Queens

A look at the 20 Year Needs: The Rockaway Beach Branch cameo

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 9, 2013

Over the past two years, the disused Rockaway Beach Branch right-of-way has creeped into the news largely because a group of Queens residents want to turn it into a park. The group has received a half a million dollars from the state to study their proposal and are engaged in a design contest to produce renderings of the park. Since land acquisition costs are high and pre-existing rights of way rare in New York City, I’ve resisted this so-called QueensWay plan without at least a comparable study assessing rail feasibility.

As yet, Assemblyman Phillip Goldfeder has stepped up to lend his voice for rail reactivation and a few transit advocates have as well, but the dollars to study a plan aren’t in place. The QueensWay is sexy; rail running through some backyards that encroach onto the right of way is intrusive. It’s a classic and never-ending development debate and one into which the city and MTA have yet to wade.

That said, toward the end of the MTA’s 20 Year Needs Assessment is this paragraph:

Utilizing Available Rail Rights-of-Way: One challenge in providing for non-core-based travel is the availability of travel corridors supporting radial routes linking existing subway, bus and rail lines. A possible option is the utilization of abandoned or underutilized Rights of Way such as the LIRR Bay Ridge Branch (linking southern and eastern Brooklyn with Central and northern Queens) or the abandoned Rockaway Beach Branch (linking Howard Beach and Ozone Park with Woodhaven) as transverse routes linking radial subway lines. Conversion of existing ROWs, where a solution to an identified travel need can be defined, could help reduce land acquisition and construction costs, and facilitate construction time in densely developed areas.

Project proponents are excited by the MTA’s acknowledgment of the right-of-way even if previous documents have contained more extensive examinations of the disused lines. Goldfeder reiterated his support to DNA Info. “The MTA has done their part by putting the plan on the table,” he said. “Now, I have to go to Albany and fight for the funding — first for a feasibility study and then for the money to rebuild the line.”

QueensWay proponents rolled their eyes. “This was a one-sentence mention in a study over 130 pages in length,” Andrea Crawford, head of Friends of the QueensWay and Community Board 9 chair, said. “There is no discussion of an intent to even study the feasibility of building a new rail line utilizing the right of way. To leave this land fallow, to let it deteriorate further, is not beneficial for the residents of central Queens.”

If only the world were as black and white as Crawford’s. The MTA should explore the potential uses for underutilized rights of way, and QueensWay proponents should embrace any such study as it could put to rest, one way or another, the debate over the best way to use this space. Ultimately, Goldfeder will keep fighting the good fight, and we can enjoy a forward-looking feasibility study. Without one, we won’t know how best to use the Rockaway Beach Branch for the next generation of New Yorkers.

19 comments
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

On MTA funding, divergent paths — or just empty promises? — from de Blasio, Lhota

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 9, 2013

With recent polls giving Bill de Blasio a fifty-point lead over GOP challenger and former MTA head Joe Lhota in the race for mayor, New York voters haven’t seen a particularly robust discussion of the issues, and even with a pair of debates looming, I don’t expect much of substance to emerge. Lhota faces too big a polling gap and recognition issues while de Blasio has nothing to gain from being out front of any policy debates. That said, the two candidates offered up some vague details on their funding plans for the MTA.

The city’s relationship with the transit agency has been a rough ground lately. City-based politicians seem to agree that the five boroughs should have more of a say on the MTA Board. Currently only four of the 12 seats are appointed by the Mayor, but the Governor has appointed city residents as well. Yet, city politicians aren’t keen on acknowledging that with great power comes great funding responsibility, and discussions surrounding city contributions to the MTA budget often result in a lot of stammering and attempts at changing the subject.

The mayoral race has been no different. No candidates are proposing congestion pricing or East River tolling, and while de Blasio has spoken about protecting the MTA payroll mobility tax as an important source of revenue, Lhota has suggested divorcing bridge and tunnel toll revenues from subway funding schemes. By and large, these positions have ranged from non-controversial to non-starters. Still, this week, we’ve seen divergent viewpoints from both candidates.

On Monday, Pete Donohue wrote about how Lhota would increase city contributions to the MTA’s budget. Lhota wouldn’t provide a specific figure or identify where the money would come from, but he noted that the city should be more involved in the MTA’s capital program. “I do believe the mayor and City Council should start participating in a significant way in the capital plan,” Lhota said. “We need to participate more.”

De Blasio, meanwhile, said that he doesn’t believe the city is fiscally healthy enough to up its MTA contributions. “I think there are some things we can do that are meaningful, like help expand Bus Rapid Transit in the outer boroughs, and there’s a contribution the city can make to that through capital funding,” the mayoral frontrunner said in a radio interview today. “But in terms of the core of our budget, no, we’re not in the position to do that right now.”

Since de Blasio is likely to win in November, his comments aren’t the most encouraging, but it’s all likely to be a load of nothing. Neither candidate has put out a transit plan comparable to that developed by Mayor Bloomberg four years ago, but mostly that just means neither will underdeliver when it proves impossible implement, say, free crosstown buses as Bloomberg once proposed. Still, resignation before the election won’t translate into action after, and the city’s strange economic relationship with its own subway system won’t change much from today’s awkward status quo.

17 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Podcast

Ep. 6 of ‘The Next Stop Is…’ on NJ Transit, PATH & BusTime

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 9, 2013

NextStopis The Second Ave. Sagas’ podcast “The Next Stop Is…” returns this week with a short episode for your listening enjoyment. Eric Brasure and I discuss New Jersey Transit’s post-Sandy woes, the increase in PATH fares that slipped under the radar and BusTime’s Manhattan debut.

This week’s recording runs a shade over 20 minutes, just short enough for your subway commute, and I’m posting it now to give you a chance to grab the link for your morning ride if you check the site early enough. You can grab the podcast right here on iTunes or pull the raw MP3 file. If you enjoy what you hear, subscribe to updates on iTunes as well.

We’ll be back with a new episode in two weeks, and we’d love to take more reader questions. So if you have a topic you’d like me to cover, leave a comment or drop me a note.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesTaxis

NY state court blocks Taxi of Tomorrow plan

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 8, 2013

With just a few weeks to go before the rules implementing the Taxi of Tomorrow were to take effect, one of Mayor Bloomberg’s signature plans may be dead as a New York State judge ruled today that the city does not have the authority to implement such a plan. In siding with the taxi industry over the city in the battle over the Nissan NV200, Judge Shlomo Hagler summed up his view, “Simply stated, the power to contract and compel medallion owners to purchase the Nissan NV200 from Nissan for ten years does not exist in the City Charter.” Rather, Hagler opined, the City Council should set these standards.

Bloomberg, no friend of the taxi industry, had first announced the Taxi of Tomorrow competition as a way to leverage the city’s purchasing power while selecting cars that were safe and spacious. The move has come under fire in recent months though as the Nissan NV200s are not as fuel-efficient as the options available for the current fleet and aren’t handicap-accessible either. His administration will appeal, but it is unclear if our next mayor would continue the site as both Joe Lhota and Bill de Blasio have not embraced the Taxi of Tomorrow.

Meanwhile, as Ted Mann notes in The Journal, this ruling could leave the city liable to Nissan for some costs as well. As Mann writes, “The carmaker’s contract with the TLC would permit it to recoup design and production costs in the event the taxi project is cancelled by the city. Nissan estimated those costs, in a document previously filed with the court, at roughly $50 million, though some familiar with the matter have said the costs could be higher.”

30 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
7 Line Extension

The 7 line brings development to Hudson Yards

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 7, 2013

A shot of the 7 line extension from June. It’s beginning to look a lot like a real subway tunnel. (Photo: Metropolitan Transportation Authority / Patrick Cashin)

As Mayor Bloomberg’s time in office nears an end, his tenure is racing against the clock for the 7 line extension. For better or worse, this project, less one key station, is his baby, and earlier this year, he vowed to push trains through the tunnel before his term ends if it means an opportunity for a ribbon-cutting. It may not be ready for revenue service until mid-June of 2014, but some sort of ceremony will take place before the end of the year just to Bloomberg can pat himself on the back for delivering the dollars.

At a certain point, the conversation surrounding the 7 line changed. I used to call it the Line To Nowhere, and while it’s sort of the line to nowhere, in a few years, it’ll be the Line That Turned Nowhere Into Somewhere. It shouldn’t surprise us because most of New York City developed on the backs of the various subway lines, but development of Manhattan’s last frontier is following the subway and at a very rapid pace.

In a big piece in this week’s Crain’s New York, Dan Geiger explores that development. The dollars are starting to roll in, and soon the buildings will start to rise. Geiger reports:

With the long-talked-about transit link almost ready, the area’s real estate interests are betting vast sums that more tenants will follow in the footsteps of the major companies that have already booked huge blocks of space, including Coach, Time Warner and L’Oréal. Indeed, as Crain’s first reported last week, Citigroup is considering relocating its global corporate headquarters from Park Avenue to Hudson Yards.

In response to those bullish signals from tenants, developers are snapping up major development sites at a prodigious pace, making the area the most active in the city this year for such deals, according to real estate experts. The 7 train’s looming arrival has only hastened that frenzy. Bob Knakal, chairman of sales brokerage Massey Knakal, said small fortunes are being created, as the activity has pushed up land prices by double or more.

“A lot of the development sites that only a short time ago were considered speculative are now tangible,” Mr. Knakal said. “You’ll see a lot more happen in the neighborhood coming up. There are at least four very significant sites that I know of that will be in play within the next month or two right smack in the Hudson Yards.”

The Related Cos., already in the process of developing the 26-acre, $15 billion Hudson Yards complex, has been the most voracious buyer of adjacent sites in a doubling down of its holdings in the area. The company has entered into a contract to acquire a parcel between West 35th and 36th streets—for $75 million or more—that will border a new “Hudson Boulevard” being constructed by the city to run between 10th and 11th avenues.

The actual arrival of the train to the area was a key moment psychologically for developers. As Geiger notes, those investing in the area believe that 70 percent of residents will use the 7 train on a daily basis, and the level of interest has increased as it’s become clear that the subway is a reality and not just a promise. Meanwhile, Related, the company with the largest stake in the area, plans to start work on the platform that will cover the Hudson Yards early next year.

“If there were no No. 7 subway, I’m not sure we would be starting the platform then,” Jay Cross, the head of the Hudson Yards project for Related, said to Crain’s. “But knowing that it is going to be there means we have to get going and that we will also have enough tenant interest for the space there.”

Is there a lesson here — besides, that is, the one Dan Doctoroff was espousing a few weeks ago when he praised the 7 line at the expense of the Second Ave. Subway? We see that subway construction can still feed development and can still dictate where people want to live, work and build in New York City. The same doesn’t happen around Select Bus Service lines, and our politicians would be wise to pay attention the Hudson Yards. There are other areas of the city that could use subway lines and the subway lines can lead to more density and a better use of scarce space.

70 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BusesMTA Technology

BusTime makes its Manhattan debut

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 7, 2013

Amidst much anticipation, Manhattan now has real-time bus tracking as the MTA unveiled BusTime for the County of New York. At around midnight this morning, BusTime — the MTA’s in-house-built, distance-based system — went live on nearly all Manhattan bus routes. The system is available on the web right here, and already, bus bunching is on display for all to see.

In announcing the new technology, a variety of MTA officials made their perfunctory statements. “MTA Bus Time is a game changer and a service that greatly enhances our customers’ experience with bus travel,” MTA Chairman and CEO Thomas F. Prendergast said. “MTA Bus Time has turned your phone into a tool that tells you when to start walking to the bus stop so you can get there right when the bus does. Meet your bus, don’t wait for it.”

Those riders who can now meet their buses — or opt to walk — instead of waiting include those who use the following routes: M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, M7, M8, M9, M10, M11, M14A, M14D, M15, M15 SBS, M20, M21, M22, M23, M31, M35, M42, M50, M57, M60, M66, M72, M79, M86, M101, M102, M103, M104, M106, and M116. The M34 and M34A were already a part of BusTime, and Brooklyn- and Queens-based routes that enter Manhattan will be added as BusTime comes to those boroughs and depots within in the next six months. The MTA estimates that 93 percent of all Manhattan bus riders can now track their routes.

To bring this borough’s iteration of BusTime online, the agency’s small in-house staff had to code in 1800 bus stops while adding GPS hardware to the buses that operate in the city. Since 2012, the MTA has installed this technology on 2852 buses. Conveniently, the MTA also provided a list of apps already accessing the BusTime API. Those include, for iOS All Aboard NYC; All Schedules Free; Bing Mobile; Bus New York City; Google Maps for Mobile; In Time Staten Island; Ride On Time NYC; Roadify; and Transit Times. For Android, Bus Tracker Pro – MTA NY and Sched NYC feature real-time bus information.

As with the previous boroughs, Manhattan’s BusTime is based on distance rather than time. Since travel times are variable and far more costly to get right, the MTA has gone with a distance-based approach that allows riders to estimate potential wait times. It’s not perfect, but any regular rider should pick up on the idiosyncrasies within a handful of uses.

Meanwhile, through the web interface, you can see bus bunching in action. Earlier today, a variety of north-south lines had two, three or even four buses all within 10 blocks of each other with big gaps in service. Jason Rabinowitz at NYC Aviation noted the problem with the M60 and service across 125th St., a particular sore spot after a vocal minority temporarily squashed bus improvements for the congested corridor.

With a wealth of location data now available, hopefully, the MTA can begin to attack the problem of bunching head on. For everyone else, now you know where your bus is and that hopeless stare down an avenue can become a thing of the past.

17 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
New Jersey Transit

Even more stories about Sandy and NJ Transit

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 7, 2013

New Jersey Transit’s response to Sandy is the story that just won’t die. It’s not quite a scandal, even though perhaps it should be, but the developments continue to trickle out thanks to reporting by Karen Rouse from The Record and Andrea Bernstein from WNYC. This should be a bigger black eye on the face of the Garden State and its governor, but so far, the scandal just won’t stick.

Late last week, a story emerged that Chris Christie had absolved NJ Transit head Jim Weinstein of blame for the agency’s failures. These failures, as you’ll recall, cost the agency a few hundred million dollars in rolling stock and involved moving trains into locations identified as vulnerable to flooding. These failures also involved ignoring weather forecasts and generally assuming everything would be fine even as sister agencies in New York City prepared for the worst. Even Christie’s story rang a little strange, though, as Rouse reported:

[Gov.] Christie said that in the chaos of Sandy’s approach, a low-level manager who was in charge of securing hundreds of pieces of equipment at the last minute ditched a plan that was in place to protect the equipment, all without the knowledge of Executive Director Jim Weinstein. Christie claimed that the unnamed employee was a civil servant and because of civil service rules, could only be demoted.

“It was a lower-level manager that made the decision on the cars … where they were placed,” the governor told The Record’s editorial board on Thursday. “It was not vetted up the chain as it was supposed to be vetted up the chain. Mr. Weinstein handled it internally because he’s a civil service employee, and you can’t just fire the person. He was demoted as a result of that decision, and that’s what we could do…There’s certain people, when you’re governor, that you can fire, and there’s certain people that the law does not permit you to do that to.”

However, several officials close to NJ Transit said none of the agency’s employees fall under civil service rules, and that the law that created NJ Transit in 1979 excludes the agency from the civil service system.

A day later, Rouse uncovered emails that contradicted Christie’s story. She reported:

The day before Superstorm Sandy made landfall in New Jersey, more than a dozen NJ Transit workers — from yardmasters to the top executive — shared emails describing where and how the agency’s rail fleet was being moved to shelter it from the storm. In one of the most questionable decisions made during the storm, many locomotives and passenger cars were parked in low-lying areas in Hoboken and Kearny — a key move that caused more than $120 million in damage after the storm surge flooded the rail yards with brackish water. How this occurred remains a mystery, particularly as damage was minimal to the operations of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority across the Hudson River in New York State, which faced the same devastating storm but managed to move its fleet to higher ground.

This week, at a meeting with The Record’s editorial board, Governor Christie said the decision at NJ Transit was made by one employee who didn’t follow the agency’s plan and didn’t inform his supervisors about his actions. NJ Transit officials declined to elaborate on that remark Friday, leaving open the question of how a single low-level manager could be responsible for a decision that led to so much destruction.

But a review of emails obtained through a public records request shows that in contrast to Christie’s remarks, at least 15 agency executives and managers, were aware of fleet movements into low-lying areas in the days leading up to Sandy. Included in at least one email, was NJ Transit Executive Director James Weinstein — whom Christie has held blameless for the damage and whom the governor praised enthusiastically during the editorial board meeting.

Unknown is whether other directives went out that were not recorded in emails and that contributed to the decision to park the rail stock in Hoboken and Kearny. But the email chains establish that information on rail fleet movements was shared widely by top decision makers at the agency.

The Record identified William Lawson, a former superintendent of equipment management, as the scapegoat for the response to Sandy. He lost about $10,000 in salary and received a titular demotion. Christie, meanwhile, continued to defend Weinstein even as the email thread suggested that the New Jersey Transit head had plenty of information concerning the agency’s response. “Jim Weinstein didn’t know about it until after it happened,” the governor said. “Everyone else at NJ Transit executed that plan except for one guy.”

Based on Rouse’s reporting, Christie’s comments don’t pass the smell test. Lawson’s emails made their ways to Weinstein with time left to change the plan, and yet, the rail cars were left to flood. Even a minor demotion is hardly an adequate response to the magnitude of the miscalculation, and a dismissal — which could have happened — didn’t.

But all of this is proverbial water under the bridge. Someone should be held responsible, but as the one-year anniversary of the storm approaches, it’s likely that no one will be called to answer for the damage. Rather, New Jersey Transit should be working to ensure every single one of its riders that these mistakes will not happen again. Instead of issuing a mea culpa and moving forward, as the MTA did after Irene, New Jersey Transit has played defense. I can’t imagine they’ll leave rail cars to flood again, but month after month of ducking and dodging has done little to instill much confidence in me.

18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

PATH fares go up; weekend work impacting 10 subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 5, 2013

If PATH raises fares and no one covers it, does it count?

You wouldn’t know from the utter lack of press coverage, but PATH fares went up this week. Port Authority issued no press release, and only an errant PATH Tweet made note of the fact. It’s mystifying really how little coverage PATH gets. It has an average weekday ridership of over 260,000 and is a key connector underneath the Hudson River.

So that’s that. Here are the weekend changes.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, there are no 1 trains between 137th Street and 242nd Street due to brick arch repair at 168th and 181st Streets. 1 trains operate between South Ferry and 137th Street. Customers may take A trains, the M3 and free shuttle buses as alternates.

  • Free shuttle buses operate between 137th Street and 168th Street
  • M3 and free shuttle buses operate between 168th Street and 191st Street
  • Free shuttle buses operate between 207th Street and 242nd Street

Customers may transfer between buses and trains at 137th Street (1), 168th Street (A) and 207th Street (A) stations. For Dyckman Street and 207th Street, use nearby A stations; transfer between the 1 and A trains at 59th Street-Columbus Circle.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 6 a.m. Saturday, October 5, from 11:45 p.m. Saturday, October 5 to 6 a.m. Sunday, October 6 and from 11:45 p.m. Sunday, October 6 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, uptown 4 trains run express from Grand Central-42nd Street to 125th Street due to electrical work at 51st Street.


From 5:45 a.m. to 7 p.m., Saturday, October 5 and from 7:45 a.m. to 7 p.m., Sunday, October 6, Dyre Avenue-bound 5 trains run express from East 180th Street to Dyre Avenue due to track tie block and surface replacement north of Morris Park and cable work north of Baychester Avenue.


From 6 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., Saturday, October 5 and from 8 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., Sunday, October 6, 5 trains run every 20 minutes between Dyre Avenue and Bowling Green due to electrical work at 51st Street.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Pelham Bay Park-bound 6 trains run express from Grand Central-42nd Street to 125th Street due to electrical work at 51st Street.


Beginning 12:01 a.m. Saturday, October 5 until May 2014, 6 trains skip Middletown Road and Castle Hill Avenue in both directions due to station renewal work.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, October 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Brooklyn-bound A trains run local from 125th Street to 59th Street-Columbus Circle due to track tie renewal north of 59th Street-Columbus Circle.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, October 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, there is no A train service between Euclid Avenue and Lefferts Blvd or Howard Beach-JFK Airport due to track panel work at Lefferts Blvd. and Rockaway Blvd. and track tie renewal and maintenance at Grant Avenue. A trains operate in two sections:

  • Between Inwood-207th Street and Euclid Avenue
  • Between Howard Beach-JFK Airport and Far Rockaway

Free shuttle buses operate in two segments:

  • Between Euclid Avenue and Howard Beach-JFK Airport, making station stops at Grant Avenue, 80th Street, 88th Street, Rockaway Blvd., 104th Street, 111th Street, Lefferts Blvd., Aqueduct Racetrack and Aqueduct-North Conduit Avenue.
  • Between Euclid Avenue and Howard Beach-JFK Airport, nonstop

Transfer between trains and free shuttle buses at Euclid Avenue and/or at Howard Beach-JFK airport. Note: Rockaway Park train shuttle is unaffected.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, October 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Coney Island-bound D trains run local from 145th Street to 59th Street-Columbus Circle due to track tie renewal north of 59th Street-Columbus Circle.

(FASTRACK)
From 5:30 a.m. to 8 p.m., Saturday, October 5 and Sunday, October 6, there is no D service between Stillwell Avenue and Bay Parkway and no N service between Stillwell Avenue and 86th Street due to FASTRACK shutdown for maintenance, testing and inspection of signal equipment. Customers may take F or Q trains and the B1, B4, B64 and B82 buses instead.


From 8 p.m. Saturday, October 5 to 5:30 a.m. Sunday, October 6, the last stop for some trains headed toward Coney Island is Bay Parkway due to FASTRACK shutdown for maintenance, testing and inspection of signal equipment.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, October 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Jamaica Center-bound E trains run local from Roosevelt Avenue to Forest Hills-71st Avenue due to track maintenance north of Elmhurst Avenue.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Jamaica-bound F trains run express from Church Avenue to Smith-9th Streets due to work on the Church Avenue Interlocking.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, October 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Jamaica-bound F trains run local from Roosevelt Avenue to Forest Hills-71st Avenue due to track maintenance north of Elmhurst Avenue.


From 11:15 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Coney Island-bound F trains are rerouted via the M line from Roosevelt Avenue to 47th-50th Sts due to station work at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street for the Second Avenue Subway project.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, Nassau Avenue-bound G trains run express from Church Avenue to Smith-9th Sts due to work on the Church Avenue Interlocking.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, there is no G train service between Court Square and Nassau Avenue. G trains operate between Nassau Avenue and Church Avenue. There is no G service at Greenpoint Avenue, 21st Street and Court Square.

Free shuttle buses operate on two routes:

  1. Via Manhattan Avenue between Nassau Avenue G and Court Square
  2. Via McGuinness Blvd between Lorimer Street L and Court Square

Customers may transfer between:

  • G trains and shuttle buses at Nassau Avenue
  • L trains and shuttle buses at Lorimer Street
  • E or 7 trains and shuttle buses at Court Square


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, October 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, October 7, there is no L train service between Lorimer Street and Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs due to track tie renewal at Graham Avenue. L service operates in two sections:

  • Between 8th Avenue and Lorimer Street
  • Between Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs and Rockaway Parkway

Free shuttle buses operate between Lorimer Street and Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs.

11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Metro-North

New Haven Line service could return Monday as credit details emerge

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 4, 2013

So sayeth the MTA:

“Full service to the MTA Metro-North Railroad New Haven Line will be restored Monday morning, assuming the new substation which received Con Edison power today is found reliable during our testing over the weekend.”

Meanwhile, Metro-North released additional information concerning the credit process today. Although the amounts have not yet been determined, New Haven Line riders will weekly or monthly passes that were valid during the outage can begin to apply for credit beginning October 9 or October 20, respectively. Customers may apply for this credit until March 31, 2014, and the agency will waive the customary $10 processing fee. The credit will be available at select New Haven Line stations and in Grand Central. Mail & Ride customers will receive the credit automatically.

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Rolling Stock

A look at the 20 Year Needs: Articulated trains

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on October 4, 2013

The open gangway of an articulated train in Paris.

I haven’t been to Paris in a while. My one and only trip to the City of Light came in 2001, and even then, I remember riding articulated train sets on the Metro. To a city rat who hadn’t experienced too many other subway systems, these seemingly endless trains were a revelation. They seemed — and were — more spacious than New York’s limited cars and allowed for better passenger flow and more people to ride with a little bit of extra comfort. Why didn’t New York have these, I’ve often wondered.

Over the years, we’ve heard a variety of excuses emanating from any number of U.S. transit agencies. While we have articulated buses, trains with open gangways haven’t yet arrived in the states. Some say that articulated trains can’t handle New York’s curves; others say that it’s a new thing requiring extensive testing. Whatever the reason, we sacrifice capacity and flexibility for the rolling stock we have.

But the MTA seems to be considering articulated trains as they look to the future. In the 20 Year Needs Assessment released this week, articulated make an appearance. Buried in the back as part of the effort to develop a 21st Century system was the following:

As the MTA continues to purchase new buses and subway and commuter rail fleets, it must incorporate state-of-the-art design concepts and technologies to minimize energy consumption, maximize carrying capacity, reduce loading times, and meet the expectation of a tech-savvy generation of new travelers. In particular, consideration should be given to trainsets with open gangways between cars, similar to the design of articulated buses. This will both maximize carrying capacity, and allow passenger to move to less-crowded areas of the train, balancing loading and unloading times at all doors.

The articulated trainsets aren’t arriving with any of the current rolling stock orders. The R179s and R211s won’t feature open gangways. So it’ll likely be until the mid-2020s that we see any such cars hit the rails in New York. By then, the R62 cars currently in use on the 1 and 3 lines will be nearing retirement age, and the 1 in particular would be a prime line for articulated cars as, outside of the old South Ferry station, the curves are essentially non-existent.

So why then don’t we have these open gangways already? Back in 2009, Yonah Freemark tackled the question and received the following response from an MTA spokesman: “MTA New York City Transit had considered an articulated train which was proposed by Kawasaki under the R110A contract. The proposal was, however, rejected by us due to the impact it would have had on the project’s budget and schedule…We may take another look at articulated trains in the future if and when we have a budget for Research and Design for an entirely new subway car.”

Basically, as with anything new, it cost too much. But now the MTA has a twenty-year plan and a vision for future train sets. If the tunnels can handle them, the next-gen rolling stock should have open gangways. It’s a minor improvement that can make a dent in reducing overcrowding and improving ease of movement in crowded subway cars.

99 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts