Second Ave. Sagas

Not-so-hidden inefficiences of HR 7 come to light

by Benjamin Kabak February 23, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 23, 2012

As things in Washington, D.C., stand now, H.R. 7, the transportation bill that has had many wringing their hands over the past few weeks, is unlikely to become law without some serious work. Still, New York representatives from both sides of the political aisle are concerned that the city will lose a major source of transit funding (and money that goes toward job creation in the area). They and leading transit officials have been speaking out against the bill.

Yesterday, in a conference call with numerous transit agency heads, MTA CEO and Chairman Joe Lhota explained how New York City benefits from the current funding scheme. “That billion dollars in funding is used to buy rail stock and switching and signaling equipment, critical to maintaining our system in a state of good repair,” he said.

Under the new bill, a dedicated funding stream for transit projects would dry up, and the money allocated for various grants for transit projects would be thrown into a common pot. Every project would compete for scarce funds, and transit and pedestrian-improvement projects would be a complete disadvantage to road building. But that’s the problem only on the top level. Below the surface the bill is rife with inefficient practices.

Take, for instance, Section 5310 of the new bill. This section concerns the bus and bus facilities formula grant. According to some commentators, approximately $900 million would be available for transit agencies under this section, but there’s a giant caveat. Section 5310(c)(1) discusses eligibility and defines it as such:

RECIPIENTS- Eligible recipients under this section are providers of public transportation in urbanized areas that operate fixed route bus services and that do not operate heavy rail, commuter rail, or light rail services.

In simple English, the only agencies eligible for funding under this section — the only folks who could claim a piece of a lofty $900 million pie — are those who operate bus systems only and also do not operate any rail service. That will lead to two consequences: Either any major transit agency — the MTA, the WMATA, the MBTA, etc. — would all be eliminated or they would have to spin off their bus operations into brand new agencies thus creating another layer of transit bureaucracy.

Transportation for America is highly critical of this section of the bill. This section, they say, “needlessly diverts tax dollars to bureaucratic overhead that should be used to provide much-needed transit services to local communities.” Why have one transit agency without streamlined operations that wastes money on bureaucracy when you can have two?

On a granular level, this is the kind of transit policy coming out of the House of Representatives right now. As three decades of dedicated transit funding sources are coming under attack, common-sense governmental operations are under the microscope too. The MTA has worked hard, with varying degrees of success, to tame a multi-agency bus system, and if H.R. 7 becomes law, the authority would either have to forfeit funds or discard its bus system entirely. Nothing about that sounds like sound policy to me.

As of now, the bill doesn’t have the votes to pass the House, but as Streetsblog noted yesterday, we’re not out of the woods yet. “I think that the drafters go back to the drawing board and they recognize that we have some issues that we can’t just overlook,” Michael Grimm, a House rep from Staten Island said. Hopefully, those drafters will listen to officials who are urging a better bill, but I’m not so optimistic.

February 23, 2012 15 comments

Queens

Trade show vets bemoan access to proposed Ozone Park site

by Benjamin Kabak February 22, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 22, 2012

As Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s plans for a convention center in Ozone Park continue to draw headlines, more and more interested groups and interest groups continue to weigh on. Today, Charles Bagli of The Times checks in with convention experts, attendees and planners, and what they have to say deserves some serious consideration. Essentially, they say, poor transit access to Ozone Park and its out-of-the-way location make it ill-suited as a potential site for a massive convention center.

“The industry is skeptical about the viability of the Aqueduct site,” Jeff Little, a trade show organizer, said to The Times. “It has the potential to be a big white elephant. It’s true that there are large shows that can’t go to the Javits, but that doesn’t mean that they’ll go to a large facility at Aqueduct.”

Bagli summarizes the skepticism surrounding the proposed plan:

Conventioneers and other visitors come to New York expecting to see Broadway shows during their down time, eat in famous restaurants and shop on Fifth Avenue, trade show managers and hotel operators say. None of that exists at the relatively remote Aqueduct racetrack in Queens, where the Malaysian company, Genting Group, hopes to build a 3.8-million-square-foot convention center and 3,000 hotel rooms and enlarge its existing gambling hall.

More to the point, they add, Aqueduct is a 60-minute subway ride from Times Square. They fear that some conventions, trade shows and conferences will decide to go elsewhere…

Mr. Little’s view was amplified a week ago at a meeting of the New York chapter of the International Association of Exhibitions and Events in Manhattan. After listening to a presentation by a top Genting executive, Christian Goode, one trade show manager jumped up and asked the crowd, Who wants to see the Javits closed? Not a single hand shot up in assent from the 125 people in attendance.

With the Cuomo Administration noting that nothing has been set in stone and any convention center plan will include “a comprehensive master plan reflecting community and shareholder input,” the Ozone Park plan continues to suffer from a lack of integration into the aspects of New York City that make it New York City. While it may be close to JFK Airport, it simply isn’t near the attractions of the Big Apple.

“We know that Javits is the most successful convention center in the country in terms of bookings,” Mark Schienberg, head of the Greater New York Automobile Dealers Association and host of the annual auto show, said. “But people want to be in the heart of Manhattan. Do they want to be on the fringes of Queens?”

Even more practical, though, are the concerns about access. Genting has not indicated it will do much more than fund a super-express A train, and based on recent history, that idea appears to be a non-starter. A comprehensive plan involving the reactivation of the LIRR’s Rockaway Beach Branch line could cost hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars. Furthermore, if a new convention center does not lead to the redevelopment of the current Javits Center, support from groups such as the Regional Plan Association may dry up as well.

Ultimately, this convention center plan, which came out of left field during the Governor’s speech, has a long way to go, but stakeholders are making appropriate noises early on. Better and faster transit access that doesn’t rob riders further down the line of train service must be a part of the equation, and as the convention industry and regional transit advocates voice these concerns, hopefully someone in Albany is listening.

February 22, 2012 37 comments

Second Avenue Subway

With the benefits of a subway come the detriments of construction

by Benjamin Kabak February 22, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 22, 2012

It has become cliched to discuss the ways in which the Second Ave. Subway construction is impacting the Upper East Side. Residents have been complaining for years; businesses have struggled; and rent, as The Times has so kindly pointed out, is going down. In fact, as the MTA has moved further along in the process, the complaints have only grown louder.

And those complaints are numerous. Besides the issues surrounding the physical presence of construction, Upper East Siders have complained about the location of station entrances, the hours of blasting and the hours of truck service into and out of the site. They have bemoaned dust and have even tried to claim that their dogs are suffering animal post-traumatic stress from the constant blasting. I’m sure once the subway is open, they’ll complain about headways the lack of a full line.

Now, I don’t mean to belittle these complaints. The MTA has not been, for much of the project, a very good neighbor. The launch box site in the low 90s was a mess for years, and the authority has learned to mitigate the spread of dust and debris through an awkward trial-and-error process during construction. It hasn’t been particularly easy for residents, and some of their complaints have merit.

That said, their latest stink stinks. Because of their previous complaints, the MTA has had to adjust work hours, and now residents are complaining about the impact of their earlier complaints because work is now going on into the night. DNA Info broke the story:

MTA officials are considering nighttime visits to apartments around East 72nd Street, after repeated complaints by residents who say the overnight construction for the Second Avenue subway is keeping them awake. Engineers for the authority are planning the visits to hear — and feel — for themselves what’s going on late-night and try to find ways to mitigate the problems, MTA spokesman Kevin Ortiz said…

Ortiz said in an email that the MTA had tried shifting the drilling work to daytime hours, but said that was only “partially effective” since the construction must be completed in a specific order and there was no arrangement of work that would prevent the drilling from happening at night. The MTA is restricted to blasting between 3 and 7 p.m., and there’s no trucking allowed after 10 p.m. Therefore, the window for drilling to prep for the blasting has to occur in the middle of the night, Ortiz explained.

Unfortunately, the DNA Info story, while quite representative of the neighbor’s complaints, doesn’t tell the fully story. Why does the MTA have to do work overnight? Because residents asked the authority’s contractors not to conduct blasting after 7 p.m. and not to allow trucks in after 10 p.m. The MTA eventually obliged, but the flip side of this compromise in a 24-hour work site means late-night work. Now, the residents are complaining about the work the MTA must conduct in order to adhere to the blasting and trucking deadlines. It is seemingly a catch-22.

It’s hard not to be a bit skeptical here. If the Upper East Side residents had their ways, the MTA wouldn’t have a window to do the work it needs to do to build a subway. There wouldn’t be time to prep for blasting or remove the debris. There would be a 10-hour workday, and construction would take five extra years and billions more. No one wants that.

Building a subway is messy work, especially when the route goes through such a densely populated area. We don’t yet know what the future holds for the Second Ave. subway, but we know that Phase 1 will continue, noise and all. It’s the price we pay for progress.

February 22, 2012 8 comments

Asides Fulton Street

At Fulton Street, just 28 months until completion

by Benjamin Kabak February 21, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 21, 2012

Making the rounds today are some new old renderings from the Fulton St. Transit Center that came packaged as part of a presentation from the MTA to Community Board 1 last week. You can check out the renderings in my October post, here via DNA Info or in raw form in the presentation PDF right here. The renderings and construction photos are fun to view, but the real news is in the timeline.

According to the MTA documents, the end of the construction effort is finally in sight. After years of missed deadlines and rising budgets, the MTA says construction is still slated to wrap in June of 2014, just over 28 months from now. A detailed glimpse at the timeline, though, reveals that most work will be completed before the end of 2012.

As the chart on page 45 of the presentation shows, the MTA will complete the rehab of the 4/5 station and ready the new Dey St. entrance by the end of July. In November, the Dey Street concourse is set to open as well the escalator to John St. By the end of the year, the Corbin building restoration and first floor retail storefronts will be ready. In 2013, the MTA’s major work will involve opening the A/C mezzanine by the end of March, and after that, it’s just a spring until the headhouse is ready in mid-2014. Even as there’s light at the end of the proverbial tunnel, I still question whether or not this project was truly worth the billions.

February 21, 2012 14 comments

Asides MTA Technology

A few thoughts on countdown clocks and subway headways

by Benjamin Kabak February 21, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 21, 2012

Since the early fall, my commute has involved only IRT trains, and as I’ve written in the past, I find the countdown clocks to make waiting for the next subway a far less stressful experience. As all of my stations now have these clocks, I’ve also started focusing on what the wait times can tell us about subway headways, and I’ve often taken to Twitter to post my observations about train bunching. It seems to happen far more often than we would like.

Take, for instance, off-peak patterns on the 2 and 3. Oftentimes, I’ll see a long wait for a downtown 2 train and a much shorter wait for the 3 train right behind it. The wait times may average out to acceptable headways, but the reality of the situation is far more subtle. I witnessed another strange happening this past Saturday when three downtown 1 trains past within 5 minutes of each other at around 5:15 p.m. Accordingly to the MTA’s schedule, those trains should have been operating with eight minutes of headway rather than 100 seconds.

Some of this bunching may be unavoidable. Perhaps an earlier delay on the 1 line caused Saturday’s bunching, but the 2/3 bunching happens often enough that I wonder if it’s a scheduling issue. The 3 makes just one stop after leaving its terminal before joining up with the downtown 2 that the dispatcher should be able to avoid such bunching. I’ve noticed, however, that the late-night schedule features Manhattan-bound 2 and 4 trains running with similarly mistimed gaps in Brooklyn.

One day, I hope the MTA releases the wealth of data currently being collected by the underlying technology supporting the PA/CIS system. It would provide a glimpse of how trains are running with what spacing as they make their journeys to their ultimate destinations. Perhaps we’d see bunching, and perhaps too we would be able to isolate why bunching happens by discovering which trains are experience high dwell times. For now, though, we just suffer through mystifying and frustrated bunching as the countdown clocks tick down the minutes until the next two trains arrive.

February 21, 2012 28 comments

MTA Absurdity

Removing trash cans a subway cure for litter?

by Benjamin Kabak February 21, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 21, 2012

Without trash cans, littler wouldn't even start here.

Every now and then, the MTA puts forward some zany idea that they call a “pilot program.” Sometimes, those programs involve scaling back service during minor holidays; sometimes, those involve replacing wooden benches with stainless. Recently, the MTA has tried to combat garbage through a rather counterintuitive pilot program: They removed all garbage bins from a station platform.

When the MTA first announced this pilot in October, it seemed to represent the final hurrah of the Walder era. It was an idea that would spring from someone with a McKinsey background, but Joe Lhota vowed to continue it, pending the outcome. For a little while, at least, 8th Street on the BMT Broadway line, a station heavily trafficked by NYU students and East Village-bound revelers alike, would feature no trash receptacles.

Initially, those watching the MTA were skeptical. Some believed the authority should add more trash receptacle to combat station litter. Others accused the authority of making the trash someone else’s problem. Those who would not just litter even in the absence of a trash can would be focused to carry their refuse out into the streets. The city wouldn’t notice less litter, but the MTA wouldn’t have to deal it.

As the press expressed skepticism, a funny thing happened on the way to trash can: The MTA noticed that litter did not increase at the targeted station, and the authority is taking out less garbage from these stations. Pete Donohue had a bit on the reaction to the program:

The MTA launched a publicity campaign to alert riders, and now many straphangers discard their trash before entering those stations or hang onto it until they encounter a receptacle at the next station or on the street. Cleaners have been bagging less trash from platforms and tracks at the two stops — Eighth St. on the N and R lines in Manhattan, and Main St. on the No. 7 line in Flushing, Queens, transit officials said.

Last week, some riders admitted they were surprised that their stations didn’t turn into the Fresh Kills landfill. “I was against it at first, but I think it has worked well,” Peter Liteplo, 63, a credit union manager from Brooklyn, said at Eighth St. last week. “I thought it would create a lot of junk, but it looks better.”

…Considering the amount of garbage the MTA hauls from the subway — 14,000 tons a year — exploring any option that could reduce the burden is worthwhile. And since it’s working, the authority should expand the pilot — not junk it. Maybe the MTA should cite security concerns as the reason for the move. The Port Authority removed garbage trains from its much smaller system after the 9/11 terror attacks more than a decade ago. The London Underground removed bins long ago because of bombing campaigns by the Irish Republican Army to end British rule of northern Ireland.

But it’s even simpler than that: The MTA could frame this discussion as one about its role. The authority is not a trash-collection agency, and if straphangers bring their garbage underground, the MTA necessarily becomes a trash collection agency. They have to devote track space, personnel hours and monetary resources toward cleanliness and litter collection. But without trash cans, if passengers are bringing their garbage with them either to stations with trash receptacles or to the nearest street level can, the MTA won’t have as much trash to collect.

Lately, a bill in Albany to ban food underground has gained headlines. Senator Bill Perkins wants to cut back on items in the subway that attract rodents. Perhaps though the simpler solution is to remove the vast majority of trash cans. By centralizing trash collection, the MTA can better remove garbage from the system while spending less on something that isn’t a core service, and if trash moves above ground, well, that’s why the city has a Department of Sanitation. Sometimes, it seems, those ideas that seem the craziest end up working better than we expect. If only all thinking on subway operations were as creative as that.

February 21, 2012 24 comments

Asides Self Promotion

Saturday service on a holiday Monday

by Benjamin Kabak February 20, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 20, 2012

As I’m sure you’ve figured out by now, as today is a federal holiday, I’m not posting any new content. Subway service is running on a Saturday schedule, and some of the service advisories leftover from the weekend are in place through 5 a.m. tomorrow. I did however want to take a minute to remind you of all the great places you can find more Second Ave. Sagas. I’m active on Twitter and maintain a Facebook page as well. So give me a follow and get more subway commentary all across the Internet.

February 20, 2012 2 comments

Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting service on 12 subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak February 18, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 18, 2012

It’s a three-day weekend for many folks, and the MTA is taking advantage of the long weekend to tack on some extra hours of work. Take note how many of this weekend’s diversions extend until 5 a.m. on Tuesday. Thus, there is no Q service, for instance, on Monday, and there is no uptown 6 local service until Tuesday. As always, Subway Weekender has the map.

From 12:01 a.m. to 6:30 a.m., Saturday, February 18, Sunday, February 19 and Monday, February 20 and from 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, uptown 4 trains run express from Brooklyn Bridge to 14th Street-Union Square due to work on the Broadway/Lafayette-to-Bleecker Street transfer connection and station painting at Astor Place and Spring Street.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, there are no 5 trains between East 180th Street and Bowling Green due to work on the East 180th Street Interlocking. For service between East 180th Street and 149th Street-Grand Concourse, customers should take the 2 instead. For service between 149th Street-Grand Concourse and Bowling Green, customers should take the 4 instead. Note: 5 shuttle trains run every 30 minutes between East 180th Street and Dyre Avenue until 5 a.m. Monday.

From 10 p.m. Friday, February 17 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, uptown 6 trains run express from Brooklyn Bridge to 14th Street-Union Square due to work on the Broadway/Lafayette-to-Bleecker Street transfer connection and station painting at Astor Place and Spring Street.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 20, Manhattan-bound 6 trains run express from Hunts Point Avenue to 138th Street-3rd Avenue due to station maintenance at Cypress Avenue, East 143rd Street, East 149th Street and Longwood Avenue.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, there are no 7 trains between Times Square-42nd Street and Queensboro Plaza due to track panel installation and CBTC work south of Queensboro Plaza, ADA work at Court Square and station renewal at Hunters Point Avenue. Customers should take the N, R, E or F between Manhattan and Queens. Free shuttle buses operate between Vernon Blvd-Jackson Avenue and Queensboro Plaza. In Manhattan, the 42nd Street shuttle (S) operates overnight. (Repeats next six weekends through March 31-Apr 2.)

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, uptown A trains run via the F line from Jay Street-MetroTech to West 4th Street, then local to 59th Street due to track maintenance north of Jay Street-MetroTech.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, A trains run local in both directions between 145th Street and 168th Street and from 6:30 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, February 18, Sunday, February 19 and Monday, February 20, there is no C train service between 145th Street and 168th Street due to track maintenance. Customers should take the A instead.

From 6:30 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, February 18, Sunday, February 19, and Monday, February 20, downtown C trains skip 50th, 23rd and Spring Streets due to electrical and substation work at Jay Street-MetroTech.

From 6:30 a.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, February 18, Sunday, February 19, and Monday, February 20, uptown C trains run on the F line from Jay Street-MetroTech to West 4th Street due to track maintenance north of Jay Street-MetroTech.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 20, Bronx-bound D trains run via the N line from Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue to 36th Street in Brooklyn due to station and line structure rehabilitation near 9th Avenue. Note: Free transfers are available at New Utrecht Avenue-62nd Street with MetroCards. This out-of-system transfer at street level via new Utrecht Avenue is available until May 2012. Look for instructions on station signs.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, D service operates in two sections due to track maintenance north of Bedford Park Boulevard:

Between Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue and Bedford Park Blvd.
Between Bedford Park Blvd. and 205th Street

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, Brooklyn-bound F trains run via the A line from West 4th Street to Jay Street-MetroTech due to electrical and substation work at Jay Street-MetroTech.

From 10 p.m. Friday, February 17 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, Queens-bound F trains run via the M line from 47th-50th Sts. to Queens Plaza due to station work at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street for the Second Avenue Subway Project.

From 4 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 10 p.m. Monday, February 20, Queens-bound J trains skip Kosciuszko Street, Gates Avenue, Halsey Street and Chauncey Street, due to track panel installation at Halsey Street and Gates Avenue.

From 7 a.m. to 9 p.m., Saturday, February 18, from 9:30 a.m. to 7 p.m., Sunday, February 19, and from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday, February 20, some downtown N trains terminate at 34th Street-Herald Square skipping 49th Street due to track panel installation and CBTC work south of Queensboro Plaza, ADA work at Court Square and station renewal at Hunters Point Avenue.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, N trains stop at DeKalb Avenue in both directions all weekend due to track work at Atlantic Avenue.

From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, February 18 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, February 21, there is no Q train service between 57th Street-7th Avenue and Prospect Park due to track replacement at Atlantic Avenue. Customers may take the N or R between 57th Street-7th Avenue and Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street. Free shuttle buses are available between Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street and Prospect Park.

(42nd Street Shuttle)
From 12:01 a.m. to 6 a.m. Saturday, February 18, Sunday, February 19, Monday, February 20 and Tuesday, February 21, the 42nd Street shuttle operates overnight due to the 7 line suspension between Queens and Manhattan.

February 18, 2012 8 comments

MTA Construction

Transit: West Side IRT FASTRACK a ‘success’

by Benjamin Kabak February 17, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 17, 2012

Maintenance workers conduct a track and signal inspection during this week’s FASTRACK shut down. (Photo via MTA)

After four nights of work along the West Side IRT line, Transit has called the latest FASTRACK treatment “a success.” In a statement released this afternoon, the authority said that, after two lines have been fastracked, “it remains clear that the FASTRACK program is both a safer and more efficient way to maintain and clean a 24/7 subway system.”

“Looking at what we have accomplished during our first two rounds of FASTRACK,” New York City Transit President Thomas Prendergast said, “makes me even more enthusiastic about this new way of conducting business. Workers can now perform tasks without being interrupted by passing trains and we are able to get to areas that would not be possible under normal train traffic. One of the more visible things we are able to accomplish is the scraping and painting of station ceilings, something that cannot be done when trains are running.”

During this week’s shutdown, 800 workers completed more than 400 tasks. Had trains been running, this work would have taken months, Transit said. The following is a glimpse of the work completed:

15,000 bags of rubbish removed;
17,000 pounds of scrap material removed;
Muck and mud scraped from 19,000 feet of concrete roadbed;
2,500 light bulbs changed in subway tunnels and station platforms;
Several stations received spot painting and the ceilings of others, including Nevins Street, were scraped and painted;
Station drains cleaned;
Maintenance and inspection of eight elevators and three escalators performed at Chambers Street, Clark Street and Borough Hall;
Serviced and inspected smoke detectors and alarms;
Serviced 17 track switches, 53 signals;
Repaired 315 feet of platform edge and;
Cleaned and tested 34 CCTV cameras and 20 monitors.

“Prior to FASTRACK,” Carmen Bianco, Transit’s senior vice president for subways, said, “workers would have to pick up their tools make certain the area was safe and then move out of the way every time a train moved through. Now, workers can continue performing their tasks in an uninterrupted manner.”

Despite the praise and the recognition that decades of deferred maintenance has ultimately left the MTA with few viable alternatives for performing this work, I still have a nagging feeling that this is a service cut wrapped in an efficiency program. While FASTRACK impacts only sections of lines with nearby alternatives, it still represents less overnight service. As Transit prepares to continue this program through at least the end of 2012, riders will have to get used to these types of outages.

The next FASTRACK closure will impact the Sixth Ave. lines from Feb. 27-March 2. The Eighth Ave. lines were get their own treatment from March 12-16.

February 17, 2012 38 comments

Asides MTA Absurdity

For $650, bring a subway bench home

by Benjamin Kabak February 17, 2012

written by Benjamin Kabak on February 17, 2012

Now that the MTA has made public its plans to replace its wooden station benches with metal ones, the authority must also figure out how best to dispose of the old wooden ones. As these benches will be considered surplus materials, they will, reports The Daily News, be available for sale for $650 each. “Get set to enjoy the ambiance of the New York City transit system,” Mike Zacchea, Transit’s assistant chief operations officer, said.

According to Zacchea, the MTA has pursued this path with its benches in the past. A few years ago, when the authority replaced some of the more weather-beaten wooden seats, they sold them for around $600 each, and this time around, these will be priced at $650, bed bugs not included. “They’re sort of iconic,” Zacchea said. “They’ve been around a long time. They’re massive. I can see them sitting in a back yard being weathered for a couple more years and serving as a conversation piece.”

If any of you plan to buy one, please take a photo of this “iconic” bench at its new home. I’d love to see how an interior decorator approaches this one.

February 17, 2012 9 comments

Load More Posts