Author

Benjamin Kabak

Reaping the spoils of bus lane enforcement

by Benjamin Kabak June 14, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 14, 2012

One of the biggest obstacles the MTA and NYC DOT face in implementing their brand of Select Bus Service concerns bus lane enforcement. Since the city has hesitated to embrace physically separated lanes, somehow, the two agencies need to find a way to keep cars out of bus lanes. Aggressive policing can accomplish this but so too can bus lane cameras. The MTA can now use such cameras in some bus lanes, but the agency has ran into a problem with the city over fine collection.

According to recent reports in The Daily News, current MTA Chairman and CEO Joe Lhota has yet to authorize bus lane camera enforcement because fines collected from lane violators does not reach the MTA. Instead, it get siphoned into the city’s coffers, unlikely to benefit transit projects or riders. The situation is, in a word, absurd.

Pete Donohue has the story:

The MTA is poised to boost bus-lane enforcement on First and Second Aves. — a step that’s long overdue — but only if the city agrees to share the income with the transit agency.

Metropolitan Transportation Authority Chairman Joseph Lhota refused to sign off on the purchase of the bus-lane enforcement cameras for the M15 Select route after staffers told him all the ticket revenue would go to city coffers, sources said last night.

In other words, the MTA would make an investment and the city would get all the returns. Lhota has an MBA from the Harvard Business School but anyone with the IQ of a beagle would see there’s something very wrong with that. One source said the illogic of entering into such an arrangement was indeed questioned by the prior transit administration.

The MTA has hesitated to discuss the issue publicly as any spat with the Bloomberg administration is unlikely to draw favorable. “We’re still finalizing a time frame,” a spokesman said to The News. “This turned out to be a bit more complicated than anticipated, but we are moving forward.”

Furthermore, according to Donohue, the authority doesn’t want all of the lane enforcement revenue; it just wants some to defray the costs of enforcement equipment. State politicians, though, who do not need to be beholden to a lame-duck city mayor, have been more aggressive in arguing for the revenue. Apparently, a similar set-up exists between the city and MTA for toll-evasion fines, and Staten Island’s Nicole Malliotakis wants to end that practice. “Money generated by MTA personnel should go back to benefit the MTA,” she said.

This truly seems like a no-brainer. NYPD officers have issued 27000 bus lane tickets since October and dole out, on average, around 40,000 traffic violation summonses on bridges and tunnels. The MTA does not receive any direct revenues from these enforcement efforts. Even if some of the dollars are returned to the MTA through the city’s contributions to the authority’s operating budget, the inequities are extreme and nonsensical. The MTA, which could use the money to improve service or restore routes lost to the 2010 cuts, allows enforcement dollars to slip away. That’s just a bad relationship, and Lhota is right to hold back on purchasing enforcement equipment until a more equitable solution can be reached.

June 14, 2012 16 comments

MTA Politics

For transit funding, does age matter?

by Benjamin Kabak June 13, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 13, 2012

At an RPA panel this morning in New Jersey, MTA head Joe Lhota spoke about securing dedicated transit funding, and his words made me ponder a generational divide. Via Dana Rubinstein:

Speaking today on a Regional Plan Association panel at the Princeton Club that also included New Jersey’s transportation commissioner, Lhota said, “I’m not sure about the state house in the legislative end in Trenton, but I can tell you when I go to Albany, I mean, just trying to talk about increased investment in rail, including in the folks in the M.T.A. region, it’s not that easy.”

“I hope it’s a generational thing,” he continued. “Pretty much the phasing [in] of the people who are the younger folks who are much used to not driving, who are used to taking more rapid transit, and that’s what we’re actually seeing at the M.T.A. The increase in growth, if you look at the demographics of it, it’s basically people who are 35 and below, who are using the system, significantly more than people older than that.”

On the one hand, Lhota’s characterization makes perfect sense to me. Many of the representatives in Albany controlling transit’s purse strings grew up in an age when a car was synonymous with personal mobility and the decaying and dangerous subway system was to be avoided. For most of their formative years, political or otherwise, the MTA couldn’t be trusted with running a train without a breakdown let alone spending money, and the subways weren’t a priority.

Yet, on the other hand, many of today’s under-35 set also came of age at a time of MTA corruption or ineptitude. They hear vaguely of charges of improper bookkeeping and understand transit funding only through the lens of Albany divestment in the late 1990s and early 2000s. But they do not, as Lhota noted, have the same level of car ownership as their parents and are much more ardent subway users. That’s why many of the younger representatives in Albany are some of the more vocal transit advocates.

It’s probably foolish or at least naive to think a new generation of lawmakers will suddenly realize the value of transit, but as constituents who are more accepting of the subway system grow up, they can make noises about investment. Waiting out demographics shifts is no way to accomplish anything in a timely fashion, but it certainly can be a piece of the puzzle. I think Lhota is on to something here.

June 13, 2012 33 comments

Subway History

When It Was A Train: The Culver Shuttle

by Benjamin Kabak June 13, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 13, 2012

Yesterday afternoon, in my post on foolish track-jumpers at 9th Avenue, I mentioned the abandoned lower level platform. Hidden at the bottom of some casually roped-off staircases, the lower level platform at 9th Avenue has sat unused for nearly forty years and is a testament to another age. This piece from the archives originally ran back in August of 2010, and I thought now would be a good time to revisit it. It’s way more fun to ponder the lost corners of the subway system than it is to risk life and limb for a pointless YouTube video so without further ado, some history on the Culver Shuttle, the train that once used that abandoned platform.

The 1964 subway map shows the Culver shuttle's connecting the 4th Avenue lines with the 6th Avenue lines well north of Coney Island.

Over on Subchat this morning, Newkirk Images posted a photo of the now-abandoned lower level of the 9th Ave. station in Brooklyn. Sitting in the center of the photo is a two-car train that has largely been lost to the history of the New York City subway system. That trainset is the Culver Shuttle.

The Culver Shuttle, as Joseph Brennan details at his Abandoned Stations site, had its origins in the late 19th Century steam-powered railroads that would take vacationing New Yorkers to the seaside resorts at Coney Island. With various elevated lines providing access throughout Brooklyn, the immediate history of the shuttle, says, Brennan is “fairly complex.” He writes:

Up to 1931, 5 Ave El trains provided all the service, and 9 Ave must have been busy with Culver passengers changing to the West End subway trains for a faster ride and access to many more places. The wooden el trains were slow and ran no farther than the end of the Brooklyn Bridge at Park Row, Manhattan.

When the Nassau St loop in lower Manhattan finally opened in 1931, the BMT began operating a mixture of subway and el services to the Culver line. Subway service ran Monday to Saturday, to Kings Highway in rush hours and summer Saturdays, and to Coney Island midday and other Saturdays. El service went to Coney Island rush hours, nights, summer Saturdays, and all Sundays, and otherwise ended at 9 Ave station. Is that clear? The BMT didn’t have enough subway cars for full service, so at rush hours and summers, the el had to pick up the service to the end of the line, so the subway trains could shortline. 9 Ave lower level saw its peak train service in these years, with both el and subway trains, and el trains reversing in the middle track during some hours…

The Transit Authority fulfilled a longstanding Board of Transportation plan in October 1954 when the IND subway was connected to the Culver line at Ditmas Ave station and took over all service to Culver stations beyond that point. BMT Culver service from a single track terminal at Ditmas Ave continued as before on weekdays, but nights and weekends it was a shuttle to 36 St. Ridership dropped, and in May 1959, it was made a shuttle full time, between Ditmas Ave and 9 Ave only.

As the subway system decayed throughout the 1960s and early 1970s, the Culver Shuttle keep chugging along. It ran the BMT standard subway cars up through the early 1970s, and Brennan notes how the way Transit didn’t maintain this little-used station echoed the collapse of the system as a well. “The dark, deteriorating lower level at 9 Ave, and the partly dismantled elevated line gave it a mood of decay,” he writes. “There was just one track, the center at 9 Ave and the west side on the el, and one train operated all the service. The end was obviously in sight, but it somehow hung on until 1975.”

That year — 1975 — saw the demise of the Culver Shuttle amidst the now-familiar refrain of budgetary problems. Only 1000 people a day used the shuttle, and most of those were making the round trip to and from work. The MTA estimated it would cost $1 million it didn’t have to rehabilitate the elevated structure, and the shuttle, which once ran into Manhattan via the 4th Ave. line and Nassau St. loop, would be shuttered instead, with residents offered a free bus transfer as a replacement service.

The abandoned 9th Ave. platform as seen in 2002. Photo via NYC Subway.

These days, not much remains to remind New Yorkers of the Culver Shuttle. A sealed staircase leads to an abandoned platform, and the platform itself is in terrible shape. The rails too are but a memory as they were demolished in 1984. The rights of way between 9th Ave. and Ditmas Ave. have generally long since been sold to private developers, and houses in Brooklyn now mark the tracks of the old Culver Shuttle. Today, only stub tracks remain, a remnant of this rich history of rail travel in Brooklyn.

June 13, 2012 24 comments

View from Underground

Video: A bad idea at an empty station

by Benjamin Kabak June 12, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 12, 2012

Every now and then, when it’s late and I’m bored, if I’m a rare three-track station, I’ll look across the tracks and eye the other platform. The distance always seems short enough to jump, but who would do that? Apparently, a few foolish folks at the 9th Avenue station would. Observe:

The gap, which measures around 10-11 feet, is apparently small enough for a good long jump, but this stunt, as many have pointed out, is beyond dumb. In fact, everyone has banded together to decry this video, amNew York reported today. Wrote Ivan Pereira:

Gene Russianoff, of the Straphangers Campaign, said he has seen hundreds of stories of people playing around in subway stations, but this one was by far the worst. Although both men jumped when there were no trains approaching, there still were big risks, including a 600-volt shock from the tracks, Russianoff said…

Transport Workers Union spokesman Jim Gannon, who called the YouTube jumpers “jackasses,” agreed. “It’s also a terrible thing for train crews to live with if one of the teens falls under the wheels and gets cut to pieces,” he said. The NYPD said it is not investigating the jumpers, but warned that jumping platforms can lead to a citation and, if done repeatedly, a misdemeanor charge.

The MTA, which also criticized the daredevils, said trains have struck 29 people so far this year. The agency said it cannot determine how many of those injuries were related to people playing around on the track. Kevin Ortiz, the agency’s spokesman, said the MTA has been pushing an advertising campaign warning people to be wary of the dangers of subway station. “However, the campaign does not address this type of idiocy,” he said.

The two jumpers actually started on the side with the third rail and jumped away from it, but that’s besides the point. Any number of things could have gone horribly wrong. If these three thrill-seeakers wanted to do something equally off limits but far less dangerous at the 9th Avenue station, they should have just snuck down to the abandoned lower level. Don’t try that at home either.

June 12, 2012 17 comments

Asides Self Promotion

Event Tomorrow: ‘Problem Solvers’ tackles bike share

by Benjamin Kabak June 12, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 12, 2012

After two successful events earlier this spring at the Transit Museum, I’ll be hosting one more Problem Solvers Q-and-A tomorrow evening before taking a little break for the summer. My guest this week will be Caroline Samponaro, Transportation Alternatives’ Director of Bicycle Advocacy, and she and I will be discussing bike share as public transit. We’ll delve into the ins and outs of the city’s upcoming bike share system and talk about how it can complement and be integrated into the existing public transit network. (For a sneak peek, check out this post I wrote on the topic from May.)

The event kicks off at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 13 at the Transit Museum in Brooklyn Heights and will run for about an hour. Please RSVP here if you plan to attend. Hope to see you there.

June 12, 2012 1 comment

Brooklyn

Searching for the L train’s ‘silver bullet’

by Benjamin Kabak June 12, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 12, 2012

The MTA buried its good news on a summer Friday last week as word got out that the L train would enjoy a massive frequency upgrade. Shortly after the initial amNew York story made the rounds, Transit issued a press release touting the service improvements, but since I was out of town for the weekend, I had a chance only to write up the bare bones of the story. So let’s delve in. There’s much to see here.

As we know, the MTA has been working on a communications-based train control system on the L line for years. As the L, at the time the test was first proposed, was not a particularly crowded subway and had the added benefit of sharing no sets of tracks with any other train line, Transit thought it had found an ideal testing ground. Over the past decade though, L ridership has gone through the roof, and the need for greater capacity along the BMT Canarsie line has gone from a luxury to an imperative.

Transit announced the official details on Friday. Beginning this past Saturday, the MTA started adding 98 weekly round trips on the L train: 16 each weekday, 11 on Saturday and seven on Sunday. In terms of wait times, the L trains will now operate every three minutes during the a.m. rush and every six minutes at midday, down from 3.5 and 7.5 minutes, respectively. Saturday evening riders will enjoy service every six minutes, and Sunday evening straphangers will find the same level of frequency, down from one train every 8.5 minutes.

“This is a perfect example of how our commitment of capital dollars to improve our signal system directly impacts the safety and quality of our service,” MTA NYCT President Thomas F. Prendergast said in a statement. “As a result of fully integrating Communications-Based Train Control on the L line, customers will have the added benefit of more trains that will help to ease overcrowding on a line that serves continuously growing populations in Brooklyn.”

Local politicians were excited by the improvements. Daniel Squadron, who has long fought for increased L service, led the charge. “Anyone tired of crushing crowds and overflowing trains will now have an L trip less likely to feel like hell,” Squadron said. “This is a big step toward a subway system that works for its riders every day of the week.”

One quote from Squadron though struck a chord. As he noted that some rush hour trains will likely be below the MTA’s load guidelines, he let slip a key line. “This is not going to be the silver bullet, but this is real good news for L train riders,” he said. “Anyone tired of the crushing crowds and overflowing trains will now have an L train trip less likely to feel like hell.”

On Friday, I noted the strange use of the silver bullet phrase, and as I thought about it this weekend, the stranger it became. What exactly does Squadron expect? What kind of silver bullet does he want? The MTA isn’t about to build a parallel line through Williamsburg or third-track the L train, and running trains every 180 seconds should be at least sufficient to ease some of the crowding concerns.

In a way, the CBTC implementation and the increased capacity shows what happens when the MTA has the money to invest in a systemwide upgrade. If the Queens Boulevard line can be converted to CBTC, if the Lexington Ave. IRT trains were CBTC-ready, the MTA could add significantly more trains to some very crowded areas. Of course, this all costs money and a lot of it. Even as the MTA says the increased service will result in only a $1.7 million jump in operating costs, the capital upgrades are in the hundreds of millions, and that money doesn’t grow on trees. Furthermore, the Canarsie CBTC implementation was, shockingly, years later and way over budget.

Daniel Squadron, one of the more ardent transit supports on the local political scene, knows all this, but he still wants a silver bullet. So what’s that silver bullet? A better run, well capitalized MTA? For the foreseeable future, that’s not a particularly feasible goal.

June 12, 2012 47 comments

Asides Service Advisories

FASTRACK returns to the East Side tonight

by Benjamin Kabak June 11, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 11, 2012

The MTA’s weeknight shutdown project, affectionately termed FASTRACK, returns this week to the East Side. For only the second time this year, service on the Lexington Ave. IRT south of 42nd St. will terminate at 10 p.m. each night this week, not to resume again until 5 a.m. the following morning. For a glimpse at this week’s map, mosey on over to this pdf.

So what will change this week? There will be no 4 service between Grand Central and Atlantic Ave, and the 6 will terminate at Grand Central as 5 trains cease service in Manhattan earlier than usual. The 3 line is extended into Brooklyn and will make 4 train stops from Atlantic Ave. to New Lots Ave. at all times. The 5 train will run between E. 180th St. and Dyre Ave. all night while the 42nd St. shuttle will also run throughout the night. On average, the MTA says, this shutdown will add approximately 20 minutes to late-night subway rides.

For Transit, this is the eighth FASTRACK treatment of the year with eight more to follow. After irking passengers in January with the first shutdowns, the MTA has been aggressive in promoting the work with a full-page ad appearing in today’s free daily newspapers. Still, the weeknight shutdowns are both disruptive and necessary as 10 p.m. has, a few times a year, become the new normal for the cessation of weeknight service.

June 11, 2012 4 comments

Brooklyn MBTA

A successful private-public partnership and one less so

by Benjamin Kabak June 11, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 11, 2012

When it comes to public-private partnerships, transit agencies and those in the private sector willing to participate have often struggled with their projects. We’ve seen some station rehabs succeed, some naming rights efforts falter and some private partners begin to understand why transit operators struggle with the finances.

In New York, one of the more problematic public-private partnerships has concerned the Atlantic Yards project. While more of a direct sale, Bruce Ratner’s obligations involved transit. In a nutshell, the MTA gave Ratner a sweetheart price for the air rights to the Vanderbilt Yards in Brooklyn with the original promise of a new nine-track train yard for $225 million. In 2009, the MTA agreed to a reduction in the size of the train yard. Ratner would have to build only a seven-track facility instead. A sweetheart deal had just gotten sweeter.

Now, we learn that despite a guaranteed delivery date of 2016, Ratner is facing delays in the construction of the train yard. As The Wall Street Journal reported last week, the delays are due to “higher-than-expected costs and a sluggish economy.” These same excuses have been percolating around the Vanderbilt Yards for years.

Brown had more:

Forest City spokesman Joseph DePlasco said the yard will still be completed on time. The developer has already built a portion of the yard, he said, and other related work will continue.

MTA spokesman Adam Lisberg said the developer has agreed to do $10 million of additional work in the interim, and the LIRR is using a temporary rail yard meanwhile. “From our perspective, very little is changing here,” Mr. Lisberg said…

Forest City had previously agreed with the MTA to get construction on the new yard fully underway by June 30. But in recent months, the developer sought to push off that date. They recently reached an agreement with the agency to push off that date until Dec. 31, 2013, the terms of which were disclosed to MTA board members this week.

I’m not quite prepared to draw too many sweeping generalizations here. The economy has indeed been sluggish, and the MTA can’t do any better with projects it oversees itself. For us to expect Ratner, who has been bleeding money for years, to do any better would be foolish. Still, this delay, which clearly risks the target completion date, is just another black eye for a project replete with them.

Meanwhile, in Boston, we learn of a public-private partnership done right. New Balance, the shoe giant, has pledged to fund a rail station in the Allston-Brighton area as part of a $500 million development plan in the area. The company will fund the $16 million commuter rail stop that will service its new headquarters, and this total includes “all permitting, design, construction and annual maintenance costs,” a Boston.com reporter said last week.

Here is a company that recognizes the need for a commuter rail stop and is willing to take the steps to see it through to reality. It’s possible then to form a public-private partnership that works, just like it’s possible to screw one up.

June 11, 2012 12 comments

Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting seven subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak June 8, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 8, 2012

As summer rolls around, the MTA tends to scale back work, and this week is no exception. We have only seven service changes, and two of those are only for a few hours on Saturday and Sunday as a result of Puerto Rican Day festivities. Don’t forget to check out my next Problem Solvers event this upcoming Wednesday. Otherwise, have a good one.

From 12 noon to 5 p.m., Saturday, June 9, 116th Street will be EXIT ONLY. Due to the 116th Street Festival, customers will not be allowed entry into this station to prevent overcrowding on platforms and stairways. For uptown or downtown service, customers may use the 110th Street or 125th Street stations instead.

From 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Sunday, June 10, 77th Street will be EXIT ONLY. Due to the Puerto Rican Day Parade, customers will not be allowed entry into this station to prevent overcrowding on platforms and stairways. For uptown or downtown service, customers may use the 68th Street or 86th Street stations instead.

From 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., Saturday, June 9, Flushing-bound 7 trains skip 82nd Street, 90th Street 103rd Street and 111th Street due to installation of cable tray brackets for Flushing CBTC.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, June 9 to 5 a.m. Monday, June 11, Manhattan-bound D trains are rerouted via the N from Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue to 36th Street due to station and line structure rehabilitation near 9th Avenue.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, June 9 to 5 a.m. Monday, June 11, downtown D trains run local from 34th Street-Herald Square to West 4th Street due to electrical work at 34th Street-Herald Square.

From 12:01 a.m. to 6:30 a.m., Saturday, June 9 and Sunday, June 10 and from 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m., Monday, June 11, Coney Island-bound N trains run via the Manhattan Bridge from Canal Street to DeKalb Avenue due to station painting at City Hall.

From 11:30 p.m. Friday, June 8 to 5 a.m. Monday, June 11, Manhattan-bound Q trains run express from Sheepshead Bay to Prospect Park due to track panel installation south of Kings Highway.

From 6:30 a.m. to 12 midnight, Saturday, June 9 and Sunday, June 10, Bay Ridge-bound R trains are rerouted via the N from Canal Street to DeKalb Avenue due to station painting at City Hall. There are no Bay Ridge-bound R trains at City Hall, Cortlandt Street, Rector Street, Whitehall Street, and Jay Street-MetroTech. Customers may should use 4 service at nearby stations.

June 8, 2012 8 comments

Asides MTA Economics

ATU: MTA debt refinancing costing millions

by Benjamin Kabak June 8, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 8, 2012

As the MTA is fond of pointing out how pension and health care benefits are directly responsible for the next fare hike, the unions have responded in turn with complaints about the MTA’s debt refinancing structure. In a report [pdf] issued by the ATU, the labor union alleges that interest rate swaps executed from 1996 through the mid-2000s is costing the MTA over $100 million annually.

The MTA disputes these findings. “To compare transactions we entered into years ago, compared to what you can get in risky variable rate debt right now is either irresponsible or deliberately misleading,” MTA spokesman Adam Lisberg said to WNYC. “They are simply wrong.”

Economists, meanwhile, have urged the MTA to renegotiate with the banks much as they have had to do so with their other contractors. Parrot also noted that the MTA is about to go to market to sell billions in new bonds to refinance its capital construction program. “They could say to the banks, ‘If you’re unwilling to renegotiate these credit swaps, we’re not so sure you’re going to get a piece of these bonds,’” economist James Parrot said. The MTA claims such a move is impossible due to the MTA’s reliance on the banks, which may be the problem in the first place.

June 8, 2012 6 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts