Home Author
Author

Benjamin Kabak

CTA

Chicago turns to naming rights deals for revenue

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 12, 2010

As transit economics and funding go, we are not living in a golden age. State and city contributions to their public transit systems are on the decline, and as both operating costs and pension obligations climb, transit agencies have left no stone unturned in their quest for revenue. From service cuts to fare hikes to internal reorganization, if the move saves dollars, it’s on the table.

For many transit agencies, advertising remains one of the last great untapped resources. In New York, the MTA draws in over $125 million annually, up from just $36 million in 1997, and yet, the ads we see in subway cars and on buses are often poor in quality. Considering the captive audience, I have to believe transit agencies could be doing a better job of selling space to companies willing to pay a pretty penny for the eyeballs.

Outside of traditional in-car display advertisements, train car wraps and station treatments, naming rights remain a potential, if controversial, source of revenue, and over the past few years, we’ve seen American transit agencies awkwardly and tentatively embrace station naming deals. The MTA faltered in its first attempts when Citi Bank refused to pony up the dollars to name the 7 stop at Willets Point after Citi Field, but it secured a 20-year, $4-million commitment from Barclays to append the name of the Nets’ new arean to the Atlantic Ave./Pacific St. hub. Other than that one failure and one success, all has been quiet on the naming rights front.

Outside of New York, transit officials have engaged in stop-and-go efforts to secure naming rights. In Philadelphia, the Pattison Ave. station at Broad St. has been renamed the AT&T stop. By removing the geographic identifiers from the station name, SEPTA has made it harder for those unfamiliar with the system to reach their destination, and I have long believed the Philly approach is the wrong one to take for station naming deals.

In Chicago, something new and different is emerging. A few weeks ago, the Chicago Transit Authority reopened the renovated North/Clybourn station, and the ceremony was significant because Apple, the computer giant which was opening a store nearby, had paid for the station renovations. The deal Apple signed with the CTA allowed them right of first refusal for the station name if the authority were to sell the naming rights, and now it appears as though the CTA is prepared to do just that.

As Mary Wisniewski of The Chicago Sun-Times reported yesterday, the CTA board has begun to explore corporate naming rights deals. She writes:

On Wednesday, the CTA board asked for bids from firms that would help seek corporate sponsorships to bring in revenues beyond what the CTA already gets from ads on buses, trains and stations.

The deals could involve naming rights or other ideas, such as sponsorship of the CTA’s planned bus rapid-transit route on the Jeffery corridor or the New Year’s Eve “penny-a-ride” program. “I’m not looking for your traditional commitment to just advertise more on the system,” CTA President Richard Rodriguez said. “I’m looking for creative ideas.”

Rodriguez said he was in London on a speaking engagement earlier in the year and realized that across Europe, transit systems are looking into sponsorship ideas. “I can’t even imagine what the opportunities might be,” Rodriguez said. The firm would be paid a portion of the revenues it generated.

For U.S.-based transit, Chicago’s bidding results could be a harbinger of things to come. If companies are willing to pay money to secure these naming rights, there is absolutely nothing stopping other transit agencies from jumping onto this fiscal bandwagon. Rodriguez, the CTA’s head, doesn’t know what to expect, but at least some prominent companies will bid for high-traffic stations or prominent events.

As transit agencies, then, head into uncharted territories, how best should they structure these naming rights deals? Sports stadiums, for instance, have embraced corporate names but have sacrificed any local identity. Would a casual fan know that the Cincinnati Reds play in Great American Ballpark? Where is the Wells Fargo Center and which teams play there? Few people outside of Philadelphia could answer that question.

So the right approach involves appending instead of replacing. Renaming Times Square, originally a corporate name in its own right, to the Walt Disney Station does no one any favors, but calling it Times Square/Walt Disney, while painful to see, doesn’t remove the key geographical signifier. Since a transit system is in the business of getting people from Point A to Point B, it must ensure that people know where Point B is.

Other than that, all bets are off. Whether any substantial amount of money can be generated from these potential deals though remains to be seen.

11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Subway History

When It Was a Train: The 63rd St. Shuttle

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 11, 2010

I found myself yesterday alighting down the stairs to the Brooklyn-bound platform at the south end of the 6th Ave IND stop at 34th St. station when I stopped to do a double-take. Instead of telling me that I could catch the B and the D on the express tracks or the F and the M on the local side, the sign that greeted me told me to expect the F or the orange S on the local tracks. The orange S? What is this mysterious shuttle?

This isn’t the first time I’ve seen an orange S pop up along 6th Ave. Last year, an astute reader sent me a photo of the S on a B train, and I delved into the history of the Grand St. shuttle. That train operated on the express tracks between W. 4th St. and Grand St. This other orange S was a local, and it helped alleviate the pressures of Manhattan Bridge construction as well.

This shuttle began service in May of 1997 and ran only late at night. It operated from Queensbridge to Second Ave. as a local route as the MTA readied the 63rd St. Connector. This shuttle again ran during 2001 while the northern tracks of the Manhattan Bridge were closed. It operated from 21st St.-Queensbridge to Broadway/Lafayette via the 63rd St. tunnel. It went into service on July 22, 2001 and ran only until December 16, 2001. On that day, the MTA finally realized its dream of connecting the 63rd St. tunnel with the rest of the Queens Boulevard line. The V train was born as the F took over the shuttle’s route through the 63rd St. tunnel. (For more on the V train and its controversial origins, check out my requiem for the lost line.)

I have to believe that the reappearance of the orange S bullet is a direct result of the sign change that eliminating the V train precipitated. My guess is that someone at 34th St. pulled off the new orange M sticker and left exposed the original metallic sign with its orange S. For now, until Transit crews cover it up, a forgotten part of the Manhattan Bridge reroutings is on full display for confused tourists and stunned natives alike to see.

4 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Abandoned StationsAsides

Underbelly Project seekers winding up in jail

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 11, 2010

Intrepid urban adventurers who set off in search of the South 4th Street subway station and the Underbelly Project art gallery are finding themselves greeted by a not-so-pleasant surprise. As Michael Grynbaum reports, around 20 people have been arrested for trespassing as they’ve set off in search of the hidden art project. The abandoned station sits directly underneath Brooklyn’s 90th Precinct station house, and as the MTA is trying to discourage illicit trespassing, a team of cops, including some of the plain-clothes variety, have been staking out the joint. So far, most of those caught have been charged with criminal trespassing while two received transit summonses. “This is not an art gallery; this is completely illegal,” one police officer said to The Times.

While the Underbelly Project curators claimed they destroyed the entrance point to the South 4th Street station, that claim is far from the truth. It is still physically possible to get up there, and those who have eluded the police found that the locals have tagged the art. For its part, the MTA reiterated its stance it will not be erasing anything on the walls, and the authority has already sealed off one of the site’s easier access points.

Amusingly enough, the authority also refused to confirm the location of the gallery to Grynbaum and The Times. “There are some bloggers who can pinpoint these places because they eat and sleep transit lore, but officially, no, we’re not confirming anything,” authority spokesperson Deirdre Parker said. It’s up there though behind chain-linked fences and well within the arm of the law.

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
7 Line ExtensionAsides

Without a TIGER grant, 7 line supporters look to ARC funds

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 11, 2010

In a last-gasp effort to save the 7 line extension’s 41st St. and 10th Ave. station, the city in June applied for a $3 million TIGER II grant. With that money, the MTA would have studied the feasibility of building a non-island shell station, but the federal government has denied that request. Once again, the absolutely necessary part of this expensive project is in jeopardy.

Today, the Real Estate Board of New York, which had pledged $250,000 in matching funds to qualify for the TIGER II grant, has issued another call for funds for this station. As Crain’s New York reports, REBNY will now work to secure some of the money from the ARC Tunnel to fund the 10th Ave. station. “That money should be deployed in New York,” Mary Ann Tighe, REBNY’s chair, said of the stop that she believes would serve 100,000 commuters a day. On Monday, I issued a similar call, and it’s worth noting that because of the late date and the ongoing work, any station at 41st St. and 10th Ave. would now have to be constructed after the 7 line extension opens. Still, it isn’t too late, and the ARC money would do wonders for this flawed project.

Yet, I can’t help but think, as I did in June, that REBNY is trying to shut the barn door after the horse has escaped. The planned 7 line stop at 10th Ave. and 41st St. needed their considerable support before the city and the MTA had to kill. Three years later, it’s a scramble for money that even the real estate lobby might not be able to win.

12 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Taxis

Peering into the future of the NYC taxi

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 11, 2010

Could this be the taxi of tomorrow? (Via Human Condition/ToT)

Once upon a time, the Ford Crown Victoria, painted yellow, dominated the streets of New York City. These gas-guzzling behemoths were the darling of the Taxi & Limousine Commission. With spacious trunks and ample space in the back, the Crown Vic proved popular with drivers and passengers alike, and even today, the familiar body, largely unchanged since 1979, still rolls around the city.

In the mid-2000s, though, the character of the taxi fleet began to change. As part of an effort to reduce carbon emissions while modernizing the fleet, the Taxi & Limousine Commission began urging and then requiring the adoption of hybrid taxis. For model year 2006, for instance, the TLC approved the Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner, the Honda Accord, the Honda Civic, the Lexus RX400H, the Toyota Highlander and the Toyota Prius for use among cabbies, and since then, the number of different taxicab makes and models has grown to 16.

The hybrid push was part of a larger effort by Mayor Michael Bloomberg to bring PlaNYC to fruition, but the judiciary had other ideas. On a preemption basis, a judge blocked the hybrid cab requirement, and an appeals court has upheld the decision as well. Instead, the request to move to a hybrid remains voluntary. Still, the city is trying to improve the efficiency of its taxi fleet.

Enter the Taxi of Tomorrow. In late 2009, the TLC pulled out a request for proposal for the next-gen taxicab. As London has done with their iconic cars, so too will New York try to unify its fleet. The main requirements are eight fold:

  • Highest safety standards
  • Superior passenger experience
  • Superior driver comfort and amenities
  • Appropriate purchase price and on-going maintenance and repair costs
  • Sustainability (minimized environmental impact throughout the vehicle’s life cycle)
  • Minimal physical footprint (with more useable interior room)
  • Universal accessibility for all users with a goal of meeting ADA guidelines (wheelchair accessible)
  • Iconic design that will identify the new taxi with New York City

From an environmental standpoint, sustainability is the key requirement. The TLC should be able to make an endrun around the court’s preemption argument by unifying the fleet and special-ordering a new car. The finalists in the RFP competition will be announced early next year, and the new cars should hit the road by 2014 as part of a three-to-five year replacement effort.

Earlier this week at the Museum of the City of New York, the taxi industry presented some preliminary designs and discussed the impetus behind the project. I couldn’t attend this session, but WNYC’s Kathleen Horan did. She reports on the divergent opinions on the one-car project:

The President of the Metropolitan Taxi Cab Board of Trade, Ron Sherman, also worries that malfunctions could cause headaches if there isn’t more variety. “We feel that there should be at least 2 or 3 choices — that stakes are too high to rely on just one provider to accomplish this.”

Taxi and Limousine Commissioner David Yassky says the benefits of working with a single automaker are worth the risks. “Only the city government can act on behalf of the entire industry in getting the best deal possible from the manufacturers. I think that’s worth it.”

He says that no other city has ever tried this, but that the only way to meet all the goals is by being pro-active and not picking from what is already on the market.

Reinventing the wheel certainly carries with it substantial risk, and Sherman’s points are a valid one. If the TLC opts for a custom-made car, it’s going to need to ensure that New York mechanics have the expertise necessary to repair these cars when they inevitably break down. These cars will have to be affordable for the city and taxi medallion owners and will have to be both handicapped-accessible and environmentally friendly. How the city resolves this design debate will have an impact well into the next decade.

18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesBuses

MTA appoints Darryl Irick as interim bus head

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 10, 2010

Following Joseph Smith’s late-October announcement that he would be retiring as the head of the MTA’s bus division, the authority revealed today that 24-year Transit veteran Darryl Irick will take over as the acting head of the MTA’s three bus divisions at the end of the year. Irick started his MTA career in 1986 as a bus operator out of the Kingsbridge Deport and has worked in management, operations planning and depot and road operations over the past few years. He’ll be overseeing a 18,500 employees at 40 facilities and a combined bus fleet of nearly 6000 vehicles that service 2.8 million daily customers over a 900-square-mile territory.

“Throughout his career, Darryl has distinguished himself with his ability to enter any operating environment and significantly improve performance,” MTA Chairman and CEO Jay Walder said today in a statement. “I’m confident that he will rise to the challenge of continuing to improve our bus service even as we deal with historic budget constraints.”

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
New Jersey Transit

In Year 2, Meadowlands train ridership up 50%

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 10, 2010

The New Jersey Transit station at the Meadowlands has proven to be popular. (Rendering from 2007)

Now that football fans have had a year to get used to the idea of taking the train to the Meadowlands and New Jersey Transit has had a year to improve service, ridership is on the rise. As The Record reported this week, NJ Transit says ridership has increased by 50 percent for the NFL season. Reports John Brennan:

The Jets — with a boost from two “Monday Night Football” games — have 70 percent more fans riding the rails than in 2009, NJ Transit spokeswoman Courtney Carroll said. On Jets game days, there have been about 21,000 trips made this year — the equivalent of 10,500 fans making a round trip — compared with 6,000 such fans last year.

Giants fans are making about 26 percent more trips — about 16,000, or the equivalent of 8,000 round trips. That means that more than 10 percent of fans overall at New Meadowlands Stadium football games are taking the train.

“The schedule is about the same as last year, but we are doing things differently on the operations side to improve the flow,” Carroll said. “We’ve had a year to learn and grow with the service, to see what works.”

Anything to ease the flow of cars into and out of the Meadowlands is a welcome change, but I’m curious to hear more about how NJ Transit has improved their planning.

Last year, for a Bruce Springsteen concert, I took the train to the Meadowlands, and although the trip to the show was smooth, the trip home was anything but. People bumrushed the train station, and after the initial trains left, we had to wait an unreasonable amount of time for the next to leave. Unlike the subway after, say, a game at Yankee Stadium, Transit doesn’t have a steady flow of trains from the Meadowlands to Secaucus Junction.

Right now, the trains are running only around 20 times a year for football games and concerts. Originally, the new Meadowlands stop was supposed to service the Xanadu shopping and entertainment complex, but the mall, slated for a 2011 completion date, may not open until 2014 or beyond.

Anyway, it’s hard to believe that even 10 percent of fans heading to the New Meadowlands Stadium take the train as that complex had become so identified with automobile traffic. That the ridership is growing is proof that, if you build it, they will ride.

8 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Fare Hikes

A short sunset period for stockpiled MetroCards

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 10, 2010

Don’t expect to build up that collection of unused MetroCards in anticipation of the looming fare hike, New York City Transit warned today. When the fares go up on December 30, straphangers will have only a few weeks to activate unused MetroCards, but those who count their days properly could still find enough time to buy an extra $89 30-day cards before the price spikes to $104.

The full grace period will run for nearly six weeks as riders who purchase unlimited ride cards will be able to get the full value out of their cards as long as they are activated — that is swiped — no later than January 10. Pay-per-ride cards will not be impacted, and so in the time-honored tradition of hoarding tokens, riders can still stock up on these cards before the bulk discount shrinks.

As far as sunset dates go, those are staggered. In other words, if you purchase one of the unlimited ride cards before the Dec. 30th hike and use it for the first time after January 10th, you will not get full credit for all of your travel. Instead, riders will have to mail the cards back for pro-rated refunds based upon the day you first use them. Unused cards will be refunded in full. The sunset dates — meaning the last day on which previously purchased cards will be valid for travel — are presented in the table below.

Days on Card Sunset Date
1 January 10
7 January 16
14 January 23
30 February 8

As a side note, two of the unlimited offerings — the 1-day Fun Pass and the 14-day card — will be eliminated entirely on December 30, and in the Daily News article about the sunset period, Gene Russianoff takes a shot at the Fun Pass. At $8.25, the price, like the rent, is “too damn high,” he says.

I respectfully disagree. Without the pay-per-ride bulk discount, the fun pass pays for itself on the fourth ride of the day. But since the discount currently kicks in at $8, we have to calculate that deal with a discount. With the 15 percent discount, the cost of a subway swipe is, in essence, $1.96, and so on the fifth swipe, the one-day Fun Pass pays for itself. For high-volume subway riders and tourists trying to get around town, it is — and always has been — a good deal.

The failure of the one-day card is more a problem of marketing than anything else. Because the MTA doesn’t publicize the break-even points for their unlimited ride cards, straphangers never knew on the fly when it made sense to buy a one-day card. My parents loved the one-day card from the get-go in 1999 when it used to cost $4, but today, most frequent subway riders have a long-term unlimited ride card. Thus, the Fun Pass will go the Great Unknown after December 31.

6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
View from Underground

On the illegality of moving between subway cars

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 10, 2010

There’s something inherently New York about walking in between subway cars. At one point or another, nearly every straphanger takes that plunge and moves between cars while the train is in motion. For some, the rush of the tunnel is excuse enough to stop outside of the cocoon of the enclosed subway car while for others, it’s a means to an end. The homeless guy is stinking up the joint. The air condition doesn’t work. Get me out of here.

What most people do not realize is that since 2005, it has been illegal to walk between subway cars. That year, the MTA Board approved a series of changes to the New York City Transit Rules of Conduct, and among those amendments was one targeting subway walkers. The penalty: A $75 fine.

Today, that rule is codified in Section 1050.9(4):

No person may ride on the roof, platform between subway cars or on any other area outside any subway car or bus or other conveyance operated by the Authority. No person may use the end doors of a subway car to pass from one subway car to another except in an emergency or when directed to do so by an Authority conductor or a New York City police officer.

When the Code of Conduct rules were changes, the language on the signs on subway doors grew more strident. It is prohibited to move or ride between cars, and now and then, the cops will hand out summonses to those who violate these rules. Every few weeks, I receive an email from a disgruntled straphanger who wants to know if he or she can contest their fine, and the Google search results for “walk between subway cars” shows a similarly pervasive number of hits on this topic. Yesterday, Metro New York ran the sob story of one woman who now owes $75 for violating the rule and $50 in late fees for failing to pay the fine.

In Carly Baldwin’s story, Lida Sharp got a ticket in late July when the 2 car she entered wasn’t air conditioned. She boarded at 34th St. and waited until the next stop to switch cars. Instead of doing so on the platform, she and another passenger got caught outside. “He didn’t care that I felt sick or that it was an emergency,” she said. “He didn’t care that the train wasn’t moving or that I didn’t even know it was illegal.”

My response to those who violate this rule is usually not one of sympathy. As I’ve learned throughout law school, ignorance of the law doesn’t excuse those who break it, and the MTA hangs a sign on the door that explicitly warns people not to cross between cars. I know most straphangers find reading MTA signs repulsive, but if they choose to ignore the warning, someone’s going to have to pay the consequences of breaking the rule.

The real question to ask though is one of common sense. Does the MTA’s ban on inter-car travel make sense? Five years ago, MTA Board member Barry Feinstein defended the rule. “It’s dangerous. It’s not smart, and you shouldn’t do it,” he said. The number of people who get a ticket though far outweigh the one or two a year who suffer injury while switching cars.

Riders, of course, have never liked the rule, and we still see various vagabonds, musicians and kids selling candy crossing at whim. “I don’t think it’s a good idea,” a Queens rider said in 2005 “People need to walk through the doors all the time. If there are no seats, people want to go to another car to get a seat.”

Yet, the rules are the rules. It might rest on a flimsy justification, and we might not agree with the rationale behind it. That doesn’t mean, though, that the rule does not apply to us all. Perhaps we’re all guilty.

66 comments
3 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Metro-North

Ceiling of the Day: Grand Central lights up

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on November 9, 2010

In the not-so-distant past, Grand Central Terminal’s majestic ceiling was grimy and dark, a far cry from the rich green hues that backdrop the constellations. From 1994-1998, the MTA engaged in a $200 million effort to clean the ceiling, leaving only a small dark patch in one corner to remind passers-by of the way it used to look. The ceiling, with its winter constellations –reversed to show it from the sky’s perspective — that light up and sparkle, is bright once again.

Yesterday, the authority again made the ceiling even brighter as they unveiled new light-emitting diodes that will both add a twinkle to the ceiling and reduce the MTA’s energy costs. Fifty-nine of the brightest lights were illuminated yesterday afternoon. “Using new technology to celebrate the traditional grandeur of Grand Central’s celestial ceiling is a testament to our commitment to improving the life of the city even as we continue to cut costs,” Jay Walder, chair and CEO of the authority, said in a statement. “We hope people won’t run into one another as they crane their necks and peer skyward in admiration.”

Orion sports the Grand Central Terminal's ceiling's new LED lights. (Photo via Metro-North)

As part of the announcement about the new light system, Metro-North released the tale of the old ceiling, and for New York City history buffs, it is a fascinating one indeed. When the terminal opened in 1913, the stars were illuminated by 10-watt incandescent bulbs, then considered to be state-of-the-art. “The pride and fascination with which the new-fangled electricity was viewed was evidenced by the bare light bulbs found throughout the Terminal,” says Metro-North.

As the stars burned out, replacing them became difficult. The ceiling is deep — 50 feet from the top of the cornice to the zenith of the arc — and is accessible only through the attic above. Workers had to crawl on all fours to replace the bulbs.

Meanwhile, says the agency, “as the predecessor railroad headed for bankruptcy, there was less and less enthusiasm for this particular maintenance chore and the bulbs burned out, one by one, until the entire winter zodiac sky was dark.”

In 1997, as part of the rejuvenation of the Grand Central ceiling, the MTA installed a massive fiber-optic system that eliminated the need for electricians to change the bulbs. Seven fiber-optic sources sent light traveling through clear plastic tubes to light up the constellations. But, says the authority, “over the years, the tubes got brittle and brown, and did not project light with the same intensity. The stars faded. In the search for a new, environmentally friendly solution, LEDs seemed the obvious choice.”

The new LED system will, says Metro-North, use just four watts of electricity, a 60 percent reduction from the fiber-optics system. The lights will be on from 5 a.m. to 2 a.m. every day and the bulbs are expected to last 50,000 hours — or 2380 days each. Total savings should be around $8000 a year.

The lights too are positioned to lend the ceiling an aura of authenticity in a city to choked with light pollution to view real constellations. “When gazing up, 125 feet above the Tennessee pink marble floor, one cannot see all the lighted stars at once,” says the MTA. As people walk across the Concourse floor and their vantage point changes, different stars appear, giving a twinkling impression.”

For more photos, check out WNYC’s gallery.

5 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts