Service Advisories

FASTRACK returns to the Concourse Line

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 15, 2013

During FASTRACK, the nearby 4 train will provide alternative travel for the IND Concourse Line. (via Second Ave. Sagas on Instagram)

The Yankees are off for the All Star Break, and thus a large portion of the IND Concourse Line’s weeknight summer riders won’t be needing subway service. To that end, starting just over an hour ago and lasting each night from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. this week, Transit is bringing FASTRACK to the Concourse line north of 161 St.-Yankee Stadium.

Here’s the nitty-gritty: D train service is suspended between 205th Street and 161st Street in both directions. B train service will end early each night, and Bronx-bound D trains will skip 155th St. Customers should take the 4 just a few blocks to the west instead. Shuttle buses will run in between 205th St. on the D and Mosholu Parkway on the 4 only.

This is the same service patterns Transit implemented back in January (and April) when the agency first brought FASTRACK to the Bronx. Leave some extra travel time.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
New York City Transit

MTA to increase G train service but won’t give free transfers

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 15, 2013
The MTA will shift G train stopping positions to better align with platform staircases.

The MTA will shift G train stopping positions to better align with platform staircases.

After conducting a full line review of the G train this year, the MTA will increase nine additional trains to the much-maligned ride during the afternoon rush hour but will not allow for free out-of-system transfers. The agency will also implement a series of changes to reduce the impact of the so-called G Train Sprint and will work to improve operations to ensure that wait times along the IND Crosstown line are consistent. Despite these victories, though, the G train’s chicken-and-egg problem remains.

“The G line is a vital connection for customers in fast-growing parts of our service area, and this review will be an important tool for making both short-term improvements and long-term additions to our service. We are pleased to be able to take these steps to improve service for all of our G train customers,” MTA Chairman and CEO Thomas F. Prendergast said in a statement.

In conducting the review — which is now available online — the MTA found facts that furthered their own talking points but also discovered ways to improve service. Notably, the agency continues to maintain that, despite significant growth in ridership over the past decade, overall ridership lags behind the rest of the system. This is my aforementioned chicken-and-egg problem. Ridership has grown despite infrequent service in relatively poorly maintained stations, and ridership hasn’t grown more because of the lack of connections to other lines and the long headways.

Yet, despite ridership that the MTA says falls within their load guidelines, the agency will add nine additional trains to the line between 3 p.m. and 9 p.m. each day, reducing headways from 10 minutes to a more manageable eight. So then why is the MTA adding this service? The report says doing so will help with “service irregularities resulting from the merge with the F.” Reducing headways to eight minutes will allow the G to better interact with the F — which has peak headways of four minutes. As an added benefit, the increased service will reduce travel times those riders who have to make transfers. The service increase is contingent upon additional funding totaling $700,000.

Additionally, to improve the customer experience, the MTA examined the G train in the context of its longer platforms. The builders of the IND Crosstown line were ambitious in their construction efforts as they built out giant stations for stations will low ridership. To save costs, the MTA runs shorter trains, and regular G train riders often have to sprint down long platforms to each trains. At nearly every station, the MTA will adjust where the G train stops to better allow for access to the more popular exits and entrances. The appendix materials detail the changes, and for many, the G Train Sprint will become a thing of the past. By the end of 2013, the MTA will also post signage indicating where along the platforms G trains will stop.

Finally, Transit will make some operational tweaks to better distribute passengers as well. Train doors will remain open for longer at Court Sq., and platform benches will be moved to align with train doors. Scheduled holds at Hoyt-Schermerhorn will allow for regular service too.

But despite these increases, the report is notable for what it rejects as much as for what it promises. The MTA will not lengthen G trains. Calling 600-foot trains a “misallocation of resources,” Transit says longer trains would lead to less frequent service. Transit will not increase A.M. peak hour service frequency or off-peak trains either. The biggest rejection though concerns out-of-system transfers.

Transit advocates have long asked for free transfers between the G at Broadway and the J/M at Lorimer St. and the G at Fulton St. and the rest of the subway system at Atlantic Ave./Barclays Center. Noting that such a walking transfer would take nearly seven minutes, the MTA cites operational and revenue concerns in rejecting the transfer:

Given current ridership patterns, an estimated 4,000 trips per weekday would be eligible for a MetroCard walking transfer, slightly under half of which use pay-per-ride MetroCards, which would result in an estimated annual revenue loss of $1.34 million with restrictions to reduce multiple trips for the price of one entry, and $7 million without these restrictions. Given the density of subway stations in Downtown Brooklyn and the heavy commercial activity in the area, restrictions would not clearly distinguish between transfers that improve connectivity and entries for a second trip that use the walking transfer to avoid paying a second fare. A significant portion of these “transfers” would likely be stop-overs by riders who travel to the area and then, within the MetroCard two-hour time limit, re-enter the subway at Fulton St once they are done with their activities.

The same analysis holds for Lorimer where MTA estimates revenue loss ranging from $770,000 to $1.1 million. On the flip side, though, the MTA has a budget of $13.8 billion, and the report pays short shrift to the fact that nearly 50 percent of riders — those without unlimited cards — are charged two fares to make these transfers. The debate remains ongoing.

Politicians and members of the Riders Alliance who have pushed the MTA to make improvements heralded the results of the study. “Now G train riders will be en route to much-needed relief that may one day lead to the G meaning great,” Senator Daniel Squadron said. “These recommendations will allow the G to keep pace with skyrocketing growth in Brooklyn and Queens – and make the notorious G Train Sprint a thing of the past. Increased frequency, shorter wait times, and better communication will go a long way for many riders.”

“Over time, the recommendations outlined in the MTA’s review of the G Line will greatly impact the quality of service for thousands of daily commuters. I applaud the MTA for a thorough assessment of the G and for putting a plan in action that will almost immediately alleviate some of the difficulties riders had pointed out,” Senator Martin Dilan said.

50 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Is MTA transparency a legitimate campaign issue?

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 14, 2013

Once upon a time, Alan Hevesi, then the comptroller of New York State, fired a complaint at the MTA that the agency had been maintaining two sets of books. Claiming that the MTA hid $500 million in order to justify a fare hike, Hevesi leveled this charge at a time public sentiment toward the MTA was at a low, and it stuck. The MTA’s bookkeeping had been sloppy, but not illegally so. A judge eventually found no wrong-doing or evidence to back Hevesi’s claim, and the comptroller himself wound up in jail for his own fiscal improprieties.

Still, the idea that the MTA has two sets of books has been an enduring and popular myth. The public can easily latch onto it because they don’t feel the MTA is own their side, and politicians use it to curry favor with disgruntled voters. It came up in both 2009 and 2010, and now that a potential mayoral candidate is riding the coattails of his time with the MTA, in essence, it is resurfacing again this year.

The latest issue comes from — you guessed it — Staten Island, and it involves Senator Andrew Lanza and Representative Nicole Malliotakis. When we last ran across these two, they had recently been railing against better bus service after bemoaning the lack of transit options for Staten Islanders. Malliotakis seemed awfully concerned with a theoretical group of senior citizen drivers who would find themselves in bus lanes and panic over receiving a ticket.

Anyway, after Joe Lhota last week in a debate called the MTA “most transparent governmental organization,” Lanza and Malliotakis responded in turn. Judy Randall from the Staten Island Advance has the story:

The two lawmakers are backing Lhota rival John Catsimatidis, who didn’t appear to take umbrage at the comment during the debate, but joined them in denouncing it in a joint statement. “When I think of the MTA, many descriptions pop into my head,” Catsimatidis said. “Transparent is not one of them.”

“Joe Lhota’s statement defending the MTA is a gross untruth,” said Lanza (R-Staten Island), adding that the agency fought to defeat legislation he authored which would have required it to undergo an independent audit. “That action alone certainly undermines Joe Lhota’s laughable claim that the MTA is the most transparent agency in the USA.”

Meanwhile, Ms. Malliotakis (R-East Shore/Brooklyn) took exception with the agency’s finances. “The MTA has a $250 million surplus from the tolls it collects from the bridge,” she said. “Under Lhota’s watch, the MTA reached a debt of $40 billion. I, for one, would like to know where that money is being spent.”

Lhota responed with a statement concerning his desire to remove the MTA bridges from state control, but put that zany idea aside for now. The real issue is one of accountability and transparency. The MTA is very transparent. It posts all of its budget materials and board materials on its website as soon as these materials are available for public consumption, and anyone with a little bit of time, energy and focus can wade through them to develop a picture of the MTA’s finances. If Malliotakis, for one, would like to know where the money is being spent, she should just look for herself.

The real issue — and it’s always an issue politicians are loath to explore — concerns not how the MTA spends money but how much they’re spending and on what. It’s great the MTA has become so transparent in light of where they used to be with budget information; it’s no so great that so much money is tied up in debt payments and pension and benefits obligations. It’s shocking that the MTA is spending nearly a $1 billion per new station for the Second Ave. Subway and is constructing the world’s most expensive transit projects the city over.

At a certain point, someone in Albany has to take some responsibility for understanding and appreciating the fiscal mess the MTA has found itself in. It’s not a mess the agency is trying to hide, and it’s one out there for everyone to see without the need to subpoena, FOIA or forensically audit the agency. It’s under our noses, but our politicians would rather take pot shots at the agency than attempt to solve the problems. That’s not government at its finest.

15 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting 16 subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 13, 2013

Somewhere around the 7th inning, as I sat in a damp Yankee Stadium this evening after waiting out a 73-minute rain delay, I realized that not only had I not prepared this post but I was on the verge on being stuck in the Bronx without my usual route home. When I checked the service advisory email, you see, I learned that the 4 train — my usual route home — was set to stop running into Brooklyn at 11:45 p.m. last night, and the N, Q and R trains were all going to head east via the Montague St. Tunnel. So a D train ride later, I made it back to the County of Kings. It certainly could have been worse.

Anyway, that’s my roundabout way of apologizing for posting these after all of the work has already begun. Note that we have another Fix & Fortify weekend on tap for the G train. But enough talk; let’s dive in.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, there is no 1 train service between 137th Street and 242nd Street due to brick arch repair at 168th and 181st Streets and station work at Dyckman Street.

  • For service between 137th Street and 168th Street, use free shuttle buses.
  • For service between 168th Street and 191st Street, use M3 or free shuttle buses.
  • For Dyckman Street and 207th Street, use nearby A stations.
  • For stations between 207th Street and 242nd Street, take the A to 207th Street and transfer to free shuttle buses, which make all 1 station stops between 207th Street and 242nd Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 13 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, 3 trains operate to and from New Lots Avenue all weekend due to switch replacement work south of Wall Street.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, there are no 4 trains between New Lots Avenue and Brooklyn Bridge due to switch replacement work south of Wall Street. Customer should take the 3, N, Q and R trains.

  • 4 trains operate between Woodlawn and Brooklyn Bridge, running local in both directions between 125th Street and Brooklyn Bridge.
  • 3 service is extended to New Lots Avenue all weekend.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, southbound 4 trains skip 138th Street-Grand Concourse due to station painting.


From 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. Saturday, July 13 and Sunday, July 14, there is no 5 train service between Bowling Green and Grand Central-42nd Street due to switch replacement work south of Wall Street. Customers should take the 4 and/or the N, Q.


From 6 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, July 13 and Sunday, July 14, southbound bound 5 trains skip 138th Street-Grand Concourse due to station painting.


From 5:45 a.m. to 8 p.m. Saturday, July 13, Main Street-bound 7 trains run express from Queensboro Plaza to 74th Street-Roosevelt Avenue due to cable work between 33rd Street and 69th Street for Flushing CBTC.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, 207th Street-bound A trains are rerouted via the F line from Jay Street-MetroTech to West 4th Street, then run local to 59th Street-Columbus Circle due to asbestos abatement and cable work north of Jay Street-MetroTech.


From 6:30 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, July 13 and Sunday, July 14, 168th Street-bound C trains are rerouted via the F line from Jay Street-MetroTech to West 4th Street due to asbestos abatement and cable work north of Jay Street-MetroTech.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, July 13, from 11:45 p.m. Saturday, July 13 to 6:30 a.m. Sunday, July 14 and from 11:45 p.m. Sunday, July 14 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, Coney Island-bound D trains run express from Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center to 36th Street due to track tie renewal at Union Street.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, Jamaica Center-bound E trains run express from Canal Street to 34th Street-Penn Station due to asbestos abatement and cable work north of Jay Street-MetroTech.


From 11:15 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, Coney Island-bound F trains are rerouted via the M line after 36th Street, Queens 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, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, 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 and 7 trains and shuttle buses at Court Square


From 3:30 a.m. Saturday, July 13 to 10 p.m. Sunday, July 14, there is no J train service between Broadway Junction and Myrtle Avenue due to track panel installation at Kosciusko Street. J trains operate in two sections:

  • Between Jamaica Center and Broadway Junction
  • Between Chambers Street and Myrtle Avenue, and then rerouted via the M to Metropolitan Avenue.

Free shuttle buses operate between Broadway Junction and Myrtle Avenue, making stations stops at Chauncey Street, Halsey Street, Gates Avenue and Kosciusko Street.

  • Transfer between J trains and free shuttle buses at Broadway Junction and/or Myrtle Avenue.
  • Transfer between J and L trains at Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs and/or Broadway Junction.


From 3:30 a.m. Saturday, July 13 to 10 p.m. Sunday, July 14, M service is suspended due to station renewal work at Fresh Pond Road, Forest, Seneca, Knickerbocker and Central Avenues. Customers should take the J trains making all M stops between Myrtle Avenue and Metropolitan Avenue.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 13 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, N trains are rerouted via the R line in both directions between Canal Street and Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center due to general maintenance and prep work on the Manhattan Bridge prior to the Montague tube shutdown.


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, July 13, from 11:45 p.m. Saturday, July 13 to 6:30 a.m. Sunday, July 14 and from 11:45 p.m. Sunday, July 14 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, Coney Island-bound N trains run express from Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center to 36th Street due to track tie renewal at Union Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, July 13 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, Q trains are rerouted via the R line in both directions between Canal Street and DeKalb Avenue due to general maintenance and prep work on the Manhattan Bridge prior to the Montague tube shutdown.


From 10:45 p.m. Friday, July 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, July 15, Manhattan-bound Q trains run express from Sheepshead Bay to Prospect Park due to track panel installation at Sheepshead Bay. Note: At all times until December 2013, Manhattan-bound Q platforms at Cortelyou Road, Beverley Road and Parkside Avenue are closed for station component work.


From 6:30 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, July 13 and Sunday, July 14, due to general maintenance and prep work on the Manhattan Bridge prior to the Montague tube shutdown, R trains are rerouted in both directions as follows:

  • Via the D line between DeKalb Avenue and 47th-50th Sts
  • Via the M line between 47th-50th Sts and Queens Plaza

N trains make R stops between DeKalb Avenue and Lexington Avenue-59th Street during this time.


From 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. Saturday, July 13 and Sunday, July 14, Bay Ridge-bound R trains run express from Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center to 36th Street due to track tie renewal at Union Street.

4 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
View from Underground

Thoughts on the ten worst people we meet in the subway

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 11, 2013

Lady, you’re doing it completely wrong. (Photo by flickr user Runs With Scissors)

Over the years, I’ve often returned to the theme of underground etiquette. It’s always entertaining to think about future subway expansion plans, ongoing construction projects and the things we would do if money were no obstacle. But on a more immediate level, the way we ride and interact with each other lends more to our day-to-day subway rides than any theoretical transit expansion does.

By and large, New Yorkers are considerate of each other on the subway. Rare are the days when someone is stabbed simply for staring, but lesser violations can mar our days or our weeks. Those lesser incidents too are usually minor. Someone will not get out of the way; someone will hug a pole or block a door. Some subway preacher will interrupt an otherwise-peaceful morning commute or a bunch of kids will insist that it’s showtime. We’ve all been there.

This week, Gawker, in a way only Gawker can, reminded us of the bad times. Their post — The Ten Worst People on the Subway — has been making the rounds in every possible format. It’s been shared countless times on my Facebook timeline (including by me); it’s been on Twitter; and it’s even been included in an email my dad sent me on Thursday afternoon. With 650,000 pageviews as of this writing, it is a viral sensation and one that seems to ring a bit too close to home for many New Yorkers who ride the subway each day.

So who are these ten terrible straphangers? I’ll urge you to read Gawker’s snarky commentary on them all, but here’s the top ten:

  1. The person standing in front of an open seat on a crowded train.
  2. The people standing in front of the door who don’t move when the doors open.
  3. The people who get on before letting everyone off.
  4. The people who lean on the pole.
  5. The people who try to make you let go of the pole before the train stops.
  6. The people who act like they’re the only ones who are going to get off at a major stop.
  7. The people who stand on the narrowest area of the platform.
  8. The people who stop hurrying down the steps once they see it’s not their train coming.
  9. The people who eat cooked food.
  10. Teenagers.

It’s hard to disagree with much of this list though I’m not sure No. 7 belongs. I’d also add the people — like my seat neighbor this morning — who insist on spreading their legs for no good reason and the more active interrupters such as the aforementioned breakdancers. Riders who put bags on empty seats deserve our scorn as well. Subway riders who can’t remove their backpacks on crowded trains get an honorable mention.

Whenever I run across these situations or posts like Hamilton’s on Gawker, I always wonder why we care so much. I think we care so much because riding the subway is a collective experience. Over the past six or seven decades, America has been a more individualistic country where we guard our space, and travel by car is a very solitary experience. But the subways are the opposite. We have no space, and we have to share it with millions of other people every single day.

And so we expect everyone else to be courtesy because it’s a shared experience that’s less than ideal. If I’m going to keep my legs closed, my bag contained and my body within its allocated space — if I’m going to move into the middle of the car and get out of the way when someone needs to get by — everyone else should do. Yet, New Yorkers also like to think the rules don’t apply to them. They bike against the flow of people in the running lane in Prospect Park; they speed through red lights to save 5 seconds of travel time; they block doors; they hop turnstiles; they don’t stand to the right and walk on the left. And that’s why we get the popular senstation of Gawker’s list.

44 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Public Transit Policy

On a rising NY economic tide and longer commute times

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 11, 2013

On the way home tonight from Yankee Stadium, I wrapped up my read of Alan Ehrenhalt’s The Great Inversion. Written during the depths of the recent recession and published in mid-2012, Ehrenhalt examines the changing demographics of urban life. It’s not about gentrifiction as Enrenhalt refuses to use the word, but the idea is that urban and suburban demographics have completely flipped. The urban core is where the wealthy, and largely white, upper class while middle and lower class communities, often majority-minority, are moving further away from downtown areas and often into the suburbs.

Over the past 12 years of the Bloomberg Administration, we’ve seen this happen on a citywide scale. Even during the economic doldrums of the 1970s, Manhattan was always the wealthy core, but the surrounding areas were hit hard by bad times following white flight. Only recently have areas like Williamsburg, Long Island City and even Park Slope and points further south become expensive neighborhoods. Even the South Bronx — an area with a history of neighborhood problems but very quick transit access to Midtown — seems to be on the rise.

As part of their assessment of the Bloomberg Era, WNYC has taken to examining the changing demographics of New York City. We know it’s become very expensive to live here, and many members of the middle class are being priced out. But for those that stay, the changing nature of the city means longer commutes. For those that want to or need to stay but find themselves priced out of areas close to the city’s job centers, travel is taking up more and more time.

Jim O’Grady discussed this problem at length in the story I’ve embedded above, and he produced a short written companion piece:

During Mayor Bloomberg’s three terms, it became especially expensive to rent or buy a home in Manhattan and neighborhoods close to it. Over the last 10 years, most of the growth in commuting to well-paying jobs in Manhattan has occurred in Manhattan itself – and in places like Williamsburg and Greenpoint, Downtown and Brownstone Brooklyn.

That development has pushed some New Yorkers of limited means to neighborhoods further from Manhattan, where most of the jobs are located. And increasing numbers of New Yorkers are traveling within or between the outer boroughs to get to work, often using a Manhattan-centric transportation system that is not well suited to getting them where they need to go.

But Bloomberg supporter Mitchell Moss, an NYU professor of urban planning and a former adviser to the mayor, argues that the economic growth that is driving up real estate prices hasn’t displaced that many people. “No one was living in parts of Hunters Point, no one was living in parts of Lower Manhattan, no one was living in DUMBO,” Moss said. “Those areas have become, not gentrified, they’ve become populated.”

Even so, it will be the next mayor’s job to try and lower the number of New Yorkers who commute more than an hour each way to work – a problem Mayor Bloomberg, for all his success at adding transportation options to the city, couldn’t solve.

Along with this piece, WNYC produced a heat map of travel times within the city. We’ve seen similar maps before, but along with their coverage of the socioeconomic changes, it drives home the point that a zone fare system would be inherently unfair to many people who cannot afford to pay more or live closer to their job centers.

So how can the next mayor or city planners fix the problem of, displacement, access to jobs and disparity in housing? The easy answer is to say that we need a massive expansion of the subway system along with a serious network of real bus rapid transit lines that feed both Manhattan and other job centers. Economically, that may not be feasible without a massive realignment of interests in City Hall and Albany and better control of project costs on the part of the MTA.

In another vein, Josh Barro at Business Insider proposes a few other fixes focusing around urban policy. Upzoning residential neighborhoods and incentivizing developers to construct taller buildings with more housing stock near the city’s core along with an aggressive push toward eliminating parking minimums could help increase available housing and ideally lower rents through market forces. That’s a controversial plan from the start.

Likely, there isn’t a very good answer. New York City is a hot place to live right now, and time has become a very valuable commodity. It will remain expensive to live close to the areas featuring high-paying jobs, and the price creep — which is extending further and further away — will continue to push those without money toward the fringe and ever-increasing commutes.

102 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMTA Economics

Amidst a payroll tax appeal, MTA gets a credit boost

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 10, 2013

Even as Nassau County and various other suburban counties appeal the ruling upholding the payroll tax as constitutional, the MTA has enjoyed a credit boost from one ratings agency. According to a report issued this week by Moody’s, the payroll tax ruling represented “a credit positive” for the MTA, but as an appeal is ongoing, it’s a fragile step in the right direction for the debt-laden agency.

As Moody’s noted, the payroll tax represents nearly a tenth of the MTA’s annual budget, and overturning the tax would be very costly. “Loss of this revenue stream would add significant financial strain on the MTA and eliminate a sizable resource available for payment of debt service on the transportation revenues bonds,” the report explained. The MTA currenty has $33.2 billion in outstanding debt on the books, nearly $19 million of which are in those bonds.

The stark reality of the MTA’s budget situation has seemingly escaped those protesting against the payroll tax. The same group of politicians and business interests strenuously objected to a congestion pricing plan and were left with the payroll tax as the best option among a sea of bad ones. Overturning it would be incredibly costly not just to the MTA but to the suburban areas that benefit from having a direct transit connection to New York City. Yet the appeal, likely to be unsuccessful for Nassau County, rolls on.

22 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Staten Island

Savino report details Staten Island Railway flaws

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on July 10, 2013

Some Staten Islanders want to see rail service return to the North Shore Railway. (Photo by flirk user Mambo’Dan)

For the past few weeks, I’ve spent some time examining the contradictions of Staten Island and the borough’s tenuous relationship with transit. Its residents want better options, but they panic once they realize adding something such as Select Bus Service may mean fewer lanes for cars. They ask for subway connections to the rest of the city but are worried it could disrupt their quasi-suburban lifestyle. What Staten Islanders want in principle isn’t always what they want in practice.

Now, it’s the Staten Island Railway’s turn to come under the microscope, and State Senator Diane Savino has supplied us with the perfect opportunity to assess the MTA’s southern-most subway. Savino, an on-again/off-again champion for transit who has thrown a fit over plans to send the subway to New Jersey but not Staten Island yet voted to steal money from the MTA without bothering to read the bill, has commissioned a report on the Staten Island Railway. Hardly scientific, it relies on anecdotes and assessments from the line’s riders, but it doesn’t paint a positive picture.

Staten Island Railway riders want better service. Period. They want better security, better lighting, better ferry connections, better station environments. They want rail — and not a bus lane — on the old North Shore right of way, and they seem to want a connection to the Hudson Bergen Light Rail in New Jersey as well. As I read the report, though, I kept wondering if they were all willing to pay for it.

The Staten Island Railway is a curiosity in New York City. It provides 4.4 million paid rides annually, but fares are collected upon entry or exit only at the two most northern stations. Not many do, but Staten Islanders are free to ride from Stapleton to Tottenville without paying as often as they’d like. To improve the Staten Island Railway — to eliminate odors many find pervasive and offensive, to improve security — would likely involve rethinking how the fare works.

So onto the report. You can read the whole thing right here on Savino’s website, but I’m not sure I’d recommend it. It’s white text on a blue background, and it’s poorly written. Yet, it’s earnest. It’s fighting for better transit and features the voices of the people who actually ride the Staten Island Railway. “We need a North Shore Railroad built, not a bus lane,” said one of them. “As a Staten Island resident who does not live near/use the SIRT, I would like to see more stations and lines extending to centralized parts of Staten Island like the North Shore. This will encourage more public transportation and dispel traffic,” said another. “The trains are over 40 years old They need new cars. They also need a public address system at each station so riders can be told of delays/problems on the line,” said a third. These are real complaints for real people.

These folks who ride though aren’t happy with the service. The trains are dirty, they say. They want express service from popular stations, new rolling stock, more frequent service and nicer station environments with better connections to buses and the ferries and perhaps park-and-ride options as well. The service received an F from its riders in an admittedly biased survey.

Ultimately, Savino’s suggestions are practical and reasonable. She urged upzoning around train stations to spur development, a train tracking app for the SIR, weather protection and concessions at high-traffic stations, security cameras and even a new station to serve the Rosebank area (with funding from bond acts and a governor’s transit fund). These are incremental changes that could drastically improve intra-borough travel along the Staten Island Railway. But does anyone want to pay for them?

91 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesSubway Security

Subway-surface air flow tests begin today

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

In an effort to assess the way air flows between the subway and the surface, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Brookhaven National Laboratory and the NYPD launched the first day of the Subway-Surface Air Flow Exchange today. The tests involve air sampling throughout the city’s subway system and the release and tracking of harmless gases called perfluorocarbons. The gases were dispersed this morning during the rush hour commute, and the air sampling is expected to wrap by 3 p.m. today.

The S-SAFE study has been funded through a Department of Homeland Security grant and is designed to better prepare the city for a potential gas attack. “The NYPD works for the best but plans for the worst when it comes to potentially catastrophic attacks such as ones employing radiological contaminants or weaponized anthrax,” Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said in a statement about the program. “This field study with Brookhaven’s outstanding expertise will help prepare and safeguard the city’s population in the event of an actual attack.”

According to the MTA, this study is the largest one focused ever urban airflow ever conducted and will help researchers “better understand the risks posed by airborne contaminants.” In the past, researchers have determined that air quality is ostensibly the same below ground as it is above, but the way air is dispersed throughout the city — through the push and pull of trains — has yet to be studied. I doubt the S-SAFE results will be made public, but the findings would make for an interesting look at how air or gases from the Rockaways could reach Times Square in an hour.

3 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
LIRRQueens

Re-re-examining an Elmhurst LIRR station

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

Remnants of the old LIRR Elmhurst station remain. Queens politicians want to revive the stop.

Once upon a time, New York City didn’t know what to do with its transit infrastructure. Investment was nil, and stations that were commuter rail in name were shut down throughout Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx. Now, nearly 30 years later, with the city’s population booming thanks, in part, to an increased investment in transit, these shuttered stations are under the microscope. Can we reopen them? Should we?

Lately, attention has focused around Elmhurst. For a few years now, local politicians have been angling to reopen an LIRR station lost to declining ridership in what was a declining neighborhood in 1985. Last year, we learned that the MTA isn’t opposed to the idea if the money can materialize. Recently, a similar group of politicians announced the next step in the process: a ridership survey.

A few weeks ago, shortly before I went on vacation, Reps. Joe Crowley, Grace Meng and NYC Council Member Daniel Dromm along with LIRR President Helena Williams announced a survey aimed at collecting data from Elmhurst residents about their travel patterns. It’s another step toward reactivating the station. “As we continue to work with the LIRR to explore the possibility of restoring service to Elmhurst, I want to encourage as many members of our community to participate in the study and make sure their voices are heard,” Crowley said in a statement. “Reopening the Elmhurst Station will increase residents’ access to Midtown Manhattan and help the area reach its economic potential. It will also open the door for all New Yorkers to experience the rich diversity and culture Elmhurst has to offer.”

Meng echoed Crowley. “Reopening this LIRR station would be a huge boon for Elmhurst,” she said. “It would greatly benefit local residents with increased access to public transportation and service to Manhattan, and it would provide a major economic boost for local businesses.”

The survey itself begin at the end of June with two parts. The first involves a written component mailed to households within a half-mile radius of the station site at Broadway and Whitney Ave. An in-person survey will be conducted at nearby subway stations and near the Elmhurst Hospital Center. According to Crowley’s office, reactivating the station could help Elmhurst see improved transit connections. Right now, it hosts local stops along the Queens Boulevard line and a few 7 stations near the neighborhood’s northern border. The politicians don’t consider these stations to be part of an “efficient” network providing direct access to Manhattan’s job centers.

According to a few unpublished studies I’ve seen, the Elmhurst reactivation could be a rather reasonable project at a time when spending on transit improvements and expansions has reached absurd levels. Some estimates peg restoring service at as little as $30-$35 million, and Crowley noted that East Side Access could ease congestion concerns that could occur were service to resume at Elmhurst. If the ridership survey bears out the proponents’ hopes, it seems like a no-brainer.

Even as this effort moves forward, I’m still left with the same thoughts I had last year: Until the fare to go from Elmhurst to Manhattan is more in line with the cost of a Metrocard swipe, very few people will use the service. Elmhurst is a solidly middle class neighborhood in mid-Queens with relatively good subway service, and individual peak rides within the city can cost upwards of $7 on LIRR. Harmonize fares; bring the price. Then, if you build it, they will come.

109 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts