Author

Benjamin Kabak

Lhota: East Side Access now expected in 2019

by Benjamin Kabak May 8, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 8, 2012

While speaking with the Long Island Association earlier this morning, MTA Chairman Joseph Lhota let slip the news on East Side Access that has been a few months’ coming. “We were originally looking at 2018, but the most recent analyses puts the opening at 2019,” Lhota said. “I don’t want to see it go past 2019.”

LIBN.com has more:

The problem with East Side Access isn’t digging below Grand Central Station, where “cavernous tunnels” have been carved out, but on the Queens side of the project. Tunneling underneath the Queens rail yard near Jamaica, where trains from Amtrak and Acela are stored in addition to MTA’s own vehicles, has become an issue.

Contaminated soil languishes and must be disposed of properly, and unlike closer to the water, the ground is soft rather than rocky. Lhota said workers have also run into springs and brooks that nobody knew existed below the surface. The MTA has brought in experts from Europe to help with developing a plan going forward.

To call this a nightmare scenario for the MTA would not be hyperbole. Initial estimates, clearly optimistic, placed the completion date during 2012, and the timeline slipped first to 2014 and then to 2016 and then to some undetermined date in the future. Now, it seems, we will have to wait seven more years for this project, with substantial tunneling completed, to see revenue service.

There is, as yet, no word what this timeline will mean for the costs. I’ll have more info as I receive it. At least for now those bemoaning Metro-North service into Penn Station will have a good decade to refine their arguments.

* * *
(Update 5:30 p.m.): Later in the day, the MTA put out the following statement as the authority acted to temper down fears of a never-ending project:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is reevaluating the risks in the construction schedule for the East Side Access project, and plans to present its findings to the Capital Program Oversight Committee later this month. One preliminary analysis of risk factors has indicated the completion date may move to 2019, as East Side Access construction intensifies in the busiest passenger rail yard and the largest passenger rail interchange in the nation.

The analysis is not complete, and the MTA is identifying ways to mitigate those risk factors to allow the project to be completed as early as possible. The MTA continues to work with its partners at the Federal Transit Administration to update the East Side Access funding agreement to reflect the new schedule.

Amtrak and the MTA are working closely together on East Side Access and improvements to the East River tunnels and the Harold Interlocking to accommodate the roughly 500,000 passengers who rely on 1,200 train movements through the region each day. Senior executives at Amtrak, the MTA and NJ Transit regularly meet to coordinate construction activities and do everything possible to keep work moving forward.

We’ll have a more definite timeline later this month when the MTA Board gathers to discuss this delay-plagued project.

May 8, 2012 51 comments

MetroCard

To fight Metrocard fraud, a longer swipe delay

by Benjamin Kabak May 8, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 8, 2012

For as long as I can remember, the key time for a Metrocard has always involved 18 minutes. The cards, the MTA has long said, cannot be used on the same bus route or at the same subway station for 18 minutes. It’s a delay long enough to frustrate the average straphanging family looking to take advantage of an unlimited ride card, but it hasn’t stymied scammers.

Those who sell swipes have long been a thorn in the MTA’s side. We’ve all seen the folks who stand in station agent-less entrances offering to sell swipes for less than the cost of a ride. Some of them are more menacing than others, and some will go so far to jam up Metrocard Vending Machines to make sure their scams are the only ways into the subway system. I’ve seen them at some of the more desolate entrances to the Columbus Circle station, and they are positioned all over.

For years, the MTA has tried to cut down on these scammers. Summonses are ineffective, and arrests are just temporary setbacks. With only an 18-minute gap between swipes, these scammers can buy multiple Metrocards and simply swipe through the pack until the time is up. Now, the MTA is upping the fight against scammers in an effort to capture more money. As Pete Donohue noted in The Daily News, the authority has quietly upped the swipe time at a few stations and is generally being more aggressive in combating those who are using the same card multiple times at one station.

Donohue writes:

In the test program, the MTA targeted 28 stations where MetroCard records indicate high rates of fraud. Turnstiles were tweaked to reject a time-based card that had been used in the same station in the previous 36, 48 or 60 minutes. For decades, the lockout time has been 18 minutes, but that’s easily skirted by rotating through a series of cards.

The MTA’s theory: increase the lockout time and a scammer needs more MetroCards to make the investment in time or money worth it. “We know the police are out there doing everything they can to address this problem,” MTA spokesman Charles Seaton said. “We think we can do some things internally to make this kind of fraud less financially attractive.”

Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign has some concerns about the plan. “It’s OK to make things harder for illegal swipers with longer blackout periods,” he said. “But transit officials have got to balance that against the mobility of the rest of us, such as when we’ve forgotten something at the office and have to reenter a station. We are New Yorkers and we are always in a hurry.”

As a frequent swiper, I am having a tough time finding too much fault with his idea. While Russianoff is right to raise a concern, do legitimate subway riders swipe in more than once in an hour at the same station? The only time I could imagine doing so is if I swipe in, realize I’ve forgotten something and then have to return home to pick it up. Even then, I could still journey a few extra blocks to enter at a different station.

The MTA has often proclaimed loses due to Metrocard scams in excess of $20 million. That’s enough to save some bus routes or avoid a future service cut. While no business can reduce its bleed rate to nothing, a 60-minute time limit at the same station seems perfectly reasonable to me as the familiar yellow-and-blue fare payment system lives out its last years. Once the Metrocard vanishes, I wonder what future scams will resemble.

May 8, 2012 46 comments

Subway Maps

The drama — and mistakes — of the subway map

by Benjamin Kabak May 7, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 7, 2012

Contrary to the subway map, West End Avenue does not end at 116th Street.

While the MTA draws the ire of millions of New Yorkers who endure packed trains and climbing fares, it often seems as though nothing quite captures the imagination of a dedicated subsection of straphangers quite like the subway map. From its design to its creation to its geographical accuracy (or lack thereof), New Yorkers are content to spend more time discussing the map than we rightly should. If this were a crime, I’d certainly be guilty of it.

Today’s tale of subway map woes comes to us from Matt Flegenheimer of The New York Times. Not only does he focus on geographical inaccuracies but he delves into the soap opera behind the map’s creation. As subway stalwarts know, the current bastardized iteration of the subway map grew out of the efforts to discard the Massimo Vignelli map. Heralded as a piece of design art that suffered functionally, the Vignelli map was ushered out in a 1979 redesign that saw various stakeholders — including Michael Hertz and John Tauranac — have input on the new map.

Essentialy, Tauranac steered the committee overseeing the redesign while Hertz’s company was in charge of execution. Tauranac was in charge of geography; Hertz overlaying the system on a diagram of the city. Both parties duke it out over the map’s flaws and faults. Now, The Times’ focus on the errors has the two men warring again:

On the West Side of Manhattan, beginning near Lincoln Center and extending toward the campus of Columbia University, Broadway is seemingly misplaced. It is west of Amsterdam Avenue at West 66th Street when it should be east. It drifts toward West End Avenue near 72nd Street, where it should intersect with Amsterdam. It overtakes West End Avenue north of the avenue’s actual endpoint near West 107th Street, creating several blocks of fictitious Upper West Side real estate…

Many New Yorkers have undoubtedly noticed that the subway map has its geographic faults, from peccadilloes like a wayward street to more obvious inaccuracies like the supersize island of Manhattan. But Mr. Tauranac’s sheepish discovery of the errors has at once rekindled and complicated a long-simmering debate over who deserves credit for the watershed 1979 guide. Michael Hertz, whose firm is credited with designing the initial template for the map, has long chafed at Mr. Tauranac’s calling himself the “design chief” on a project that has garnered numerous accolades, including a commendation from the United States Department of Transportation and the National Endowment of the Arts.

“We’ve had parallel careers,” Mr. Hertz said in a telephone interview. “I design subway maps, and he claims to design subway maps.”

While Tauranac, who also takes a jab at Vignelli’s map in the article, is content to battle it out in the press with Hertz, the truth remains that the map is a semi-fictionalized part of New York City. It requires people riding the system to have a passing familiarity with their destination, and it does not provide point-to-point directions or above-ground accuracy. As MTA spokesman Adam Lisberg said, “This is not a street map. This is a subway map.”

May 7, 2012 13 comments

Queens

Making the case for the Rockaway Beach Branch

by Benjamin Kabak May 7, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 7, 2012

A schematic shows the Rockaway Beach Branch service from 1955 until it was shuttered in 1960. (Courtesy of Railfan.net)

After a flurry of activity this winter concerning the reactivation of the LIRR’s Rockaway Beach Branch line and some Queens residents’ calls to turn the right-of-way into a park, news concerning the rail line’s fate has died down. Recently, though, local politicians have thrown their voice behind the rail line.

In mid-March, Community Board 14 voted to voice its approval for reactivation of the Rockaway Beach Branch spur. It’s unclear what, if anything, anyone will do with this non-binding vote, but the role this old rail spur could play in improving intra- and inter-borough transportation in Queens is tremendous. Recently, Vincent S. Castellano took to the Queens Courier to outline exactly why this rail line should be reactivated, and his argument deserves a look.

Castellano offers up both a history lesson and an argument for better rail service. The history is important though because it sets the stage for today’s depart. Essentially, in 1962, the then-privately operated LIRR shut down the 3.5-mile stretch of the Rockaway Beach Branch between Queens Boulevard and the Aquaduct now under the microscope. The A train started using the southern portion out to the Rockaways at a tremendous cost to mobility.

“By disconnecting the northern part of the Rockaway Beach Branch,” Castellano wrote, “the powers that be severed train service between south and north Queens. Have you ever wondered why a Rockaway train has to go through Manhattan to go to Flushing? This is why.”

After some good old bashing of local politicians who have failed to solve traffic and transportation problems for decades, Castellano gets down to the crux of his argument:

Let me suggest that the best plan for the future of Queens is the original one from 1952. Re-establish the connection between the existing A train at Aqueduct and White Pot Junction in Kew Gardens. This can be done simply by adding new NYCTA tracks on the 3.5 mile northern branch thereby making the connection to Queens Blvd. There the old Rego Park Station (near 63rd Drive) could be rebuilt as a transportation hub providing transfers between the subway and the LIRR mainline. The Rego Park Station is less than 10 minutes from Penn Station.

This short 3.5 mile stretch of track effectively connects the A, E, J, M, R and Z subway lines to the LIRR. In addition, it runs parallel to Woodhaven Blvd so it will reduce congestion there. It also crosses Jamaica Avenue, Atlantic Avenue and Metropolitan Avenue and terminates in the vicinity of Junction Blvd, Queens Blvd and the LIE. If you had to create this right of way today the cost would be staggering. Yet this priceless public asset (paid for with taxpayer dollars) just sits there collecting rust for the last 50 years. Have we elected the wrong people to manage public assets?

Making the new Rego Park Station a transportation hub in the center of Queens also makes other transportation options possible. Limited/Select bus services could be established from the Rego Park Station to LaGuardia Airport, Citifield, Queens College and Flushing. This would be a one transfer, one fare connection between north and south in Queens. It would finally make Queens College accessible in practice and not just in theory. Re-establishing the Rockaway Beach Branch would also reduce vehicular traffic and congestion since this plan is cheaper, faster and more efficient than existing mass transit plans and current vehicular options within Queens.

Castellano ends his piece proclaiming this spur to be “shovel-ready,” and I’m not so sure I’d go that far. Nothing in New York City without a time-consuming environmental review process is truly shovel-ready. Plus, to reactivate the rail line would require extensive testing and cleaning up of the preexisting infrastructure. Some parts of the right-of-way have been encroached upon, and the MTA would have to deal with those who need to be moved. It’s not quite as easy as a snap of the fingers.

This project, however, is one that merits serious consideration. Much of the infrastructure is there, and construction costs would pale in comparison with, say, Phase II of the Second Ave. Subway. It would truly right a transportation wrong and ease congestion and traffic throughout parts of Queens. With bits and spurts of momentum behind it, this project should stay on the front-burner until it moves forward. It makes too much sense for the region for it stall out.

May 7, 2012 75 comments

Service Advisories

Weekend work, movie filming impacting 11 lines

by Benjamin Kabak May 4, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 4, 2012

Not much to say here on a night when this happened to the Yanks in Kansas City. You get service advisories for the weekend instead, and I’ll have more content later in the morning.

Note the first entry. I can honestly say I’ve never seen a 15-hour train diversion due to a movie filming. I hope someone’s getting some money out of that one. Otherwise, that seems like a pretty flimsy reason to skip a reasonably popular station.

From 5 a.m. to 8 p.m., Sunday, May 6, downtown 1 trains skip 125th Street due to movie filming.

To this station, customers may transfer to the M4 bus at 137th Street (free transfers issued) or take the downtown 1 train to 116th Street and transfer to an uptown 1 train.
From this station, customers may take the M4 or M104 bus to 116th Street (free transfers issued) and transfer to a downtown 1 train.

From 12:01 a.m. Sunday, May 6 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 7, 3 service is extended to New Lots Avenue due to platform edge, mechanical and electrical work at Fulton Street and renewal of switches north of Borough Hall. Note: 3 trains operate express in both directions between Chambers Street and 96th Street.

From 12:01 a.m. Sunday, May 6 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 7, there are no 4 trains between Brooklyn Bridge and New Lots Avenue due to platform edge, mechanical and electrical work at Fulton Street and renewal of switches north of Borough Hall. Customers should take the 3, N, Q or R instead. Note: 4 trains operate local in both directions between 125th Street and Brooklyn Bridge.

From 8 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., Sunday, May 6, there are no 5 trains between Grand Central-42nd Street and Bowling Green due to platform edge, mechanical and electrical work at Fulton Street and renewal of switches north of Borough Hall. Customers should take the 4 (operating between Woodlawn and Brooklyn Bridge.), Q or R trains instead. 5 trains run every 20 minutes between Dyre Avenue and Grand Central-42nd Street.

For service between Grand Central-42nd Street and Bowling Green, customers may take the 4.
For service between Brooklyn Bridge and Bowling Green, customer may use the nearby Cortlandt Street, Rector Street and Whitehall Street R stations, served by the uptown Q and Brooklyn-bound R trains during this time.

From 11:30 p.m. Saturday, May 5 to 6 a.m. Sunday, May 6, 207th Street-bound A trains are express from Canal Street to 59th Street-Columbus Circle due to switch replacement north of West 4th Street.

From 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturday, May 5 and Sunday, May 6, Manhattan-bound C trains run express from Euclid Avenue to Broadway Junction due to system inspection.

From 12:01 am to 6 a.m., Saturday, May 5 and Sunday May 6 and from 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m., Monday, May 7, Bronx-bound D trains run express from 36th Street to Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street, skipping DeKalb Avenue due to track work north of Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street.

From 11:30 Saturday, May 5 to 6 a.m. Sunday, May 6, Queens-bound E trains run express from Canal Street to 42nd Street-Port Authority due to switch replacement north of West 4th Street.

From 12:01 a.m. to 6:30 a.m., Saturday, May 5 and Sunday, May 6 and from 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m., Monday, May 7, Manhattan-bound N trains run express from 36th Street to Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street, then via the Manhattan Bridge, skipping DeKalb Avenue due to track work north of Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, May 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 7, Manhattan-bound Q trains run via the R line between DeKalb Avenue and Canal Street due to track work north of Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street.

From 11:30 p.m. Friday, May 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 7, 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 midnight, Saturday, May 5 and Sunday, May 6, Manhattan-bound R trains run express from 36th Street to Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street, then via the Manhattan Bridge, skipping DeKalb Avenue due to track work north of Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street. Note: Manhattan-bound Q trains replace the N and R, stopping at Jay Street-MetroTech, Court Street, Whitehall Street, Rector Street, Cortlandt Street and City Hall.

From 12:01 a.m. to 6:30 a.m., Saturday, May 5 and Sunday, May 6 and from 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m., Monday, May 7, there are no R trains between 59th Street and 36th Street in Brooklyn due to track work north of Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street. Customers should use the N instead. R trains operate between 95th Street and 59th Street in Brooklyn.

May 4, 2012 12 comments

Asides MTA Technology

Boingo, Transit Wireless team up for underground WiFi

by Benjamin Kabak May 3, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 3, 2012

As Transit Wireless is hard at work bringing cell service to the New York City subway stations, the company has announced a deal to bring WiFi underground as well. Transit Wireless announced a deal today with Boingo that will see the company manage and operate a WiFi network within the city’s underground subway stations. The roll-out for the service will be gradual over the next five years and will cover stations in Manhattan, the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens.

“Boingo has a proven expertise in operating easy-to-use wireless services in high-traffic venues serving people on-the-go,” Transit Wireless CEO William A. Bayne Jr. said in a statement. “Our partnership with Boingo helps us deliver on our commitment to providing best-in-class technology amenities to our community of commuters and visitors to the Big Apple.”

Boingo, known for its vast array of airport networks it operates, will be charging for the service. It’s roaming partners, which include Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon may be able to use the service for a lesser charge as well. On the one hand, this is a positive development for New York City subway riders. On the other, it’s somewhat redundant as smart phone users will be able to use Transit Wireless’ own network to access the Internet. Still, this move should further the push toward technological innovation in the transit space.

May 3, 2012 8 comments

MTA Technology

A technological future for the city’s transit

by Benjamin Kabak May 3, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 3, 2012

I’ve grown up in a technologically oriented age. I’ve had a computer for as long as I can remember, the Internet throughout high school and Google for my collegial and professional careers. Still, throughout most of my first three decades, my native transit agency has had a tough relationship with technology. It’s begun to change, though, and over the next few years, we’ll see it progress even more so.

Until recently, the MTA’s embrace of technology was lukewarm at best. We had heard countless stories of the troubles. Bus tracking couldn’t happen in New York because of GPS interference in the canyons of Manhattan. One contractor had filed suit over a new monitoring project. Countdown clocks were perennially on the horizon. The website resembled something out of the late 1990s.

Lately, though, the agency has turned the page. We have countdown clocks in nearly every A Division station, new rolling stock that incorporates technological advances, a BusTime system slowly spreading across the city and a more dynamic website. No one will confuse the MTA with a groundbreaking technology company, but after refusing to release data for years, we’ll soon enjoy real-time subway arrival data. It’s a solid start.

Earlier this week, I attended a panel on technology in transit. Among the speakers at NYU’s Rudin Center were an app developer, officials from the Port Authority and MTA, a Google engineer and one of the leaders from Open Plans. They spoke at length about the role technology will play in the short- and long-term, and all five of the panelists agreed that the future will involve rapid innovation.

On an individual level, we know what to expect. The MTA will make its subway data available and will soon bring arrival boards in one form or another to its B Division. It’s also seeking to implement a next generation fare payment system. PATH is hoping to incorporate dynamic signage and a better train tracking system. Right now, for instance, Exchange Place-bound customers at the World Trade Center have no idea which train will leave first, and that’s a flaw that should be corrected.

Technological innovations that impact transportation aren’t limited to public transit either. The Port Authority is working on ways to bring more information about road conditions to the public, and it already pays off. When I have to drive around the city, I’ll always check the traffic conditions online before picking my route. In the future, we should have more information concerning delays and problem spots.

Of course, with the improvements — which cost money to implement and money to maintain — come questions. We’re living through an era of austerity. Governments refuse or cannot invest in transit service, and agencies have cut bus routes and train frequency. Meanwhile, technological innovations move forward, and many critics claim that flashy technology is simply a front of worse service. Should we accept countdown clocks if the trade-off is fewer and more crowded trains?

I asked the panelists to comment on that critique, and the answers were similar. We cannot move forward without technology. Many seemed to view the service cuts as somewhat temporary. When the money returns, so too will service. The technological improvements, meanwhile, can cost a fraction of what it would cost to restore the service cuts, and they serve to make commutes more convenient and passenger-friendly. The information helps riders plan their trips, and it can help the operations staff plan routes and frequency. The possibilities are endless.

I buy it. I embrace the technology. I crave the countdown clocks and BusTime, the Google Maps traffic layers and the simple signs pointing to the next train to depart. But I grew up enmeshed in technology. It is no replacement for frequent service, but we need the improvements to move forward. Now if only the MTA would release its Board committee materials in searchable PDF format. It is, after all, 2012.

May 3, 2012 16 comments

MTA Economics MTA Politics

A temporary reprieve for an onerous bond fee

by Benjamin Kabak May 2, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 2, 2012

Earlier this year, as the MTA went about securing its capital future, an infuriating state law concerning the issuance of debt rose to light. Even as New York State has required the MTA to issue debt, it is also takes a fee of about 8.4 cents per every dollar of debt issued. Thus, if the MTA issues $1 billion in debt, New York State, the body that required the MTA to issue the debt, takes in $84 million. As the state has collected over $100 million from the MTA over the years, I called it the great bond swindle.

When The Daily News brought the issue to light in February, it caught the attention of some New York politicians who were, rightfully so, outraged. Now, the MTA is, as the Staten Island Advance notes, getting a temporary reprieve. In an editorial calling for the permanent elimination of the debt fee, the Staten Island newspaper summarizes recent developments:

The authority would have had to fork over $50 million in BIC over the next two years alone to borrow the money it plans to raise through bond issues. Of course, this added financial burden has meant that the hard-pressed MTA, which is required to have a balanced budget, has been forced to resort to fare hikes, service cuts and even more borrowing to fund its operations.

As Ms. Malliotakis said, “This policy was completely counterproductive as it was bleeding the MTA dry and contributing to the agency’s chronic failure to maintain adequate bus service and keep tolls and fares at a reasonable level,”

Now that wrong has been righted, however – at least temporarily. At the urging of MTA officials, including Staten Island board member Allen Cappelli, and elected officials such as Ms. Malliotakis and Assemblyman Michael Cusick, who authored legislation to eliminate the fee, Gov. Andrew Cuomo finally relented and waived the bond issuance charge for new MTA bonds, but only on those issued in 2012 and 2013 to refinance old debt.

MTA Board members have quickly called for the authority to use the savings to restore services lost to the 2010 cuts. “The MTA needs to look at the additional money from this and increased passenger revenue and invest it in restoring much needed bus and subway restorations as well as some additions to service,” Cappelli said. Meanwhile, city workers removed two bus stops around the corner from my apartment that once served the late great B71, leaving me with the feeling that these lost routes ain’t never coming back.

Meanwhile, this absurd measure by the state has been rectified for now, and as the Advance says, it should be overturned permanently. Good riddance to bad polices.

May 2, 2012 9 comments

MTA Technology

Anticipating real-time subway arrival data

by Benjamin Kabak May 1, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 1, 2012

A glimpse through the March MTA Board meeting materials revealed to the world a long-awaited development from the transit authority. The MTA had issued a procurement call for the technology to release a real-time data feed of available subway arrival information. The feed would cover the A Division lines that currently enjoy the benefits of countdown clocks and would open up a whole new world of transit data for app developers.

Earlier today, I spent the morning at an event at NYU’s Rudin Center for Transportation Policy & Management, and this upcoming data feed was a hot topic. The early a.m. event focused on technology and urban mobility. It featured panelists from the MTA and PATH and developers from Google Transit and OpenPlans (as well as Adam Ernst, a Second Ave. Sagas advertiser). Ernest Tollerson, the MTA’s Director of Environmental Sustainability & Compliance, opened the talk with a brief discussion on the real-time data feed.

According to Tollerson, the authority hopes to have the train arrival estimates ready to go later this year. At the time, app developers will be able to grab this information that covers 37 percent of all subway riders. It will be, he said, “a transformative moment in the life of the city and the MTA.”

Now, we’ve known about the looming public release of this data for a few weeks, but Tollerson let slip some additional info as well. After the real-time data streams are live, the authority will look for ways to push out real-time information for B Division lines that are elevated or at-grade. In other words, most lines out in Brooklyn and Queens would be in line to receive these feeds as well.

Tollerson and the rest of the panelists spoke about the ways in which transit technology can make trips more convenient. If we know what’s happening where and when before we leave our house, we are better prepared for delays or the need to find alternate routes. Making the voluminous train location data available to the public is a huge step for the MTA and for the millions of people who ride the subways every day. That moment cannot come soon enough.

May 1, 2012 19 comments

Paratransit

The trouble with Access-A-Ride, again

by Benjamin Kabak May 1, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on May 1, 2012

Over the years, I’ve touched upon the problem with the MTA’s Access-A-Ride offerings. Essentially, the paratransit service is in response to the unfunded ADA requirements, and the MTA estimates that the door-to-door service costs nearly $66 per ride. It is, in other words, a giant money suck for a cash-strapped agency, but one in which it must participate due to federal law.

Lately, the authority has begun to discuss ways to cut its annual expense — which grew to over $440 million last year. As The Daily News reported a few weeks ago, the MTA may just offer up free MetroCards for those who would otherwise qualify for Access-A-Ride service. The MTA says that just a fifth of all Access-A-Ride users are wheelchair-bound, and the rest should be able to use the bus or subway with the assistance of a caregiving who can ride for free. Allen Cappelli of the MTA Board said of the new plan, “There’s really no downside to it that I can see.”

Disabilities advocates and disabled riders see otherwise. “People don’t use use Access-A-Ride for the fun of it,” Edith Prentiss, a vice president of Disabled in Action, said. Still, as The News notes, agencies in Los Angeles and Washington, DC, have implemented similar plans successfully. It apparently does not run afoul of federal law and could save the MTA upwards of $96 million a year.

Yesterday, The News’ editorial board sounded off on the MTA’s plan. From the new plan, they claim, we can draw “two disturbing conclusions”:

The first is that thousands of people who are listed as eligible for Access-a-Ride service are not too disabled to use the subways and buses. The second is that Access-a-Ride service is so terrible that, given the slightest monetary benefit, even truly disabled people will mount herculean struggles to avoid it.

While MTA staff members say similar plans have cut costs in other cities, Chairman Joe Lhota should think more broadly and should do so in coordination with Mayor Bloomberg, who needs a hand to untangle the taxi mess his administration has created. Together, Lhota and Bloomberg should study moving toward shifting at least some passengers off the Access-a-Ride program’s clunky, unreliable vans and into wheelchair-accessible cabs and livery cars.

Provided it clamped down on eligibility — a most critical element — the MTA might well be able to deliver improved transportation at lower cost, Bloomberg might well be able to remake taxi service under an economically viable structure and the disabled might well be able to get around more conveniently.

The News has no better solution for the various stakeholders other than “work it out.” They want the MTA to work with the city and the Taxi & Limousine Commission to come up with a cost- and ride-sharing scheme that removes the some of the fiscal pressure from the MTA while providing adequate taxi service for the city’s disabled. In an ideal situation in which the city works well with state agencies, such a call may be heeded, but the MTA and New York City do not have the best track record when it comes to such cooperation.

The real eye-opener here though are the costs. Access-A-Ride service costs around $500 million annually, and the cost per rider are astronomical. A door-to-door taxi ride from most points in the city to any other doesn’t cost that much, and we can only imagine what the MTA could do to make its system more accessible if it could invest this money in physical upgrades rather than $60-per-person rides. This is one problem clearly in need of a comprehensive solution.

May 1, 2012 32 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts