Second Ave. Sagas
  • About
  • Contact Me
  • 2nd Ave. Subway History
  • Search
  • About
  • Contact Me
  • 2nd Ave. Subway History
  • Search
Second Ave. Sagas

News and Views on New York City Transportation

View from Underground

Photo: On the matter of subway seat etiquette

by Benjamin Kabak May 15, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 15, 2012

Photo by Benjamin Kabak

On the way home from Yankee Stadium on Friday night, I had the chance to enjoy one of those quintessential subway experiences, and the photo above was my surreptitious attempt to capture the moment in all of its glory. The woman who has decided to take up three subway seats was not sleeping when I snapped the photo. She was putzing around with her iPod while shouting across the car to her traveling companions.

From Yankee Stadium until I got off at Nevins St., this woman sat splayed across three seats. As other riders came and went, many in search of a seat on a relatively crowded train, she would not move. At various points, she had both feet up on the seats, and when someone would approach about the empty seat, she would glower at them and then laugh as they went off elsewhere in search of a sit.

I wondered how it came to this. Why do people think they can hog seats? Where are our manners underground? Where was the cop to give this woman a summons for her rude behavior? No one had the audacity to say anything. We, like the woman next to her in my photo, just stared and pursed our lips. It was an utter breach of underground etiquette.

May 15, 2012 30 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Brooklyn

At Atlantic Ave., an updated name with a corporate twist

by Benjamin Kabak May 15, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 15, 2012

An astute straphanger noticed some new signage at Atlantic Avenue this week. (Photo by flickr user OverclockedBravo)

It sure does seem like ages ago that the MTA announced its first — and, so far, only — subway station naming rights deal, but after three years, the Barclays Center is coming to the subway system. As we learned back in June of 2009, the MTA is earning $200,000 annually for 20 years for the right to append the name of the new arena to the subway station name, and the new moniker is now showing up on maps and at the station.

Pacific Street, we hardly knew ye.

As the photo above shows, the Barclays Center name is slowly taking over some column posts even though the arena won’t open for another four months or so. Meanwhile, it has made its first appearance on the online subway map but not the PDF available for download. According to one report, maps and system signage will not bear the new name until later this summer.

With this glimpse at the subway naming future, we see that, apparently, the MTA will be dropping the Pacific St. half of the station name entirely. In a way, that’s no big loss as Pacific St. was a relic of the old BMT system. As Pacific St. is a tiny one-way street with nothing much of note on it, passengers bound for that station are more interested in the fact that the stop lies at the intersections of Flatbush, 4th and Atlantic Aves. Only some of the entrances were on Pacific St., and the Atlantic Ave./Barclays Center name better captures why subway riders are heading there in the first place.

May 15, 2012 73 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Construction

Between the MTA and its contractors, a symbiotic relationship

by Benjamin Kabak May 15, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 15, 2012

The MTA needs its contractors, and the contractors need the MTA. The authority, with its multi-billion-dollar capital plan, is one of the main drivers of the construction industry in New York City and the surrounding region. Without that investment and the drive to expand, workers would see jobs dry up, and contractors would see the flow of funds evaporate. Yet, all is not perfect between these two major players.

Yesterday’s amNew York featured an extensive interview with Denise Richardson, the managing director of the General Contractors Association of New York. Richardson is a former procurement officer for Transit’s capital program and has spent her career in various governmental and agency positions. In light of the current price tags attached to various MTA capital projects, Richardson’s words are quite informative and well worth our attention.

Richardson begins the Q-and-A throwing her voice behind the MTA. When asked what she wants to see changed, she argues for more comprehensive investment in and more attention paid to the MTA. “Everyone complains when there is a problem on their line,” she said, “but the MTA moves 8.5 million people every day and gets almost everyone to their destinations safely and on time. There was almost no capital investment in the system at all from the 1950s to the 1980s. They’ve spend $76 billion since 1982 trying to bring it back to a system of good repair, but some of these projects – like refurbishing the signal system to provide increasing capacity – are very messy and they still haven’t caught up.”

Of course, the GCA is a unique position to lobby for the MTA, and generally, they do so. They were an important voice during the lead-up to the funding of the capital plan, and they have argued for MTA dollars time and again in the past. They support congestion pricing, as Richardson explains in the interview, and they have some weight in Albany as well.

Yet, as the contractors have a symbiotic relationship with the MTA, they also have a slight parasitic one as well. Archaic work rules has led to overstaffing that significantly increases costs. While MTA Capital Construction President Michael Horodniceanu once made an off-hand reference to me on overstaffing, few MTA officials are willing to speak at length about this problem, and Richardson didn’t say too much either. “As a practical matter, the only way we can build large, transformational projects like the World Trade Center or the Hudson Yards is with the skilled, unionized construction workforce,” she said. “[Unions] have had issues adapting to new construction techniques and new construction methods, but they’ve worked hard to address them, so it’s a positive future.”

Ultimately, Richardson’s dream lines up with the impetus behind this blog. As she says, she wants to see “a full-length, Second Avenue subway.” She explained, “The plan is for it to run from Upper Manhattan all the way downtown. I would like to see the funding to continue the project.”

The current leadership at the MTA has yet to come out with plans for Phase 2 north to 125th St., let alone ay sections south of 63rd St. The engineering studies have long been completed, but the dollars aren’t there. A first step in the right direction would involve a concerted effort between the GCA and the MTA to identify ways in which costs can be lowered. Can the MTA and its contractors reduce staffing levels on these projects? Why does everything goes significantly more in New York than in other cities around the globe? These aren’t easy questions, but they need to be answered.

The General Contractors Association could be the MTA’s best friend. They both need each other to move forward, but at some point, moving forward will require compromise and sacrifice. It’s not an easy path.

May 15, 2012 12 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Reminder: FASTRACK returns to 6th Ave.

by Benjamin Kabak May 14, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 14, 2012

FASTRACK hits 6th Avenue tonight. Click for the much larger version.

The FASTRACK express heads to 6th Ave. on Monday night, and Transit has laid out the week’s service closures. From 10 p.m.-5 a.m. each night beginning on the evening of Monday, May 14 and ending on the morning on Friday, May 18, there will be no service along 6th Ave. between 57th St. and West 4th St. in both directions. Here’s how service will operate instead:

  • D trains are rerouted and operate in two sections:
    • D trains will operate between 205th Street and 59th Street-Columbus Circle, then via the C line between 59th Street-Columbus Circle and West 4th Street, then via the F line between West 4th Street and 2nd Avenue, the last stop.
    • D trains will operate between Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue and 36th Street in Brooklyn, then via the R line between 36th Street and Whitehall Street in Lower Manhattan, the last stop.
  • F trains operate via the E line between Roosevelt Avenue and West 4th Street in both directions. For service to Lexington Avenue/63rd Street, Roosevelt Island and 21st Street-Queensbridge, customers should take the Q. Q service will be extended to 21st Street-Queensbridge via the F line after 57th Street-7th Avenue.
  • Manhattan-bound B and M service in Brooklyn and Queens ends at 9:30 p.m. Service in Manhattan is available until 10 p.m.
  • Free Shuttle buses provide connecting service between the Grand Street D station and both the Canal Street N/Q/R/6 and Broadway-Lafayette D/F stations.

Leave plenty of time for alternate travel. At least with the Yankees on the road this week, post-game D service from Yankee Stadium will be only marginally impacted.

May 14, 2012 12 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Staten Island

North Shore Alternatives Analysis calls for SI BRT

by Benjamin Kabak May 14, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 14, 2012

The North Shore Alternatives Analysis has endorsed a busway for Staten Island. (Click to enlarge)

For the past few years, I’ve been following along as the MTA, at the behest of local Staten Island politicians, has reexamined the fallow right-of-way on Staten Island’s North Shore. When last we checked in on this story, the MTA had narrowed the choices considerable and seemed to be deciding between a light rail option and a truly dedicated bus route. Predictably and to my chagrin, the MTA has decided to endorse a bus route over the old rail right-of-way.

In a study unveiled to the public last week and obtained by Streetsblog on Friday [PDF], the authority delved into its thinking behind endorsing a bus rapid transit line. Overall, the Alternatives Analysis tried to meet three goals. It had to identify an option that improved mobility while preserving and enhancing the environment, natural resources and open spaces and also maximizing the MTA’s limited financial resources. With the right-of-way already secured, the authority had to identify something then that wouldn’t cost a crippling amount to implement while still providing the other benefits identified. Light rail would have allowed for a potential spur over the Bayonne Bridge and into New Jersey while a true bus rapid transit route would better distribute current and future riders throughout Staten Island.

So how did the BRT option win? The numbers, as identified in the study, seem to make it a winner. According to the MTA’s report, a bus rapid transit line would allow for a 23-minute trip from West Shore Plaza to the Ferry Terminal. That’s two minutes slower than the light rail option, but the authority estimated that, with additional bus lines using the ROW, estimated AM peak ridership would reach 12,100 with the bus line and just 10,590 with a light rail. Operating costs for a bus line would be around $500,000 per year less than light rail, and the capital costs pale in comparison. Light rail would cost $645 million while installing the infrastructure for true BRT would cost $371 million.

The SI Busway would bring the first truly dedicated BRT lanes to New York City.

Should we be satisfied by this answer though? I am a bit skeptical of the ridership estimates. By including bus lines with stops outside of the busway — including preexisting lines that would be rerouted — the MTA has seemingly inflated the number of bus riders who would take advantage of the busway. This is the so-called “open” busway model that would include exit points from the dedicated ROW for routes heading to other points on Staten Island. Still, considering how light rail can run higher capacity vehicles more frequently, it’s tough to see how exactly a bus lane would carry more passengers than a properly designed and integrated light rail system.

Meanwhile, the study seems to give short shrift to environmental concerns as well. Only a box of checkmarks notes that BRT could have a high impact on air quality. Light rail would be a far cleaner transportation option, and if environmental concerns were truly on the table, it wasn’t weighted too heavily here.

Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised though. New York City has been singularly hesitant to embrace any sort of light rail. A 42nd St. proposal that would reshape midtown has gained no traction, and alternatives for Brooklyn and Queens have never been regarded as realistic options for underserved areas. Staten Island has a dedicated right-of-way and an easy connection to a preexisting light rail line, albeit one in another state, but this option too was left on the table.

Ultimately, though, as Noah Kazis noted, this entire discussion may be a moot one for the foreseeable future. Even at a modest cost of a few hundred million dollars, the MTA can’t yet afford to do anything here, and it still would have to send this project through an engineering and environmental review process. Right now, the North Shore Alternatives Analysis is nothing more than a thought experiment that deserves a better future. When the money is there, perhaps the rail option will be as well.

May 14, 2012 115 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting 15 subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak May 11, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 11, 2012

Here’s your Friday evening special. Have a great weekend.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 14, there is no 1 train service between 168th St and 242nd St due to rehabilitation work at Dyckman Street station and structural rehabilitation, platform edge and canopy work at 1 stations from 207th Street to 242nd Street and track panel installation north of 215th Street.

  • For 181st St and 191st St, customers may take the uptown 1 to 168th St and transfer to the M3 or free shuttle bus on St. Nicholas Ave.
  • For Dyckman St. and 207th St, customers may take the uptown 1 to 168th St and transfer to the A train.
  • For 1 stations from 215th St to 242nd St, customers may take the uptown 1 to 168th St and transfer to the A to 207th St, then take the shuttle bus on Broadway.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 14, there are no 2 trains between Flatbush Ave and Franklin Ave due to electrical work near Church Ave. 2 trains operate between 241st St and the Utica Ave 3, 4 station. Free shuttle buses provide alternate service. (Repeats next weekend: May 19-21.)


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 14, 3 service is extended to New Lots Avenue due to platform edge, mechanical and electrical work at Fulton Street and renewal of switches north of Borough Hall.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 14, there are no 4 trains between Brooklyn Bridge and New Lots Avenue due to platform edge, mechanical and electrical work at Fulton Street and renewal of switches north of Borough Hall. Customers should take the 3, N, Q or R instead. Note: 4 trains operate local in both directions between 125th Street and Brooklyn Bridge. (Repeats next two weekends May 19-21 and May 26-28).


From 6 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., Saturday, May 12 and from 8 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., Sunday, May 13, there are no 5 trains between Grand Central-42nd Street and Bowling Green due to platform edge, mechanical and electrical work at Fulton Street and renewal of switches north of Borough Hall. Customers should take the 4 (operating between Woodlawn and Brooklyn Bridge.), or R trains instead. 5 trains run every 20 minutes between Dyre Avenue and Grand Central-42nd Street.

  • For service between Grand Central-42nd Street and Brooklyn Bridge, customers may take the 4.
  • For service between Brooklyn Bridge and Bowling Green, customer may use the nearby Cortlandt Street, Rector Street and Whitehall Street R stations.


From 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., Saturday, May 12, Flushing-bound 7 trains skip 82nd, 90th, 103rd and 111th Sts due to cable tray bracket installation for Flushing CBTC.


From 12:15 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 4:45 a.m. Monday, May 14, shuttle trains and buses replace A train service between Howard Beach and Far Rockaway due to rebuilding of piers and bearings on the South Channel Bridge and replacing of drain pipes between South Channel Bridge and Hammels Wye.

  • Rockaway Park shuttle trains operate between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park.
  • Free shuttle buses operate between:
    1. Howard Beach and Far Rockaway, non-stop.
    2. Howard Beach and Rockaway Park, making a stop at Broad Channel.


From 6:30 a.m. to 11 p.m. Saturday, May 12 and Sunday, May 13, uptown C trains skip Spring, 23rd and 50th Sts due to electrical and substation work at Jay Street-MetroTech.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 14, E trains are rerouted via the F line in both directions between 36th Street, Queens and West 4th Street in Manhattan due to work on the 5th Ave Interlocking Signal System Modernization project. Trains travel via the 63rd St and 6 Ave corridors, stopping at F stations. Downtown trains resume the E route at West 4th Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 14, Queens-bound F trains are rerouted via the A from Jay Street-MetroTech to West 4th Street due to electrical and substation work at Jay Street-MetroTech.


From 11 p.m. Friday, May 11 to 5 a.m. Monday May 14, there are no G trains between Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts and Church Ave due to station painting at Classon Ave and Clinton-Washington Aves. G trains operate in two sections:

  • Between Court Square and Bedford-Nostrand Avs
  • Between Bedford-Nostrand Avs and Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts (every 20 minutes)

For service between Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts and Church Avenue, transfer to the A or C at Hoyt-Schermerhorn to Jay Street-MetroTech, where F service is available.


From 6 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 10 p.m. Sunday, May 13, there are no J trains between Jamaica Center and Crescent Street due to structural steel repair, painting and track work north of Cypress Hills. J trains operate between Crescent St and Chambers St. Free shuttle buses operate between Crescent St and Jamaica-Van Wyck, where E trains are available.


From 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., Saturday, May 12 and Sunday, May 13, Coney Island-bound N trains are rerouted via the D line from 36th Street to Coney Island- Stillwell Avenue due to NYC DOT installation between 59th St and 8th Ave. (Trains stop at the New Utrecht-62nd St station.)


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, May 11 to 5 a.m. Monday, May 14, Manhattan-bound Q trains skip Neck Road and Avenue U due to track panel installation south of Kings Highway.


From 12:15 a.m. Saturday, May 12 to 4:45 a.m. Monday, May 14, Rockaway Park shuttle trains operate between Far Rockaway and Rockaway Park due to rebuilding of piers and bearings on the South Channel Bridge and replacing of drain pipes between South Channel Bridge and Hammels Wye.

  • No Rockaway Park shuttle trains between Beach 90th Street and Broad Channel
  • No A trains between Howard Beach and Far Rockaway
  • Free shuttle buses operate between:
    1. Howard Beach and Far Rockaway, non-stop
    2. Howard Beach and Rockaway Park, making a stop at Broad Channel
May 11, 2012 13 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMTA Politics

Some comings and goings for MTA execs

by Benjamin Kabak May 11, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 11, 2012

A small item in the print edition of Crain’s New York caught my eye earlier this week: According to the trade pub, Gov. Andrew Cuomo is putting his stamp on the MTA as some key top executives are shuffling through the organization. Former COO and current Director of Strategic Initiatives Charles Monheim and Linda Kleinbaum, the deputy executive director of government affairs, have both retired. Hilary Rign, the current director of government affairs, is taking over Kleinbaum’s spot as deputy executive director, and Steve Morello, who has worked for both Gov. Cuomos as well as Mayor Bloomberg, will step into Ring’s position.

All in all, shakeups like these are fairly common as new agency heads come and go. Cuomo has not been a vocal advocate for transit himself, but those in charge are doing the job. “There’s a desire for a stronger connection between the governor’s office and the MTA, and that’s not a bad thing,” William Henderson of the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee, said to Crain’s.

May 11, 2012 2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
7 Line Extension

Video: Arriving rails for the 7 line extension

by Benjamin Kabak May 11, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 11, 2012

As we near the final 18-24 months of construction on the 7 line extension, the MTA is rapidly moving forward with some of the last elements of the project. Yesterday, the authority posted a video providing a behind-the-scenes look at the delivery of the rails. Their explanation offers us an update on the project as well:

The 7 Extension Project, now 65 percent complete, has just received its first set of rails.

Each rail delivered to the extension site is 390 feet in length and weighs approximately 15,000 pounds. Each delivery consists of only four rails because of their weight. The rails are delivered with a work train leaving the Linden Shop in Brooklyn. The trip takes about 48 hours from loading to unloading because it only travels during the midnight shift in order to avoid interrupting passenger service.

The first of sixteen deliveries left the Linden Shop on April 30 headed for the Grand Concourse Yard (via the 4 line) where it laid up for the day. The next day, the work train traveled via the D line and south of 34th Street, switched tracks and came back north on the F line. From there, it crossed over at Queens Plaza to the N line, and then switched to the 7 line to Times Square.

As for the overall project, structural work at the future 34th Street Station is now complete. Work also began in September on the project’s last major contract. This systems contract includes rail track, all mechanical, electrical and related systems throughout the tunnels, station, ventilation buildings and the main subway entrance at 34th Street. Completion of this contract is the last piece needed to initiate service on the 7 line Extension.

Even as this project nears its completion, I am still reminded of missed opportunities. Not construction a station or even a shell at 41st St. and 10th Ave. remains one of the more inexplicably short-sighted moves made by the City and MTA in recent decades. Perhaps though the 7 line will one day reach the western parts of Chelsea. That won’t make up for the missing stop near Hell’s Kitchen, but it would bring train service to an inaccessible part of Manhattan.

May 11, 2012 38 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
LIRRQueens

On Elmhurst, the LIRR and a better CityTicket

by Benjamin Kabak May 10, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 10, 2012

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

A few months ago, Queens representatives gathered with MTA officials to discuss the old Elmhurst LIRR station. Shuttered in 1985 due to declining ridership, politicians want to reopen the station with the neighborhood booming, and the MTA isn’t opposed to the project. With a population increase of 45 percent between 1980 and 2010, the neighborhood, currently served only by the M and R trains, is at least a 30-minute train ride away from Midtown and could use speedier transit.

Recently, a Wall Street Journal article offered up a summary of things:

The R and M subway lines that currently stop in Elmhurst take between 30 and 40 minutes to reach Manhattan during peak hours—on crowded trains. The LIRR train from Elmhurst would arrive at Manhattan’s Penn Station in roughly 15 minutes. “If people are given the opportunity to shave off about half an hour from their commute, that’s an enormously valuable product,” said Mr. Crowley, adding that the move would also open up Elmhurst as a neighborhood for additional people to explore.

LIRR officials say they are giving the issue “serious consideration.” Improvements being made on the Port Washington line will add capacity, according to Helena Williams, president of the LIRR. The project would cost between $20 million and $30 million, she said The next step, Ms. Williams added, will be a ridership study to be conducted in the next year or so, that will analyze the potential market for the LIRR in Elmhurst.

Robert Valdes-Clausell, an Elmhurst resident since 1966 and treasurer of the Newtown Civic Association, said residents are “already being exposed to the rumbling of the [LIRR] train and there is a tremendous increase in population density.” With the number of residents “expected to grow even further, this is a great opportunity to accommodate and serve the people,” he said.

The costs depend upon accessibility. With an elevator, the project would likely reach its $30 million estimate; without, it could afoul of ADA regulations and cost $20 million. That’s not the real issue though.

The biggest problem, as reports from earlier this year noted, is the cost of a ride. A subway swipe from Elmhurst Ave. costs, at most, $2.25 — and no one really pays that much on a daily basis. An LIRR monthly pass starts at $163, and individual peak rides run upwards of $7. The $3.75 City Ticket is good only on Saturdays and Sundays. Why?

The MTA has long treated its sub-agencies as separate fiefdoms that don’t play well with others. While back-office functions have been combined in recent years in an effort to eliminate redundancies, fare policies have remained stubbornly separate, much to the detriment of transit usage. It shouldn’t cost that much more to take the LIRR from Forest Hills than it does to take the E or F trains, and if the MTA is seriously about adding another LIRR stop in Queens or Metro-North access in the Bronx, the fare policies should be better unified. Otherwise, missed opportunities will abound.

May 10, 2012 68 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA TechnologyStraphangers Campaign

Straphangers: Problems plaguing old signal system

by Benjamin Kabak May 10, 2012
written by Benjamin Kabak on May 10, 2012

Problems with the subway signal system accounted for over 35 percent of controllable delays last year. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak)

Any veteran subway rider knows to dread an announcement concerning “an unavoidable delay.” Such a proclamation can precede an endless wait in a tunnel somewhere as some mysterious problem causes back-ups up and down the line. Details are scarce, and the waits infuriating. But what if those unavoidable delays aren’t so unavoidable after all?

For straphangers stuck in a train, the MTA delivers scant information. We never find out the why or wherefore of the service delay unless we seek it out. Yesterday, though, the Straphangers Campaign pulled back the curtain a bit, and after analyzing the 2011 service delays, what they found were a bunch of potentially avoidable delays based on the city’s aging subway signal system.

By analyzing the MTA’s text message alert system, the Straphangers produced a report on subway delays. The total world of delays included 4580 alerts, and the Straphangers determined that 1613 of them — or 35 percent of the total — were uncontrollable. That is, they involved sick passengers or police activity outside of the realm of the MTA. The remainder were indeed avoidable.

The remaining 2967 alerts encompassed delays due to signal or mechanical problems, and over 1000 of those were due to signal problems. The advocacy group offered up some topline summaries:

  • The 2 line had the most controllable significant incidents in 2011. The 2 line accounted for 251 out of 2,967, or 8% of all controllable significant incidents.
  • The 5 line came in a close second, with 247 controllable significant incidents. This was also 8% of all controllable significant incidents.
  • The G line had the fewest controllable significant incidents in 2011. The G line accounted for 45, or 2%, of all controllable significant incidents.
  • The most frequently occurring type of controllable significant incidents in 2011 was signal problems. This reason accounted for 36% of all controllable significant incidents.

The 2 and 5 lines, of course, share trackage in both Brooklyn and the Bronx so it’s no surprise that those two lines are intertwined in their delays. As critics of the G may say, since the train never runs, it can’t be delayed (but we know those numbers are due to the fact that it’s a one-train route from Queens until Bergen Street).

For its part, the MTA didn’t dispute these findings. “We agree with the Straphangers’ assessment that signal issues contribute to delays,” the authority said in a statement. “That is why signal upgrades remain a top priority and are a crucial part of our capital program. FASTRACK is also helping to improve how we maintain and improve our signals network.”

The Straphangers posed a few questions based on their data, and one in particular caught my eye. “Are there explanations,” they asked, “for why signal and mechanical problems constitute more than two-thirds of all significant controllable incidents?” The easy answer concerns the age of the subway infrastructure. Simply put, the equipment is very, very old; some signals are pushing 70. This technology needs to be better maintained and, more importantly, upgraded both to maintain current capacity and throughput and allow the MTA to expand its services.

A few weeks ago, I bemoaned the threat of a less ambitious capital plan. Joe Lhota had spoken then of looking at ways to spend less for a few years but invest in the hidden infrastructure. “It’s about signals,” he said. “If we’re going to have more throughput, we’re going to put more trains on the same track, and we’re going to have to have more modernized signals.”

So maybe this is indeed all about signals. The MTA plans to spend around $3 billion on signals over the next few years and will look to increase that amount when the pressures of funding — but not building — the megaprojects start to come off the books in 2015. Can we wait a few more years to upgrade this vital, if hidden, part of the subway system? We may have little choice, but all of a sudden, that less-than-ambitious capital plan looks a little more promising.

May 10, 2012 37 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts

About The Author

Name: Benjamin Kabak
E-mail: Contact Me

Become a Patron!
Follow @2AvSagas

Upcoming Events
TBD

RSS? Yes, Please: SAS' RSS Feed
SAS In Your Inbox: Subscribe to SAS by E-mail

Instagram



Disclaimer: Subway Map © Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Used with permission. MTA is not associated with nor does it endorse this website or its content.

Categories

  • 14th Street Busway (1)
  • 7 Line Extension (118)
  • Abandoned Stations (31)
  • ARC Tunnel (52)
  • Arts for Transit (19)
  • Asides (1,244)
  • Bronx (13)
  • Brooklyn (126)
  • Brooklyn-Queens Connector (13)
  • Buses (291)
  • Capital Program 2010-2014 (27)
  • Capital Program 2015-2019 (56)
  • Capital Program 2020-2024 (3)
  • Congestion Fee (71)
  • East Side Access Project (37)
  • F Express Plan (22)
  • Fare Hikes (173)
  • Fulton Street (57)
  • Gateway Tunnel (29)
  • High-Speed Rail (9)
  • Hudson Yards (18)
  • Interborough Express (1)
  • International Subways (26)
  • L Train Shutdown (20)
  • LIRR (65)
  • Manhattan (73)
  • Metro-North (99)
  • MetroCard (124)
  • Moynihan Station (16)
  • MTA (98)
  • MTA Absurdity (233)
  • MTA Bridges and Tunnels (27)
  • MTA Construction (128)
  • MTA Economics (522)
    • Doomsday Budget (74)
    • Ravitch Commission (23)
  • MTA Politics (330)
  • MTA Technology (195)
  • New Jersey Transit (53)
  • New York City Transit (220)
  • OMNY (3)
  • PANYNJ (113)
  • Paratransit (10)
  • Penn Station (18)
  • Penn Station Access (10)
  • Podcast (30)
  • Public Transit Policy (164)
  • Queens (129)
  • Rider Report Cards (31)
  • Rolling Stock (40)
  • Second Avenue Subway (262)
  • Self Promotion (77)
  • Service Advisories (612)
  • Service Cuts (118)
  • Sponsored Post (1)
  • Staten Island (52)
  • Straphangers Campaign (40)
  • Subway Advertising (45)
  • Subway Cell Service (34)
  • Subway History (81)
  • Subway Maps (83)
  • Subway Movies (14)
  • Subway Romance (13)
  • Subway Security (104)
  • Superstorm Sandy (35)
  • Taxis (43)
  • Transit Labor (151)
    • ATU (4)
    • TWU (100)
    • UTU (8)
  • Triboro RX (4)
  • U.S. Transit Systems (53)
    • BART (1)
    • Capital Metro (1)
    • CTA (7)
    • MBTA (11)
    • SEPTA (5)
    • WMATA (28)
  • View from Underground (447)

Archives

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram

@2019 - All Right Reserved.


Back To Top