New York City Transit

While most of us take the subway every day, how many of us know anything about the people who conduct the trains? When I asked my friends who their favorite subway conductors were, most of their responses were things like “That guy on the A who sings the names of the stations” or “One time I had a conductor on the N who not only announced the stops but said which tourist attractions were near each one.”

Well, I have a favorite driver – his name is Eric Booker, and he conducts the 7 train. However, Eric’s not terribly famous for his day job. Under his nickname, “Badlands,” he’s one of the country’s foremost champions in a very unusual sport – competitive eating. Booker holds records in events from hamentaschen to burritos to peas. He’s one of the IFOCE (International Federation of Competitive Eating)’s biggest celebrities and makes regular appearances at the best-known eating competition of all, the Nathan’s Famous Hot Dog Contest, held every Fourth of July on Coney Island.

When he’s not eating or conducting the 7 train, “Badlands” is also an aspiring rapper. You can check out one of his songs (which is about Krystal hamburgers, obviously) here.

Over the last few years, we’ve tracked the progress of the line manager program from an idea to a pilot program on the L and 7 lines to a system-wide level of management. This week, according to amNew York’s Heather Haddon, the line manager program will officially be in place throughout the system.

While some transit advocates see this is a move that should benefit New York City Transit’s customer service and customer interaction, I’m still on the fence. In the end, according to Haddon, the program will include 36 manager — and that means 36 managerial salaries. Transit, however, says this program will actually save money. Haddon explains:

The 36 managers act as the CEOs of their lines, coordinating all departments, from platform cleaning to track maintenance. Six of the general managers oversee more than one line.

Officials must analyze train performance and respond to customer complaints, according to the job description. The managers take training before starting, and are to ride trains and visit stations along their lines.

Transit estimated it would save $7 million by cutting managerial jobs. The program is the first major managerial reorganization of the subways in more than 50 years.

Since this program debuted in 2007, Transit and MTA watchdogs have engaged in a back-and-forth over its effectiveness. Transit has noted that lines with the line managers have been cleaner and saw a bump in performance during the second round of the Rider Report Cards. As Haddon notes, though, the 7 and L were also the recipients of more cleaners. With service cut backs on tap, the rest of the system will not enjoy that benefit.

In April, when the Permanent Citizen’s Advisory Committee to the MTA evaluated Transit in 2008, they reserved judgment on the line managers. Said the report, “It has imparted a sense of ownership to managers and helped quantify what it takes to provide a reliable level of service and well-maintained stations. However, it is still not clear how success is going to be measured.”

Even with a full roll-out, it’s hard to say more about the managers. Already, straphangers can e-mail their line managers if they have complaints or criticisms. Beyond that, though, we’ll have to see how performance improves. There is, after all, only so much one manager can do in the face of an underfunded and under-resourced subway system.

At the intersection of 7th Ave. and Greenwich Ave. on the southeast side of the street sits a triangular lot. This lot is not just any lot. It is a historic piece of village land. It is the inspiration for one of Edward Hopper’s most famous works of art and is currently home to the 9/11 Tiles for America memorial. This land is also owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and the MTA now needs to do something with it.

The functional plans for this plot are less than romantic. New York City Transit plans to construct a emergency ventilation plant for both the 7th Ave. lines that run north/south near that point and the 8th Ave. line that cuts east/west under Greenwich Ave. to and from West 4th St. The neighborhood though is reluctant to part with its corner, and both sides are working together to come up with an acceptable plan. Albert Amateau reports in The Villager:

New York City Transit last week presented three basic design suggestions for the emergency ventilation tower planned for the triangle at Seventh Ave. South and Greenwich Ave., where thousands of Sept. 11 memorial tiles have been hanging on a chain-link fence for the past eight years. Neighbors at the June 22 presentation were glad the plans provided for space to display at least some of the tiles, but they were disappointed with the tower design options, which they characterized as “off the rack” and not worthy of the Greenwich Village Historic District.

Last year Transit chose a plan for a combined emergency ventilation plant for both the Seventh Ave. and the Eighth Ave. subway lines that includes a 38-foot-tall tower on the triangle property that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority owns. However, Community Board 2 had recommended the plant be built entirely below street level.

The above-ground option was deemed to be least expensive — $79.5 million compared to $93.7 million to $124 million for eight other site options — and to have the least impact on vehicle and pedestrian traffic, according to the project’s final environmental impact statement.

Community Board 2 members were lukewarm in their views on the tower. “We’ve been grappling with the ventilation plant issue for some time now,” Brad Hoylman, former C.B. 2 chairperson, said to Amateau. “We asked for a distinctive design for the building, not least because it’s at the gateway to the Greenwich Village Historic District, and because it includes an important piece of recent history.”

Today, Curbed posted slides from the MTA’s presentation, and the one I featured at the top of this post is my choice. As Judith Kunoff, an architect at Transit explained, this version incorporates the Tiles for America memorial into a structure reminiscent of the historic dinner from Nighthawks.

Hopefully, when all is said and done, both the history and memory from this corner will be a part of a functional piece of transit equipment. Incorporating neighborhood design elements into necessary infrastructure serve to make the city friendlier and more livable.

In August 2007, a torrential rain storm knocked out nearly the entire New York subway system for hours. With the underground floods came a bunch of alarming developments. The MTA’s website couldn’t withstand the onslaught of visitors; their emergency alert system for service advisories was non-existent; and their anti-flood measures were ineffective at best and mostly useless. Over the last few years, the MTA has beefed up its website infrastructure and now provides near-real-time text alerts. The flood prevention was the last to come, but it’s finally in place and working.

According to Pete Donohue, the MTA completed a $31-million flood-prevention program. The highlight of this effort was a move to raise 1500 streetlevel grates a few inches off the ground. Instead of funneling rainwater underground and onto subway tracks and platforms, the waters are now siphoned to flood drains.

While New Yorkers saw the second-wettest June on record, weather-related subway delays are down significantly. For that, the agency deserves praise. Twenty-two months after a crippling storm, the system is ready for nature’s wrath.

New York City Transit is quite pleased with the performance of the grates. Paul Fleuranges sent me the above picture (which you can click to enlarge) and added a note about their use particularly on June 18 when the city received 1.84 inches of rain. “There’s no doubt given the amount of rain we’ve had this month, and the propensity of Hillside to flood out, we would have had serious problems if not for the grates,” he said.

When the MTA, with much fanfare, raised the fares this past week, many riders complained that they were paying more for the same level of service. New Yorkers, it seems, do not realize that without the fare hikes, they would suffer through crippling service cuts. These straphangers also seem to be more willing to pay higher fares for more service.

It’s not quite true that the MTA did not extend service though, and I want to take a brief second to talk about a couple of recent service extensions. These aren’t quite the service upgrades we need or want, but for now, they will have to do.

First, on Monday, Transit started running the 5 train into Brooklyn during midday, off-peak hours. For years, the 5 had a varying schedule for peak and off-peak hours. It would run express to Flatbush Ave. only from 6:15 to 10 a.m. and from 3:15 to 8:45 p.m. Now, the 5 runs to Flatbush Ave. from 6:15 a.m. straight through until 8:45 p.m. The Franklin St. transfers for midday Flatbush-bound travelers along the East Side IRT has been eliminated. Overall, the MTA has implemented this change to provide more consistent service while working to alleviate the overcrowding on the 4. Sounds good to me.

Further south in Brooklyn, this Sunday marks the extension of the G train to Church Ave. While the G signage has already been updated, the changes go into effect this weekend. The G will now continue south from Smith/9th Sts. with stops at 4th Ave.-9th Street, 7th Ave, 15th Street-Prospect Park, Fort Hamilton Parkway and Church Ave. Riders on the G can now get a one-seat ride from Kensington, Park Slope and Windsor Terrace to Williamsburg and Long Island City, and the stop at 4th Ave.-9th St. offers a connection to the M and R.

This service extension is a direct result of the Culver Viaduct rehabilitation project. However, if it is successful, Transit has expressed a willingness to make it a permanent change. It could also open up the possibility of F Express service in Brooklyn.

Finally, Transit recently wrapped up a 4 express pilot program in the Bronx as well. We’re still waiting for the results, but this too could be a new service option.

These are but small additions to a vast system, but every service extension helps.

Riders will create a garbage can wherever they can. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak)

When I interviewed New York City Transit President Howard Roberts in the fall, he spoke at length about his desire for cleaner stations. Roberts talked about the various plans in the works to beef up the maintenance crews around the system. Ah, to be in October. Those were simpler times.

Today, facing financial constraints and extreme internal budget-tightening, New York City Transit has been faced with a maintenance reality. The agency no longer has the money to support expanding the cleaning programs and in fact has had to cut back. Stations are, as Heather Haddon reported this morning, dirtier, and Transit’s cleaning staff is down by 100 workers. She reports:

Because of budget constraints, the MTA has curtailed station cleaning, with Transit officials acknowledging they are down by about 100 workers. The agency has also slashed overtime for cleaners, and workers say they simply can’t keep up with the mounting trash…

In recent years, the cleaning department has struggled to keep up with the surge in ridership. In 1993, the MTA employed 1.5 station cleaners per million riders. By 2007, the ratio had slipped to 1 cleaner for every million, according to Transit figures…

In a survey last year, the Straphangers Campaign found that the L and No. 7 made big improvements and were the system’s cleanest. A 2008 Transit report found that track fires also declined on the lines.

But running the pilot sapped precious manpower, which has fallen in the last several years as cleaner jobs went unfilled to save money, [union leader Marvin] Holland said. A hiring freeze implemented earlier this year has compounded the problem. Cleaners are now often scurrying to hit as many as five locations in one shift, whereas in the past they would usually just do two. And now stations only have cleaners on-site for an average of four hours a day, according to the Transit report.

The subways have never been known for their cleanliness. Oblivious or discourtesy straphangers treat every available surface as a garbage can. Food is left to rot on station platforms, and the worst offenders clip their nails onto the floors of train stations and cars.

Roberts though wants to add more cleaners. He says he can’t though because of the budgetary constraints and a worse-than-expected outlook. He hoped that internal belt-tightening would allow him reallocate resources for cleaning, but that is an optimistic prediction today.

In the end, the people who suffer most are, well, those same riders. More trash leads to more rodents. More trash leads to more track fires. More trash leads to a more unpleasant commute. Sadly, it sounds as though we may need to get used to that idea.

The latest from William Neuman is an odd tale indeed. According to The Times, New York City Transit officials are backtracking in a way on their decision earlier this year to eliminate an emergency response team.

A dedicated emergency response team for the subway — trained to help police officers and firefighters confront transit emergencies — was eliminated by New York City Transit this spring as officials overrode concerns of the agency’s safety experts.

The seven-member unit was created to address shortcomings that had become apparent after a series of bungled responses to fires and other incidents in the subway system, and it had won praise during its 13 months of existence for improving communication among police, fire and transit officials at emergencies.

Yet the agency’s leaders, including its president, Howard H. Roberts Jr., deemed the response team unnecessary. They compared the unit to Maytag repairmen, saying it was rarely used… When the unit was eliminated in March, it was replaced by the same much-criticized system that had been in use before the team was created.

But after first defending the change, Mr. Roberts now acknowledges that it was mishandled, saying that the response team should not have been eliminated before a better system was fully in place.

He said that no analysis was done of the unit’s effectiveness before it was disbanded. He said that neither he nor the agency’s vice president for subways, Steven A. Feil, had looked at basic data on the unit’s performance, like the number of incidents it responded to, until last week when the information was requested by The New York Times. That data showed that the unit had responded to hundreds of incidents, large and small.

Neuman’s piece goes in depth on the elimination of this team, and Transit is taking the heat for downplaying the response team’s effectiveness. “I think that the basic thing that went wrong here was that people wanted you to go away,” Roberts said to Neuman, who earlier this year had poked around the situation.

In the article, Neuman tracks the creation and subsequent elimination of a team designed to streamline how Transit handles underground emergency situations. While MTA officials said that the team was underutilized, current numbers show an average of two emergency response efforts per day. Roberts plans to reestablish the team once the new Line Manager program is full implemented this fall.

I wonder how the agency, with its public image largely battered after the Doomsday budget debacle, will handle this latest revelation from The Times.