Home Author
Author

Benjamin Kabak

AsidesTWU

Bus drivers rehired, but MTA/TWU talks break down

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2010

According to a report in the Daily News, approximately 100 bus drivers who were given a pink slip two months are back on the job. Pete Donohue reports that these bus drivers were asked to return to work to “fill vacancies from retirements and promotions” and that the move to rehire these drivers wasn’t an unexpected one. “It’s good to see people back to work, especially with this economy,” TWU official J.P. Patafio said. “We never understood why they were laid off to begin with.”

Buried within the article though is a glimpse of some dismaying news from the labor front. Donohue says that attempts to renegotiate the contract between the TWU and the MTA have fallen apart. Although the authority offered to “maintain staffing levels if the union agreed to re-open the contract and grant longer-term concessions that would lower MTA costs,” the two sides could not reach an agreement. I have to believe the labor relations will grow further strained next year as the end of the TWU’s current three-year contract arrives.

3 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
New York City Transit

Alarms ineffective at emergency exits, says Riders’ Council report

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2010

In case of emergency, go around. (Photo by flickr user rlboston)

The emergency exit doors in subway stations throughout the city are the scourge of the system. Installed in 2005 and 2006 to provide fast egress in the event of an underground emergency and equipped with an ear-splitting alarm, the doors are rarely used for their intended purpose. Instead, people who think rules don’t apply to them use the exits to escape crowds at turnstiles and generally get out of dodge faster than the person next to them.

Today, the New York City Transit Riders Council issued a call for better emergency exit policies. In a report released this morning (PDF here), the NYCTRC unveiled results of a study its members conducted of the emergency exits. These rider advocates found widespread emergency exit abuse and numerous instances of fare evasion. The group found examples of herd mentality and concluded, as anyone who spends enough time near the subway’s fare-control areas, that the alarms are completely ineffective.

The NYCTRC’s methodology is fairly straightforward. This summer, council members sat at 19 subway stations throughout the four boroughs and at various times of the day to monitor the emergency exit use. The findings are summarized succinctly:

In the course of sixteen hours of observations during peak hours and nineteen hours of observations in off-peak hours, our surveyors counted a total of 2,308 passengers using designated emergency gates for access to and egress from the paid area of subway stations. Most of this activity involved 2,115 individuals who exited the paid areas of the stations through the emergency gates. Our surveyors also observed 193 individuals entering the paid areas of stations through the emergency gates. In 109 cases, surveyors indicated that these entries into the paid areas appeared to be made in the course of evading fare payment.

So when do people use the emergency exits? According to the council’s observers, those brave souls willing to risk setting off the alarm do so to “relieve a backlog of riders waiting to exit the station.” However, as I witnessed this summer at the relatively empty north end of the City Hall/Chambers St. stop, some people use the emergency exit because it’s the door closest to the stairway. Convenience often trumps manners.

The council too noted that a herd mentality is in full effect with regards to the emergency exits. “At many locations where large numbers of riders improperly exited the station through emergency exit gates,” the report says, “it appeared that riders generally refrained from using the gates until one rider “broke the ice” by using the gate. Once the gate was opened and the alarm activated, a substantial percentage of exiting riders turned from using authorized points of egress and exited the station via the emergency gate.”

And what of fare evasion as well? Only around five percent of emergency exit use constituted examples of fare evasion, and the NYCTRC says the vast majority of those fare evasion uses came at one station — 125th St. and Nicholas Ave. — where the gate was unlocked and unalarmed. “Clearly an open gate without an operable alarm is an invitation to individuals wishing to enter the system improperly,” says the report.

Unfortunately, the report is low on recommendations. The Riders’ Council suggests that monitored exits deter improper emergency exit use, but that alarms are not the answer. “We believe that because the alarms sound very frequently, they have lost their ability to alert riders to a possible emergency,” the report says. “If anything, [the alarms] serve to distract a shrinking force of station personnel from other duties.” The alarms may also alert those looking to avoid paying that the gate is open.

Without station agents at every exit and with emergency gates so porous, the Riders’ Council suggests video monitoring, a silent alarm and a better locking mechanism for the gates. The best answer might just be targeted police sweeps aimed as those who are violating the emergency exit rules either to enter without paying or to exit improperly. The emergency exit debate has been raging for years and with no end in sight. The NYCTRC report confirms what we know: that emergency exits are far from perfect. If you build it, New Yorkers will abuse it.

48 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
New Jersey Transit

The psychology of a quieter commute

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2010

For the city’s neighbors to the west, Tuesday was a big day in the effort to restore a sense of peace, quiet and dignity to the often tiresome quiet for New Jersey Transit launched its quiet car pilot program. Amidst much fanfare for an early-morning hour after a three-day weekend, the nation’s third-largest transit system sent forward a Penn Station-bound train from Trenton in which the first and last cars were designated as cell phone- and noise-free zones.

“Our customers have asked us to offer a Quiet Commute option in an effort to balance the needs of people who want to stay connected while aboard our trains with those who want to relax or work in a quiet atmosphere,” NJ Transit Executive Director James Weinstein said prior to the 9:14 a.m. launch of the quiet car. “We are offering this amenity as a pilot program and will rely on customer feedback to determine whether to make Quiet Commute a permanent NJ Transit amenity.”

For the next 90 days, the instructions are simple: The first and last cars of various trains will be clearly marked on the outside as the quiet cars, and NJ Transit conductors will pass out business cards to those who offend the sensibilities of others who want to ride in silence. The cards, printed in both English and Spanish, were first employed by SEPTA during its quiet commute launch and seem as firm reminders of the new social norms.

In this pilot, it is truly social norms of train ridership that are under assault and for the better. The Quite Commute cars, says New Jersey Transit, are intended to provide a “subdued environment for customers who wish to refrain from using cell phones and are willing to disable the sound feature on pagers, games, computers and other electronic devices.” Riders are urged to talk in “subdued” voices and, thankfully enough, are told to use headphones at a volume that “cannot be heard by other passengers.” To rid trains of the blight of loud and leaky headphones would be a true accomplishment indeed.

As the commuter rail network looks to remind people that everyone is on the train together and that selfish behavior should be left at home, the proper enforcement methods must inevitably come under scrutiny. Who, wondered Victoria St. Martin of The Star-Ledger, will enforce the quiet? If all goes according to plan, NJ Transit officials hope that other rides will serve as the overseers. “We’re not trying to make the[ conductors] hall monitors. Most will respect the rules, and if not, they will tell them,” Weinstein said. “Most of the enforcement will be peer pressure by the passengers themselves — they’ll demand it. If somebody gets on and they’re not aware it’s a quiet car, and they start their cellphone, first they get killed by looks. And then if that doesn’t work, passengers will invariably get up and let folks know that it’s a quiet car and cellphones are not permitted there.”

There are, of course, no shortage of gripes about noise. Michael Grynbaum in The Times tracked down numerous commuters who are looking forward to a quieter commute. While one commuter tells tales of 6 a.m. cell phone calls being “shut down,” others are ready for a break from the incessant chattering a 24-hour business cycle brings. “It is a movement toward civility,” Professor Frank Cioffi said. “You’ve got these high-powered businessmen in the morning doing heavy-duty negotiations, while you’re trying to read a book.”

In New York, though, the quiet car seems to be an idea out of place. Officials at Metro-North and the Long Island Rail Road say they’ll “monitor” the NJ Transit pilot but can’t see the Quiet Commute arriving on our trains any time soon. “Most of our trains are running pretty full these days,” Marjorie Anders, a Metro-North spokeswoman, said. “People don’t have the luxury of moving to another car.”

At the same time, though, if trains are about commuting and the demands of a global economy dictate a need for access to phones, e-mail and things that make noise, not everyone will head to the Quiet Commute cars. Still, those that do will treasure the silence as NJ Transit assesses this program. “It gives you a sense of calm,” Louis Kinscy said. “The cell phones go off and the erroneous conversations — it’s tolerable but it’s annoying. To have the quiet makes life much easier.”

14 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
View from Underground

A 1 train above ground while underground

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 7, 2010

Photo by Fred R. Conrad/New York Times

What you see here is a view of the subway from the former World Trade Center site. What most travelers heading to and from South Ferry don’t realize about the 1 train is that, as it passes the Cortlandt St. station and the area around Ground Zero, the subway itself is running through a concrete box suspended 50 feet above ground by pillars and beams.

This past weekend, in a extensive spread in the Metropolitan section, The Times explored the goings-on at Ground Zero ahead of the nine-year anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The piece includes a photogallery that highlights everything happening below street level, and the subway box looms over the eastern end of the work zone as construction crews build around it. Eventually, the subway will again be encased underground, and according to the Port Authority’s latest status report, the Cortlandt St. station will reopen some time during the third quarter of 2011.

19 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Nassau County exec calls for Walder’s resignation

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 7, 2010

Earlier this summer, word leaked out that the MTA may cut sever its Long Island Bus service. Owned by Nassau County, the bus routes just east of Queens are operated at a tremendous loss by the MTA, and the county pays just $9.1 million out of the agency’s $133 million operating costs. Now, as the MTA’s budget problems are coming to a head and the Long Island Bus remains in the crossfires, the Nassau County Executive has called for Jay Walder’s resignation.

Speaking earlier today of the problems plaguing the MTA, Edward Mangano issued a stunning call for the authority’s CEO and Chairman’s head. “New Yorkers are paying higher fares, businesses are paying a job-killing payroll tax and LI Bus faces extinction as a result of Walder’s threats,” Mangano said. “Taxpayers deserve accountability, and for that reason, I am calling on our gubernatorial candidates to pledge new leadership at the MTA in January.”

As Newsday’s subscriber-only article notes, Mangano’s posturing stems from the dispute over the bus company. The MTA wants the state and Nassau County to fork over $100 million to cover the LI Bus operations costs while Nassau County is a party to the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the payroll tax. Apparently, it’s beyond Mangano’s ability to understand that the payroll tax was approved long before Jay Walder returned from England to run the MTA.

Meanwhile, Mangano, who makes around $175,000 a year, criticized Walder’s salary. “This Labor Day, families sat around the barbecue worrying about how to afford to get to work because of Walder’s mismanagement,” he said. “Earning a $350,000 salary plus a generous housing allowance, Walder has taken taxpayers for a ride.”

Of course, Mangano failed to mention that, if Walder is removed from the MTA in January, he’ll be owned another $350,000 as part of his Golden Parachute payments. How would the taxpayers stomach this move?

Jay Walder has not had a perfect tenure as the head of the MTA. He hasn’t had the best of relationships with labor, and although he was brought in on the promise of financial stability and with a mandate to modernize the subway system, he has had to face a crushing financial crisis brought about, in part, because of the actions of the New York State legislature. He is a lifetime transit planner with the credentials to head the MTA and has taken the economic bull by the horns as much as anyone in his position has. He’s made some question hiring decisions and has had to fire a lot of people, but he’s not going anywhere.

Edward Mangano knows this just as you and I do. Mangano might not know that the MTA’s problems stem from state inaction. Why should the MTA spend $100 million for Nassau County bus service? Because Nassau County has spent a decade reducing its operating contributions to its own bus system, and Mangano is just part of that problem. Like every New York politician though, he’d rather just blame someone else.

34 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BrooklynSubway History

A history of futility for Utica, Nostrand extension plans

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 7, 2010

The proposed Second System subway expansion plans issued in 1929 called for subway lines down Nostrand and Utica Aves.

In the annals of New York City subway history, the Second Ave. Subway carries with it the grand stigma of futility. First proposed in 1920, the SAS went through various iterations, groundbreakings and funding crises before the current construction efforts relaunched in 1995. Barring an economic catastrophe, at least Phase 1 of the Second Ave. line will open before the end of the decade, and the Second Ave. Subway will pass from myth to reality.

Elsewhere, though, other subway expansion plans have languished for nearly as long as the Second Ave. Subway. While none of these plans have as tortured a history as the future T line does, many of them are common-sense system expansions that have been on and off the city’s transit table since the early days of New York’s subway system. Take, for instance, the Marine Park-Sheepshead Bay-Gerritsen Beach area.

Although Brooklyn’s subway service is nearly as comprehensive as Manhattan’s, a glance at the borough map reveals a large gap in service in the southern reaches of eastern Brooklyn. The Marine Park-Sheepshead Bay-Gerritsen Beach triangle is serviced only by the B and Q along Flatbush Ave. to the west and a bunch of local buses. To the north, the Flatbush Ave./Brooklyn College stop serves as a terminal for the 2 and 5 trains, and with Nostrand Ave. running south from that station, that road would serve as the natural starting point for new service.

In fact, that’s long been the dream of city planners, and that final stop on the 2 and 5 wasn’t built as such. Rather, it was supposed to lead into the Nostrand Ave. subway line. Talk of the Nostrand and Utica Ave. subway extensions pop up as early as 1910 when The Times discusses future expansion of the young system into Brooklyn. A century ago, planners anticipated a branch of the subway running out to the ocean, and the IRT awarded its Brooklyn expansion plans in two contracts. Only the first part saw the light of day, and when Flatbush Ave./Brooklyn College opened in 1920, no one knew this station would become the de facto terminal for the IRT.

In 1929, when the city unveiled its ambitious Second System proposal, both Nostrand and Utica Ave. extensions were included. The Nostrand spur would have completed the IRT’s early 1910 plans for subway expansion, and the Utica Ave. route would have been the southern part of the new Williamsburg train lines. A 1939 post-Depression version of the Second System had the Utica Ave. line reaching Floyd Bennett Field.

The 1939 plans for subway service to Floyd Bennett Field.

As we know from the history of the Second Ave. subway, though, a World War interrupted the city’s ambitious expansion plans, and the Nostrand and Utica subway lines were once again shelved for nearly 15 years. As the mid-1950s dawned and the city looked to build the Second Ave. line, so too did it give approval for the Nostrand and Utica Avenue extension plans. The Nostrand spur would again see what we now call the 2 and 5 extended south while the Utica Avenue plans were scaled back. Instead of a new line coming south from Williamsburg, the 1950s plan called for a spur from what is today the end of the 4 line in Brooklyn. The extensions were estimated to cost $82.15 million — or around $656 million in today’s money — and be ready for service by 1960.

A proposed rendering from 1969 of the Utica and Nostrand Avenue subway expansion plans.

But the city’s debt and deferred system maintenance led to a different reality. By 1957, it was clear that the two subway lines in Brooklynwould not see the light of day, and as transportation money went to modernization instead of growth, the plans laid dormant for another ten years. In 1968, the city again approved a massive subway expansion plan that included the Nostrand and Utica Avenue lines, and again, the city’s financial situation would intervene. Over the next three years, the bond request that would fund these expansion plans became a hot political issue. The city and state had no money, and many transit watchers did not believe the price tags for the capital plans were accurate. With Theodore Kheel, a current advocate for free transit, banging the financial drum, voters turned down the transportation bond request, and although another bill would pass a few years later, the Nostrand and Utica Avenue subways died in 1971.

On March 21, 1971, The Times penned a requiem for these plans. City planners thought the Utica Ave. routing would lead to even more overcrowding on the already-stuffed IRT lines and wanted to extend the Canarsie BMT — today’s L train — instead. The price tags for the two projects had reached $350 million in 1971 or $1.8 billion today, and no one believed that estimate to be accurate. These concerns still ring true today, and when Kheel attained his victory in the early 1970s, the Nostrand and Utica Ave. plans would become but another unbuilt relic of the subway system.

Today, the areas that would have enjoyed subway system 80 or 90 years ago are among the more isolated and car-dependent neighborhoods in Brooklyn. While the Second Ave. line, whose fate was seemingly intertwined with the Nostrand and Utica Avenue plans, is now under way, no one is advocating for service in southern Brooklyn even though the city would be better off for it.

34 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Weekend service changes ahead of permanent Queens, Bronx reroutings

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 3, 2010

With Labor Day upon us, summer meets its unofficial end, but New York City Transit’s ambitious work plans continue regardless of the season. For the immediate weekend, train service on Monday will operate on a Sunday schedule. Otherwise, we have some long-term changes to contemplate before jumping into the weekend schedule.

First, Transit has restored express service along the 5 through March 2011. Beginning on Tuesday, 5 trains during rush hour will run express in peak directions — southbound in the AM; northbound in the PM — between East 180th Street and 3rd Ave.-149th Street. The 2 will continue to serve all stops at all times.

Transit had eliminated the 5 train as part of the 180th St. signal modernization project and station rehabilitation, but the agency rescheduled some planned work. The 5 will run local from April 2011 through August 2011 to accomodate the new schedule.

Meanwhile, the Rockaways are gearing up to see some service changes as well. Per Transit, the Manhattan-bound A platforms at Beach 25th, Beach 44th and Beach 67th Streets are scheduled to close for rehabilitation at 12:01 a.m. on Tuesday, September 7, 2010 until the fall of 2011. Also, the Rockaway Park-bound A/S platforms at Beach 90th and Beach 105th Streets will close until spring 2011. This work includes installing new canopies over the stairs and platforms, repairing the platforms, columns, stairs and tracks, redesigning area around station booth for easier access to trains, replacing the mezzanine and platform floors, replacing the stations’ lighting and platform edges, and installing a new, high-quality public address system. And so it goes.

Now onto the good stuff. These service changes come to me verbatim from Transit. They are subject to change without notice. Listen to on-board announcements and check signs at your local station. Subway Weekender should have the map shortly.


From 12:01 a.m. to 6 a.m. Saturday, September 4, from 12:01 a.m. to 7 a.m. Sunday, September 5, and from 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, downtown 1 and 2 trains run express from 14th Street-Union Square to Chambers Street due to work to replace the roadbed at Franklin Street.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, September 3 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, there are no 2 trains between Manhattan and the Bronx due to switch renewal at the 142nd Street junction north of 135th Street. 2 trains run between Flatbush Avenue-Brooklyn College and 96th Street, and then are rerouted to the 1 line to 137th Street. Free shuttle buses replace the 2 between 96th Street and 149th Street-Grand Concourse. 5 trains replace the 2 between 149th Street-Grand Concourse and 241st Street. Note: After leaving 96th Street, uptown 2 trains stop at 103rd Street then run express to 137th Street (days).


From 10 p.m. Sunday, September 5 to 4 a.m. Monday, September 6, 2 trains skip Church Avenue station in Brooklyn in both directions due to J’Ouvert Parade 2010.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, September 3 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, there are no 3 trains running due to switch renewal at the 142nd Street junction north of 135th Street. 4 trains replace the 3 between New Lots Avenue and Nevins Street all weekend. 2 trains replace the 3 between Nevins Street and 96th Street. Free shuttle buses replace 3 trains between 96th Street and 148th Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, downtown 4 trains run local from 125th Street to 14th Street-Union Square, then express to Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall due to gap filler replacement at 14th Street-Union Square and the construction of the Broadway-Lafayette Street to Bleecker Street transfer connector.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, uptown 4 trains run local from Brooklyn Bridge to 125th Street due to gap filler replacement at 14th Street-Union Square and the construction of the Broadway-Lafayette Street to Bleecker Street transfer connector.


From 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 7, downtown-bound 4 trains run express from 14th Street-Union Square to Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall due to gap filler replacement at 14th Street-Union Square and the construction of the Broadway-Lafayette Street to Bleecker Street transfer connector.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, 4 trains run local between Atlantic Avenue and Utica Avenue and are extended to and from New Lots Avenue to replace the suspended 3 (switch renewal at the 142nd Street junction).


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, there are no 5 trains between Bowling Green and 42nd Street-Grand Central due to switch renewal at the 142nd Street junction. Customers should take the 4 instead. Note: 5 trains run between the 241st Street 2 station and Grand Central-42nd Street (days) or 149th Street-Grand Concourse (overnights). 5 shuttle trains run between Dyre Avenue and East 180th Street all weekend.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 7, downtown 6 trains run express from 14th Street-Union Square to Brooklyn Bridge due to gap filler replacement at 14th Street-Union Square and the construction of the Broadway-Lafayette Street to Bleecker Street transfer connector.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 7, downtown A and C trains run express from 59th Street-Columbus Circle to Canal Street due to track chip out at 42nd Street-Port Authority Bus Terminal.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 7, downtown-bound E
trains run express from 34th Street-Penn Station to Canal Street due to track chip out at 42nd Street-Port Authority Bus Terminal.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, September 3 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, Manhattan-bound E and F
trains run local from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Roosevelt Avenue due to a track chip out south of Elmhurst Avenue.


From 12:30 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, Jamaica Center-bound E trains run local from Roosevelt Avenue to Forest Hills-71st Avenue due to a track chip out south of Elmhurst Avenue.


From 12:30 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, Jamaica-179th Street-bound F trains run local from Roosevelt Avenue to Forest Hills-71st Avenue due to a track chip out south of Elmhurst Avenue.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, Coney Island-bound N trains are rerouted over the Manhattan Bridge from Canal Street to DeKalb Avenue due to grouting and track work at Cortlandt Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 6, Manhattan-bound N trains run on the D line from Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue to 36th Street due to track panel work north of the Kings Highway station to north of the Bay Parkway station.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 7, uptown-bound Q trains run local from Canal Street to 34th Street-Herald Square due to track dig-out north of 23rd Street.

16 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesPublic Transit Policy

Public transit investment paces job creation

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 3, 2010

As a solid follow-up to my morning rant about the lack of subway expansion in New York City comes word that, as I posited, public transportation investment is the nation’s leading in job creation. AltTransport highlights a new (PDF) report by the Transportation Equity Network that shows how $1 billion in transit investment leads to 9000 more new jobs than $1 billion in road investments. Of course, New York City, with its extensive transit network, TEN finds, leads the nation in both transit investment and job creation through this spending. The city has spent 75 percent of its Transit Improvement Program funds on transit and has created 34,679 jobs per $1 billion spent. While New York politicians are clamoring for road improvements, investment in transit would lead to a stronger economy and a better city overall.

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Public Transit Policy

Searching for political will for subway expansion

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 3, 2010

For a few pieces that I’m readying for next week, I’ve delved into the political history of numerous subway expansion efforts. Most resemble the failed Staten Island subway plans in that the Transit Authority proposes an extension, the Board of Estimates approves the program, the Mayor signs it into law and then, nothing. The money isn’t there; the cost estimates skyrocket. Something gets in the way, and that something is a failure of leadership.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a few foolhardy men who believed they can change the city used their positions of power and influence to secure lucrative contracts that allowed them to build and operate the first subway systems. The Interborough Rapid Transit company gained its premiere spot through some officially-sanctioned monopolies and eventually accepted the Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit as a competitor. The men behind these private companies were out to turn a profit, and they did so by driving workers who built the subway hard and pushing the city for high payments for expansion plans.

In the 1920s, in response to both the financial successes of the IRT and BMT and the overcrowded subways, Mayor John Hylan proposed a city-owned and operated competitor. Thus, the Independent Subway System, one of the most overbuilt subway systems in the world, was born. As the city’s Board of Estimates artificially deflated the fare for political gain, the subway companies faltered financially, and the city eventually assumed control of all three in a grand unification scheme. The IND Crosstown line — today’s G train — opened in 1937, and after that, the pace of subway expansion in New York City slowed considerably.

After unification, parts of subway routes in the outer boroughs with some connections into Manhattan would open, and the Chrystie St. Connection in 1967 involved a massive undertaking. These snippets of subway routes were originally proposed as part of the ambitious Second System, but sapped of money by the Great Depression and political will by the bad guy in our tale, most of that system hasn’t seen the light of day.

Today, there are glaring holes in subway service. Some train lines end, built with expansions in mind, have been stuck at their terminals for 80 years. Other major landmarks — such as the city’s airports — remain frustratingly out of reach of a one-seat ride to Manhattan. Still other parts of the city once slated for subway access — the Sheephead Bays and Eastern Queens of the Big Apple — remain disconnected. It is for lack of trying.

As Robert Moses built out the city’s roads throughout the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, subway construction took a back seat to the automobile. Moses didn’t allow space for a train connection to what was then Idlewild Airport as he built various highways out to the airport. He foreclosed the Verrazano Bridge to an eventual rail connection by engineering a grade too steep for the city’s subways. He pushed aside proposals to fund transit and would have nothing of expansion plans.

Today, the irony is that the subways need a Robert Moses. They need a big dreamer with the proper political clout to push through major projects. Nearly two and a half years ago, then-MTA head Elliot Sander proposed an ambitious 40-year plan that included the circumferential subway, cross-Bronx routings and an expansive Second Ave. Subway. It was a new Second System, and it remained a dream on paper.

Sander didn’t have the political influence to garner much support for his plan, and he was out at the MTA by the middle of 2009. His replacement Jay Walder is more focused on the technological innovation of transit and is trying to, amidst an ongoing budget crisis, bring a modern sense and sensibility to the MTA and New York City Transit. Beyond the projects already in progress, Walder hasn’t paid much lip service to a growth plan.

So we wait until a transit champion comes along. It won’t be any time soon, but an ambitious plan to invest in the subways and expand the tracks eastward, southward, westward could stimulate the construction economy and provide an opportunity for growth in a crowded city. Who will one day be that leader?

34 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
LIRR

Threatened by Earl, LIRR cancels East End service

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 3, 2010

Just five days after restoring full service past Jamaica, the Long Island Rail Road is again canceling trains. This time, though, the cause for the service changes is a hurricane bearing down on Long Island. Nature is a fickle beast, and service to the East End of the Island will pay because of it.

According to the MTA’s service advisory, “the LIRR will suspend train service east of Speonk on the Montauk Branch and east of Ronkonkoma on the Main Line, which normally takes customers to Greenport and Long Island’s North Fork.” The agency summarizes the changes:

LIRR service west of Ronkonkoma and west of Speonk will operate on a normal schedule. In addition, eight early getaway trains between 2:02 PM and 3:48 PM scheduled from Penn Station heading east on Friday will continue to operate to Babylon, Great Neck, Far Rockaway, Hicksville and Huntington.

The last eastbound train to Montauk will leave Penn Station at 12:39 AM Friday morning and arrive in Montauk at 3:57 AM. The last train traveling westbound to Penn Station is scheduled to leave Montauk at 5:39 AM and arrive at Penn Station at 8:42 AM. The last westbound train will leave Greenport at 5:30 AM Friday morning.

Those commuting from stations east of Speonk and Ronkonkoma will not have LIRR service on Friday morning. These cancellations could become potential problems for people who need to evacuate the Island by heading west. Roads will grow clogged, and the pace slow.

Earl, currently a hurricane, is expected to reach Long Island on Friday and should be a Tropical Storm by the time it does so. Still, the LIRR will not have a service update until late Friday night and will work to restore trains by Saturday morning. Depending up on the damage sustained though, it could take up to eight hours to reactivate the line after the storm passes. If Earl knocks out trees or power lines, service could of course be suspended for longer.

3 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts