Second Ave. Sagas

Thoughts on integrating the city into its own transit network

by Benjamin Kabak June 22, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 22, 2012

In a sense, I offered up yesterday’s post on the progress on the Penn Station Access project on its own when, in reality, it came out of the larger context of a City Council hearing on intra-city mobility. Noting that reverse commuting and non-Manhattan-based job centers are growing, the Council’s Transportation Committee wanted to know what exactly the MTA was doing to help improve access throughout the city. After all, while Manhattan is the biggest driver of jobs, other areas are growing rapidly.

“More workers are commuting from Brooklyn to Queens, from the Bronx to Westchester, from Staten Island to New Jersey or Brooklyn than ever before and yet our city’s transit infrastructure has not kept pace,” Transportation Committee Chairman James Vacca said. “If it means that a person is going to take three buses, that person is likely to get into a car.”

In response to Vacca’s question, officials from the MTA took the opportunity to talk up the plans to beef up Metro-North service in the Bronx. Already, the commuter rail line is seeing rampant growth, and while we may have to wait the better part of a decade if we’re lucky, adding more stations will further help New Yorkers get where they need to be. It’s not really enough though, and it’s definitely not a fast enough solution.

First, Metro-North isn’t intended to be an intra-city transportation network. It’s designed to bring commuters from the suburbs to the city’s job and entertainment centers. Fares are significantly higher on Metro-North than on the subways, and stations are much further apart. Adding more stations in the Bronx may help the locals, but it be a disservice for the core Metro-North commuters trying to reach Midtown. The MTA may have to consider overhauling the City Ticket system and the entire fare structure if it intends for Metro-North to serve as urban transportation.

Second, promising Metro-North improvements some time after East Side Access is completed in 2019 isn’t fast enough. The city’s job patterns are showing decentralized growth now, today in 2012, and they have been for more than a few years. We can’t wait another seven or 10 or 15 years for Metro-North to amble its way through four or six stations in the Bronx.

The answer, despite my lukewarm embrace of it, is a faster and more creative approach toward Select Bus Service. For reasons unknown, the MTA and New York City’s Department of Transportation have treated borough borders as though they are immutable and uncrossable. Select Bus Service routes currently in service and on the drawing board rather cross from one borough into the next. They serve to deliver isolated commutes to the subway faster, but they don’t bring people to job centers. Where’s the SBS route from the far reaches of Brooklyn to JFK? Where are the radial routes from Jamaica Hospital? Where’s the bus from the Bronx to LaGuardia?

If the City and MTA want to bring more Metro-North stations to the Bronx, by all means, they should do so. It shouldn’t be the only solution to new job patterns and commuter demands. Buses can offer a flexible long-term solution, and it can be an interim one. Those bus routes could one day be replaced with a higher-capacity rail system. For now, though, we’re suffering from a strange borough-based territoriality and a lack of drive, urgency and creativity when it comes to adjusting our public transit system to new commuting patterns.

June 22, 2012 33 comments

MTA Economics

At Columbus Circle, a retail-focused trial run

by Benjamin Kabak June 21, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 21, 2012

At some point, when the MTA finally opens the Fulton Street Transit Center and perhaps too when East Side Access comes online, the authority will have a wealth of commercial real estate in high-traffic areas that they want someone else to manage. When the time comes, the authority will try to identify a private entity to take out a master lease for the space and manage it. For now, though, the rehabilitated Columbus Circle with 11,500 unused square feet of retail space will serve as a guinea pig.

The authority announced this week that it has begun the RFP process to find a real estate company willing to sublease 13 spaces in the Columbus Circle space. The winning bidder will oversee the various retailers while also marketing the concourse as a retail destination and keeping the straphanger circulation areas in front of the stores free of trash and other potential hazards. The stores would occupy the concourse that runs underneath 8th Ave. for a few blocks. (Check out some photos right here.)

“It is imperative that the MTA find new ways to reduce expenses and make the most out of its real estate portfolio,” MTA Chairman Joseph J. Lhota said in a statement. “Thinking creatively about our real estate holdings and the way we engage with the private sector has led us to pursue a partnership that we expect will increase MTA revenue and allow us to focus our resources on those parts of the station where they are most needed. We think this public-private partnership will prove to be a useful model that will help us improve the management of retail spaces at larger stations going forward.”

In the release touting this effort, the MTA noted that this would be the first agreement of its kind. A private sector firm would be for subletting individual retail spaces and for maintaining adjoining public areas within the transit system. At Grand Central, the MTA maintains the public concourses. If all goes well, the same model will be exported to Fulton St.

In a way though, it’s easy to view this as a tacit admission from the MTA that retail isn’t a strength. Columbus Circle is the seventh busiest station in the system, and the renovations have been completed for some time now. The retail spots though remain empty, and with each passing day, the MTA isn’t realizing dollars it could use. As long as they draw some interest in the space, they’ll earn some dollars too.

June 21, 2012 6 comments

Penn Station Access

MTA moving forward on Penn Station Access studies

by Benjamin Kabak June 21, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 21, 2012

The MTA is currently analyzing the environmental impact of its Penn Station Access plans.

When last we checked in with the MTA’s off-again, on-again plans to send Metro-North into Penn Station, it was under some disappointing circumstances. Short-sighted and territorial Long Island politicians had begun to protest Metro-North service into Penn Station (and, similarly, diverting some LIRR service into Grand Central) because it would rob constituents of their regular commutes. Their logic was tough to follow, and with East Side Access slowly on the way, completely inexplicable. Still, it was a disappointing development as the city tries to diversify transit options.

Still, the MTA is not deterred by this strange opposition. After performing the scoping studies in 1999 and 2000, the MTA has revived the Penn Station Access plan and is currently conducting environmental analysis studies that will be ready in 2013. Earlier this week, Authority officials were on hand to discuss their plans with the City Council, and Dana Rubinstein offered up a very thorough report from the hearing. She wrote of the far-off future:

After the completion of the East Side Access project, now due sometime in 2019, Long Island Railroad passengers will be able to disembark in Grand Central Terminal, rather than just Penn Station, which means there should be more space available on the west side for other railroad purposes.

One proposal that’s being considered is to run two new Metro-North trains out of Penn Station. One line would run north from Penn Station along the Amtrak line to Albany, connecting with the Hudson line in Spuyten Duyvil. The other line, which addresses that East Bronx issue, would run east from Penn Station along the Amtrak route to Boston, looping south of Grand Central, into western Queens and then north through the East Side of the Bronx, connecting with the New Haven line somewhere south of New Rochelle…

The proposal would not involve laying new track or building new rights-of-way, since the M.T.A. would presumably be able to use Amtrak’s. But it would involve the construction of six new stations, four in the east Bronx—near Co-op City, Morris Park-Bronx Medical Center, Parkchester and Hunts Point—and two on Manhattan’s west side, one at 125th Street, and the other possibly somewhere between West 54th and 57th streets and 10th and 11th avenues.

The MTA’s own study documents from nearly 15 years ago contain the outlines of the plans, and the authority will be updated these studies over the next few months. The key element, though, appears to be cost. For the four stops planned in the Bronx — Co-Op City, Morris Park, Parkchester and Hunts Point — the track already exists. The MTA would have to find funds to build only the stations.

According to City Council Transportation Committee Chair James Vacca, such a build could cost as little as $400 million — or $100 million per station. The MTA though hasn’t put a price tag on the project yet as it’s still in the planning stages. Still, advocates see this as a potentially affordable project for an agency that cannot control costs on its big-ticket investments. “I will say that it’s not a big capital investment item for the type of service that you’re talking about,” Chris Jones of the RPA said. “You’re not talking about billions of dollars for this.”

And so with vague indications of what the next capital campaign will contain, the MTA is moving forward on a project that can come online in tandem with East Side Access in 2019. It could improve access in the Bronx to both the East and West Sides and won’t come with sticker shock. Right now, it seems like a win-win. Will Long Island still object though?

June 21, 2012 70 comments

Buses

Bus fare evasion now a $50 million problem

by Benjamin Kabak June 20, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 20, 2012

One question I’ve struggled with over the past few months has concerned fare-jumping. Does the New York City media place too much of an emphasis on the revenue lost to fare-jumping? Should we care that a small percentage of transit riders try to duck their fares? At what point does the cost of increased enforcement outweigh the benefits?

When it comes to subway fare enforcement efforts, I’ve been firmly on the side of ignoring it. I think the media has spent all together too much time focusing on subway fare jumping as it is mostly just an inconvenience. Steeper fines are likely a sufficient deterrent by themselves. But what about buses?

For a while, the MTA had pegged bus fare evasion as a $14 million problem. Despite anecdotal reports of rampant fare jumping on certain bus lines, Transit had downplayed their bleed rate. Now, it seems, it may be worse than they thought. Pete Donohue had the report:

The MTA loses about $50 million in revenue each year to bus farebeaters — more than triple what it previously estimated, the Daily News has learned. The staggering figure is partly the result of a new way the authority calculates fare-dodging, but also indicates that the longstanding problem has worsened because of lax enforcement, sources said.

The authority previously had estimated that bus farebeaters were stealing $14 million worth of free rides annually. Gauging bus freeloading levels has been an inexact science. Drivers are supposed to keep tallies by pushing a button every time someone boards without paying. The authority also has used video to estimate the frequency of bus farebeating.

“This is situation we have to get under control,” MTA board member Allen Cappelli said. “Not only is it a significant amount of revenue, but you’re allowing people to behave in a lawless manner.”

At a certain point, some bleed is inevitable, but if the MTA’s $50 million estimate is accurate, the new bleed rate on the buses has jumped from around 1.5 percent of annual revenue to 5.5 percent of annual revenue. It’s probably time to address the problem.

As folks enter without paying their fares, it creates a disincentive for others to swipe their MetroCards, and enforcement has been lax. According to Donohue, the MTA is working to propose a citywide plan to “deter fare evasion,” and politicians are calling for more police activity aboard buses. It’s tough to say though what the golden ticket will be here. Until these figures decline though, bus fare evasion will garner headlines one way or another.

June 20, 2012 47 comments

Asides Service Advisories

From the MTA, a hot weather advisory

by Benjamin Kabak June 20, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 20, 2012

The MTA announced last night that the onslaught of hot weather expected New York City and stick around for two or three days could impact travel. With temperatures climbing into the upper 90s after a cool few weeks, the authority may have to reduce power consumption, with the reduction in usage impacting subway and train signals, overhead power lines and escalator and elevator service.

“While we are obligated to reduce power consumption, we will make every effort to provide safe and reliable service throughout our entire network,” said MTA Chairman and CEO Joseph J. Lhota. “While extreme temperatures can affect our equipment and infrastructure, we will do everything possible to avoid service disruptions.”

The MTA says its goal is to “run trains on schedule and at regular intervals,” thus minimizing customers’ wait times on un-air conditioned and stiflingly hot underground platforms. Still, if the New York Power Authority implements its Peak Load Management plan to reduce demand, subways may run slower as the MTA powers down some substations. Additionally, I’ve noticed in the past that some of the authority’s newer computerized upgrades — such as the popular countdown clocks — may not be operating during periods of extreme hot.

It’s a scorcher out there. Stay cool, stay hydrated, and if you’re feeling ill, please do not board a subway train. As the heat drags on, I’ll be back in a bit with some musings on bus fare scofflaws.

June 20, 2012 5 comments

TWU

Link: Lhota goes public with union demands

by Benjamin Kabak June 19, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 19, 2012

As the MTA and TWU enter month six since their previous contract expired, negotiations have been awfully silent for a while. MTA Chairman Joe Lhota brough that out in the open today though with a forcefully worded piece in the pages of The Post today in which he calls upon the TWU to make some sacrifices. After years of streamlining operations, he writes, it’s time for the TWU to give back as well.

Lhota:

It’s not yet common knowledge, but the agency is in an era of cost-containment and -control unlike anything in its history — as even a quick glance at the MTA’s financial statement reveals. Annual expense reductions in the operating budget — that is, savings that recur year after year — totaled about $700 million in 2011 and will grow to $890 million in 2015. That’s 11 percent of our discretionary operating budget.

How did we do it? We eliminated more than 3,500 positions, including 20 percent of our headquarters staff. We renegotiated vendor contracts. We froze wages for all non-union employees. We rebid employee health care. We reduced unnecessary overtime and consolidated redundant functions. The list goes on and on . . . and this work is far from over. In 2012 and beyond, we’ll continue to slash costs while looking for creative ways to bring in revenue…

All the while — during a time of unprecedented cost-cutting at the MTA, and as our nondiscretionary costs spiral out of control — binding arbitration has required that members of our largest labor union get pay hikes of 4 percent in 2009, 4 percent in 2010 and 3 percent in 2011. That’s a whopping 11 percent over the last three years, at a time when New York City’s cost-of-living index rose 4.6 percent.

Managers and non-union workers haven’t been so lucky. They got 0 percent in 2009, 0 percent in 2010 and 0 percent in 2011. Today, these public servants have gone four years without so much as a cost-of-living increase. That’s why the MTA is asking its unionized workforce, during its current contract talks, to forego raises for the next three years.

Labor, writes Lhota, should be “a part of the solution.”

On Twitter, TWU Local 100 called Lhota’s piece “outrageous” but didn’t offer up much more. I’m not surprised they don’t see eye-to-eye with the Chairman, but he makes a very compelling case indeed. At a time when non-unionized workers haven’t seen a raise in nearly half a decade and the MTA is clearly at risk of a brain drain of talented workers, everyone has to pay somehow.

June 19, 2012 27 comments

MetroCard

Audit: Metro-North unit rife with corruption, nepotism

by Benjamin Kabak June 19, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 19, 2012

As New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli continues his ongoing series of MTA audits, he’s starting to get to the juicy bits. Late last week, DiNapoli released his examination of Metro-North’s now-defunct On-Board Services Unit and found that employees who were supposed to monitor train conditions and crew performances were not doing their jobs. The unit was rife with no-shows and poor job performance while one particularly egregious case of nepotism may have run afoul of the New York State Public Officers Law.

The audit, available here as a PDF, has already led to some changes. The MTA, accused of offering no oversight for the On-Board Services Unit, has since disbanded the team, and the matter has been referred to the Office of the Inspector General for further investigation. It’s possible that criminal charges could be filed.

“The public got taken for a ride,” DiNapoli said. “When workers in this unit did bother to show up for their jobs, they did shoddy work or personal tasks when they should have been ensuring that trains were operating safely and smoothly. The MTA needs to do more to tighten up accountability. I am pleased that this audit brought an end to this situation.”

What exactly did the audit find? DiNapoli’s office provided a summary:

The audit covered the period January 1, 2009 through June 20, 2011 and examined whether employees in Metro North’s On-Board Services Unit fulfilled their duties and performed their assigned tasks. As of July 2011, the unit consisted of a supervisor and five employees who earned a total annual compensation of $832,676.

Auditors and investigators examined 300 rides that were expected to be taken and documented, of which 29 percent (89 rides) had no logs to support that any work was done. In 14 percent of all rides, staffers were not on the job, though they were scheduled to work and were paid for those hours. None of the 211 logs that did exist reported any significant performance or safety issue, raising serious questions about the quality of oversight provided by the unit.

Staff was supposed to take six train trips daily to work an eight-hour day, but auditors found that staff averaged only four train trips daily. Auditors and investigators estimate that four unit staff members were paid in excess of $170,000 annually for work that might not have been performed.

Supervision was also almost non-existent, with no log of time and attendance records, no observation of staffers on trains and no written schedule of trains to be monitored. Auditors and investigators also found that staffers surfed the internet during work hours, including spending 6.5 hours on firearm sites and Google and 5 hours on various commercial sites such as Chuck E. Cheese. Reviews of cell phone usage found little communication between staff members and their supervisor but did find out-of-state calls and calls home.

So essentially, Metro-North employees earning an average of $138,000 simply did not do their jobs. When they did, they did a poor job and tried to exploit the situation for family members. The audit found, in fact, that an assistant V.P. hired a family member at a salary of $84,700 when the candidate ranked lower than two others and was supposed to be paid under $60,000.

I’ve always said that DiNapoli’s audits are more obvious than they should be, and I don’t think one is any exception. Corruption and croneyism have ruled the day at the region’s railroads for time immemorial. But now, we see the impact this has on public perception and political beliefs. The MTA has worked hard under a few chairmen to get its house in order, but it’s such a mess that these stories continue to crop up in division after division. For progress to be made in terms of funding, Albany will have to trust the MTA with the dollars. Right now would you if you were in their shoes?

June 19, 2012 10 comments

Asides Brooklyn

Link: Brooklyn’s Boulevard of Broken Dreams

by Benjamin Kabak June 18, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 18, 2012

Although I don’t often delve into urban planning policy here, it is of course closely intertwined with public transit policy. Walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods that are pedestrian-friendly will feed a smart, growth-oriented transit system and vice versa. One of the city’s greatest misses in the recent decade is, unfortunately, a three-avenue-block walk from my apartment, and I frequently see how poor urban planning can lead to some very pedestrian-unfriendly areas even amidst a wealth of transit options.

That avenue is Fourth Avenue in Brooklyn as it zooms past Park Slope. A change in zoning regulations in the early 2000s led to a renewed interest in development, but because of parking requirements and generally shoddy construction, the area is filled with ugly buildings with no commercial frontage on the avenue. It turned what could have been a grand boulevard into a wasteland with isolated pockets of alluring drinking establishments.

Today, in The Wall Street Journal, Robbie Whelan explores the mistakes made along Fourth Avenue and the street’s current state of affairs. As one with close ties to the area, I found the piece to be both depressing and illuminating. Hopefully, the Department of City Planning has already learned from its mistakes, and we can avoid creating through zoning boring streets in what should be a vibrant neighborhood.

June 18, 2012 8 comments

Gateway Tunnel

A trans-Hudson tunnel by any other name

by Benjamin Kabak June 17, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 17, 2012

Someone will have to fight for the tunnel if Gateway is to become a reality by 2025.

It’s been 20 months since Gov. Chris Christie canceled the ARC Tunnel project, and its replacement has yet to move forward. Billed as a better solution than the deep-cavern terminal underneath Macys, the Gateway Tunnel has been put forward as a key element in any high-speed rail plan as well as a solution to the trans-Hudson bottleneck. Yet, we’re no closer today to seeing the Gateway Tunnel materialize than we were a year ago.

Recently, region transit advocates and Gateway Tunnel proponents have started to open a dialogue on the tunnel. No one denies the need for it, but it will take a great deal of political maneuverings to see it realized. “What should be clear is that nobody, nobody is debating that we need this,” Amtrak board member and former Port Authority Chairman Anthony Coscia said.

So what’s the problem? Why has this project gone nowhere? Money seems to be the answer. Steve Strunsky of The Star-Ledger has more on the effort to draw out support for the tunnel:

What is still far from clear, however, is where the money will come from to fund the Gateway project’s estimated $13 billion to $15 billion cost. Estimates for the ARC project were $9.8 billion to $14 billion when Christie bailed out on it in late 2010, saying New Jersey taxpayers would be unfairly stuck with the tab for overruns. He has not ruled out support for the Gateway plan, which he has said would better serve commuters.

So to boost the general public’s awareness of Gateway, stimulate interest among potential participants and help the project pick up steam in Washington, D.C., Trenton and Albany, proponents hosted what they said was the first forum to bring together representatives of the three rail agencies and others likely to share in its benefits and costs.

Coscia’s remarks capped the morning conference, which was held at the Princeton Club in Manhattan. It was hosted by the Regional Plan Association, a planning and transportation think tank, and the General Contractors Association of New York, whose members stand to work on the Gateway project. “Yes, we’re contractors — we build infrastructure,” said the association’s managing director, Denise Richardson. “But we also live in the region.”

For now, as Strunsky notes, a lot of the same people are bringing up the same talking points they’ve been rehashing for nearly two years. Meanwhile, in the halls of power — in D.C. and Trenton and Albany — a resolute nothing has happened. Outside of a token Senate appropriation, no one has taken the lead on this project from a federal standpoint, and Chris Christie and Andrew Cuomo seem to be engaged in a battle of who can say less when asked for comment on Gateway’s future. “We’ll see where it goes,” New Jersey’s State Transportation Commissioner Jim Simpson said on gaining Christie’s support for the tunnel.

As the days and weeks and months tick away and the ARC Tunnel becomes a distant memory, the Gateway saga reminds me of the point MTA Chairman Joe Lhota made last week. To improve the region’s transportation options and access to the city core, we all will have to learn to work together. Cuomo and Christie will have to join forces, and Washington, DC, will have to be a significant funding partner. That is far, far easier said than done.

At this point, in a major election year, any real progress on Gateway will both be on hold until after November and depend heavily upon the outcomes of the key races. The region’s trans-Hudson rail capacity isn’t going to increase by itself though, and while everyone seems to recognize the need for more tunnels, no one has been willing to do much about it. How utterly disappointing.

June 17, 2012 67 comments

Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting five subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak June 16, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on June 16, 2012

A wee bit late with these this weekend. My apologies. As always, Subway Weekender has the map.

From 4 a.m. Saturday, June 16 to 10 p.m., Sunday, June 17, there is no 4 train service between Woodlawn and 161st Street-Yankee Stadium due to track panel installation and track maintenance north of Bedford Park Blvd. Customer should take the D and free shuttle buses instead.

For service to or from 161st Street-Yankee Stadium, 167th Street, 170th Street, Mt. Eden Avenue, 176th Street, Burnside Avenue, 183rd Street, Fordham Road and Kingsbridge Road, customers should walk or take a crosstown bus to D service at nearby stations.
Free shuttle bus service is available to and from Bedford Park Blvd. 4 station, Mosholu Parkway and Woodlawn with a connection to the Bedford Park Blvd. D station.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, June 16 to 5 a.m. Monday, June 18, Coney Island-bound D trains are rerouted via the N from 36th Street to Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue due to station and line structure rehabilitation near 25th Avenue.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, June 16 to 5 a.m. Monday, June 18, E trains are rerouted via the F line in both directions after 36th Street (Queens) to West 4th Street (Manhattan) due to work on the 5th Avenue Interlocking Signal System Modernization project. Trains travel via the 63rd Street and 6th Avenue corridors, stopping at F stations. Downtown trains resume the E route at West 4th Street.

From 1 a.m. Saturday, June 16 to 5 a.m. Monday, June 18, J service operates in two sections due to escalator repair at the Bowery station:

Between Jamaica Center and Essex Street
Between Essex Street and Chambers Street (every 20 minutes)

From 11:30 p.m. Friday, June 15 to 5 a.m. Monday, June 18, Coney Island-bound Q trains run express from Prospect Park to Sheepshead Bay due to track panel installation south of Kings Highway. Trains stop at Church Avenue, Newkirk Plaza and Kings Highway.

June 16, 2012 4 comments

Load More Posts