Rolling Stock

Photo: Early glimpse at an R188 car?

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 20, 2012

Is this an early glimpse at the cars delivered as part of contract R188? (Photo via Wikipedia)

The Internets were all abuzz today with word that the first of the R188s hit the Corona Yards last night with more to follow. The cars aren’t yet ready for revenue service, but they are sitting out in the open for shutterbugs to snap. Reportedly, the photo above from Wikipedia is the first glimpse we’ve had of the new order of rolling stock.

The R188 order is a strange one. The MTA is purchasing only a limited number of new cars while they’re converting a bunch of R142As into CBTC-ready sets. What you’re seeing here is a converted R142A. The new cars aren’t yet ready for delivery, and the 7 line isn’t yet ready for CBTC either.

13 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Manhattan

Idea: The L train to the United Nations

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 20, 2012

One architect has a plan to send the L train to the United Nations. (Via nybydzine. Click to enlarge)

Via DNAInfo, here’s a fun one for a Friday afternoon: Architect David Wright, while dreaming up plans for future subway expansions, has proposed sending the L train to the United Nations via Hudson Yards. It’s an ambitious plan that carries with it numerous engineering and operational challenges along with astronomical costs, but it’s an entertain one to ponder nonetheless.

Here’s his explanation:

Suppose that L to 7 Hudson Yards Extension actually happens. The platforms are offset so the L Train could eventually extend east to Penn Station and directly connect to Grand Central Terminal.

From there, there’s a very convenient connection with the 2nd Avenue Subway and First Avenue – UN Plaza. Add in a new Herald Square L Train Station, and 3 of the busiest transit hubs become connected. There isn’t a 34th Street tunneling conflict since Penn RR lines are under 32nd & 33rd Streets.

Maybe this becomes a reversed “C” shaped SAS revised route. It would include a Harlem Crosstown extension connecting west to the 1 Train. This would greatly improve horrible bus traffic on 125th Street and provide connections with all existing subway lines across Harlem…And maybe this Crosstown L just heads north up 2nd Avenue and west across Harlem and we’re done!

A few days ago, Michael Horodniceanu, president of MTA Capital Construction, spoke vaguely of extending the 7 train if the popular will and political muscle is in place to do so. Wright’s plan, a dream more than anything else, certainly could capture public imagination. It’s thinking big, and I like thinking big.

70 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
WMATA

Giving up a stop at the airport to streamline travel

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 20, 2012

One WMATA board member isn't sold on a Silver Line station stop at Dulles. (Image via The Transport Politic)

If New York had its druthers, public transportation to its airports would be more direct than it is today. Right now, existing transit connections serve to get air travelers almost to their destinations. Instead of direct service, the trip to Newark or JFK Airports involves a two-seat ride with an automated people-mover that delivers travelers from one train station to a terminal. Of course, a subway to JFK’s door would still involve travel from a train station to the terminal, but as London’s Piccadilly Line shows, it’s not an impossible way to travel.

Down in the Washington, D.C. area, the WMATA is finally rectifying a grave oversight of travel. They are amidst work on a multi-billion extension of the Metro that will finally, mercifully bring subway service to Dulles Airport. By New York standards, this so-called Silver Line seems downright cheap, mostly because it involves a good amount of at-grade construction. The final project will bring 23 miles of track and 11 new stations to the area for under $7 billion. Jealous yet?

Still, one Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority board member isn’t satisfied. To save $70 million — or a little over 1 percent of the project’s total cost — Bob Brown proposed eliminating the Dulles stop, straightening out the alignment and constructing a people mover from the nearest station to the airport. “In my view this would be superior transportation service for our passengers,” Brown said.

Other WMATA board members were quick to shoot down the plan. “This is a creative idea,” Mame Reiley said, “but it’s not rail to Dulles. Fifteen years ago I might have been supportive, but I just don’t think that’s what we labored for is not to have rail to Dulles.”

That’s a rather singular vision put forward by Reiley. They’re not going to change their minds after 15 years of planning, and Greater Greater Washington issued a similar appeal. “Cutting so many corners that you don’t achieve your goal is not cost savings, it’s failure. Far from saving $70 million, by failing to provide Metro service to Dulles Airport Brown’s proposal would actually waste billions,” Dan Malouff wrote. He concluded: “The absolute minimum requirement for a Metro line to Dulles Airport must be that it actually reaches Dulles Airport. Period.”

I’m often skeptical of any argument that must be emphasized with a superfluous “period,” and another piece I read on the issue seemed to bare that out. Yonah Freemark ponders whether or not an airport line must actually service an airport. It may be perfectly acceptable and more beneficial for all riders if the airport line does what New York’s does. That is, if the train to the plane takes you to a people-mover that can better service airport terminals, everyone might come ahead.

After running some numbers, Freemark finds that total travel time from Route 28 — the station from which a Dulles people-mover would depart — to the airport isn’t significantly different if the WMATA goes with a station stop at Dulles or an airport connector. The difference, he notes, is in perceived convenience. It’s viewed as inconvenient for someone laden with bags and stressing to catch a flight to switch to yet another mode of transit. No one wants a two-seat ride; everyone craves a one-seat trip.

Ultimately, the people-mover proposal is a non-starter. It could streamline rides for folks traveling on the so-called Phase 2 of the Silver Line that connects parts north and west of the airport with the rest of the Metro system, but after years of fighting it out, the WMATA isn’t about to give up the airport station for an effort now called Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project. It might just be worth it though for everyone involved.

35 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesTWU

Report: TWU calls off negotiations, for now

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 19, 2012

The Transport Workers Union Local 100 has pulled out of talks with the MTA over claims that that the authority is attempting to negotiate through the media, according to reports. After an article appeared in today’s Daily News charting the MTA’s demands in light of the union’s request for a raise, TWU President John Samuelsen said he would banter through the press. “You had bus operators, track workers, signal maintainers, reading the newspaper today, with a better grasp of what the MTA was going to do with the negotiation committee of the union than the leadership of the union,” he said, “and that’s an outrage.”

According to The Daily News, the MTA appeared willing to budge on the union’s request for a one-percent raise this year and next, but its demands were high. The MTA had wanted to change overtime rules to kick in after a 40-hour work week rather than an eight-hour work day and had planned to demand part-time bus drivers, less vacation time and revised health care plans. Raises too will come with other work rule changes as well.

For its part, the MTA denied negotiating through the press, and TWU leaders said they would be willing to resume talks eventually. For now, we wait.

18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesSecond Avenue Subway

Report: Despite SAS blasting, UES air quality safe

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 19, 2012

Despite constant blasting and an increase in dust particles, Second Ave. Subway construction has not led to an unsafe level of air pollutants on the Upper East Side, a study released today by the MTA claims. The report, prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff, reviewed by the EPA and available right here, was conducted over a four-week period this fall. It found that pollutants were below nationally acceptable air quality standards and that spikes in pollutant levels coincided with increased automobile traffic and not blasting frequency.

“Based on the results of the study, there are no concerns that Second Avenue Subway construction is causing any danger to the public’s health,” MTA Capital Construction President Michael Horodniceanu said in a statement. “We will continue to do everything we can to be a good neighbor as we complete this critically important project as quickly as possible.”

I can’t speak to the validity of the findings, but it seems that residents are skeptical. Some have noted that Parsons Brinckerhoff is an MTA contractor while others are complaining about smoke from blasting in addition to dust particles and debris. With station work expected to begin at 86th St. this year, these complaints will not cease. Just 59 more months to go.

8 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MetroCard

Transit Designs: A better MetroCard machine display

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 19, 2012

The MetroCard Vending Machines offer refills in even dollar amounts but not in rides.

Earlier this year, an enterprising if law-breaking New Yorker made headlines when he claimed to make $20,000 off of discarded MetroCards. The first part of John Jones’ scheme is perfectly legal; the second part is not. Either way, the story, in a roundabout way, highlights a problem I’ve had with the MTA’s MetroCard Vending Machines.

In a nutshell, Jones took to the extreme what many of us do on a whim. He collects every discarded MetroCard he can find, and generally, many of them have odd amounts of cash left. Since the new $2.25 base fare went into effect with bonuses set to seven percent on purchases of $10 and above, straphangers in a rush don’t wait to work out the proper discount. They’ll fill up their cards with $20, receive an extra $1.40 and call it a day. When the card runs low, those who are unaware that they can refill it or simply do not care will discard the leftover change.

Jones collects those cards and combines them — a perfectly legal maneuver — and then he tries to sell them to those in need of a quick fare card. That’s the shady part, and it’s against the law. He’s been arrested a few times, but that hasn’t deterred him. “I’m surprised that people just toss money away,” he said to The Post.

I don’t condone Jones’ third step, but I know plenty of people who are aggressive in their pursuits of discarded fare cards. One SubChatter collected over $520 last year in unused MetroCards, and the MTA itself claims around $50-$60 million annually in unused cards. It’s not a problem so much as it is a fact of life. We lose things; we forget how much we had on our MetroCards; we leave the city, never to return, with an unused MetroCard tucked into a drawer somewhere.

The bigger issue though is one of design. As the screenshot atop this post — from days bygone — shows, the MetroCard Vending Machines aren’t programmed to be too user-friendly. When we refill our fare cards, we’re not buying rides. Rather, we’re just sticking cash on a card with a magnetic strip. There never has been an attempt to associate rides with the amount we’re paying. Instead of pre-selecting a card with a certain number of swipes on it, you have to know ahead of time that adding $39.95 to an empty card will get you, with the bonus, $42.75 or 19 rides even.

The MTA has no incentive to offer such a user-friendly interface because then cards will zero out more often. Maybe when or if the authority finally gets around to implementing that $1 surcharge on new cards in 2013, straphangers will become more aware of their leftover dimes and nickels. For now, though, the math-minded among us will know what to do while the rest of us can use bonus calculators or just keep slapping on $20 until the fare evens out. We discard pennies with little notice. What’s a few more cents on an nearly empty MetroCard anyway?

32 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesQueens

Cuomo: MTA ‘working on additional transit applications’ for Ozone Park

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 18, 2012

As Gov. Andrew Cuomo embarks on an extensive press tour to promote his plan to bring a privately-funded convention center to the Ozone Park area, reporters have asked him about the transit implications of such a plan. As I’ve mentioned in the past, the proposed area out near the Aqueduct and JFK Airport, isn’t particularly transit-accessible with only sporadic A train service and a nearby AirTrain. That isn’t stopping the governor though from eying the spot — and the $4 billion in private funds that come with it — optimistically.

Speaking with reporters earlier today, Cuomo said in a reponse to a question on mass transit, “The MTA is working on additional transit applications.” He touted the fact that Genting will pay for the construction of the convention center and will carry the costs of some transportation-related aspects of the project as well.

Admittedly, it’s still early in this process, but early is when key decisions are made. The MTA, governor and Genting must be as transparent and inclusive as possible in this process. A successful convention center will incorporate increased transit access without taking frequency away from popular stops further down the line, and the MTA should not be expected to cover the operating costs of increased service or the capital costs of building out a rail extension or new station stops. Now is the time for these concerns to see the light of day and not when the shovels are entering the ground.

46 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
PANYNJ

Calatrava’s $3.4 billion hub slowing down WTC progress

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 18, 2012

A $3.4 billion PATH station will serve as a symbol for poor infrastructure investment strategies.

Back in early October, when opined on the way we spend transportation dollars in New York City, I railed against the $3.4 billion price tag attached to the Calatrava-designed PATH hub at the World Trade Center. In the comments to that piece, Charles Komanoff urged me to find a cost breakdown of the design elements, and that week, I submitted a FOIA request to the Port Authority for that information. If we knew just how much the Port Authority is spending on design, we would have a better platform from which to view the project.

It’s now mid-January, and I’m still waiting on those numbers. I’ve heard from the PA a few times. First, they promised me my documents in November, then in December and now next week. It can’t be that hard to drum up an outline of the dollars being spent on construction of the steel porcupine vs. the dollars spent on improving passenger flow and transit capacity. But apparently, those aren’t figures the PA is too keen on releasing.

Today, in The Wall Street Journal, Eliot Brown provides us with a glimpse into the inner workings of the construction at the World Trade Center site, and it seems that the steel demands for Calatrava hub are slowing down the works and causing costs to spike. He reports:

Long beset by delays and cost overruns, construction at the World Trade Center site faces another potential snag: the financial struggles of the company responsible for erecting the massive steel skeletons of two towers and a $3.4 billion transportation hub. For months, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has been quietly advancing money to the contractor responsible for fabricating and putting up steel for the projects, which include One World Trade Center, according to people familiar with the matter.

The company, DCM Erectors, has more than $700 million worth of steel contracts at the site. The firm has told the Port Authority that it is facing cash-flow problems in part because of the project’s complexity, and also because of the amount of time it takes for the agency to approve extra costs…

The company’s troubles speak to some of the larger problems with the site’s redevelopment, which is running billions of dollars over original budget projections. The transportation hub alone has a price tag of $3.4 billion, up from an expected $2 billion in 2007. DCM’s woes stem largely from the station, which features giant steel arches that soar over a large train hall, and the 1,776-foot-tall One World Trade Center.

According to The Journal, DCM apparently “underestimated costs,” which goes without saying considering how the cost of the hub is up 70 percent over initial estimates and could climb even higher.

At this point in the process, no one will stop the Calatrava Hub or save the money. This is, however, a severely misguided project that is flushing transportation dollars down the drain. Between the Calatrava Hub and the Fulton Street Transit Center, various government agencies will have spent nearly $5 billion to deliver litle in the way of transportation capacity improvements. For that money, the feds could have guaranteed ARC Tunnel overruns or built another section and a half of the Second Ave. Subway. Misguided priorities indeed.

33 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

In Governor’s budget, MTA bucks safe for now

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 18, 2012

Gov. Andrew Cuomo released a sweeping budget yesterday afternoon that is aimed at shoring up the state’s shaky finances. The big-picture items do not concern us here, but on the transit front, Cuomo has so far delivered as promised. After cuts to the Payroll Mobility Tax last year, he has proposed to make the MTA whole for 2012 and will not yet raid the transit piggy banks. Despite this pledge of dollars, the MTA though will still face a deficit of $35 million this year.

“Because of the tough choices and the historic reforms we achieved last year, we are able to propose a pro-growth budget, tackle broad fiscal reform, drive accountability in our schools to put students first, and leverage tens of billions of dollars of new investment to create jobs without significant cost to the taxpayer,” the Governor said in a statement. “Through fiscal discipline and working in partnership with the private sector, we are making New York a pro-growth State once again. This budget represents the next step in our plan to transform New York State.”

In the Governor’s proposal are a few line items for the MTA. First, the authority will receive $250 million from the state to replace dollars lost to the payroll tax repeal. Eventually, the partial repeal will cost the authority $310 million a year, but because the repeal doesn’t go into effect until mid-2012, the state need only pay over $250 million this year. The future for out-year payments, upon which the MTA had been relying to avoid deficits in the range of hundreds of millions of dollars, remains hazy.

Next the state will contribute an additional $190 million to the MTA, money that had already been factored into the authority’s budget. That isn’t money, as some transit advocates suggested earlier in the day, that came as a surprise to the MTA, and the MTA, unfortunately, cannot use it to restore service cut in 2012.

Finally, the state granted the MTA over $700 million in capital funding and raised the authority’s debt limit by $7 billion. So now the MTA can proceed with securing the necessary revenue flow for the remainder of its capital plan. As Streetsblog noted, this last item is a big one. The MTA has now seen its debt cap increase by $13 billion over the past few years, and at some point, the debt payments are going to come due. It’s fine to build Second Ave. on the backs of revenue-supported bonds, but we will pay tomorrow and for years to come for the remainder of the capital plan.

In a statement, the MTA thanked the governor: “MTA greatly appreciates the Governor’s continued support. When the payroll mobility tax was cut in December, the Governor committed to holding the MTA harmless. He followed through on this commitment by increasing direct aid to the MTA in the 2013 Executive Budget. The Multi-Year Financial Plan contained in the Executive Budget also indicates that MTA will continue to be made whole for the next three fiscal years. In addition, the Executive Budget also includes $770 million in capital funds and an increase in the statutory bond cap that are both critical to the funding plan for the 2010-2014 MTA Capital Program.”

That, of course, is just a part of the charade of the budgeting process. When the state finds itself a few hundred million dollars short come November and December, we’ll see how well those funds supposedly dedicated to and earmarked for the MTA hold up. That $35 million deficit won’t shrink on its own, but we’ll have to rely on Albany to keep from growing ever so quickly.

6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Construction

Horodniceanu: Expansion possible with popular, political will

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 17, 2012

Every week, GE releases an online-only magazine called Txchnologist, focusing on the intersection among science, technology and infrastructure. In this week issue’s, reporter Matthew Van Dusen sat down for a talk with MTA Capital Construction President Michael Horodniceanu, and the good doctor’s responses to Van Dusen’s questions provide some interesting fodder for thoughts on the MTA’s future. Take a read:

Txch: What happens if Second Avenue isn’t completed?

MH: It will be a train that starts at 96th and services the East Side between 96th and 63rd streets. It resolves some of the issues that existed on the Upper East Side. I think that, to go further north would be easy. We have tail tracks that go all the way to 105th street. Then we have a five-block gap. Then from 110th to 120th streets we have a tunnel. If you build a station at 105th to 110th streets you now will have another station. So you can come from 110th Street all the way down. We will also provide the ability to go south from 63rd street.

It’s going to be the political will, the people’s will. The same way that No. 7 could go further south. Right now it stops at 34th but we have tail tracks down to 26th street. There are opportunities to expand the system to make it better. It’s just a matter of people’s desire to do that.

While the initial cost projections for Phase 2 of SAS aren’t much less than the Phase 1 price tag, I’ve long believed Phase 2 will happen. There’s simply too much preexisting infrastructure to forego this opportunity, and the need is too great. South of 63rd St. is another question though as the MTA would have to forge ahead through some very densely populated areas of Manhattan. Money, of course, remains an issue.

The more intriguing statement here though concerns the 7 line. Will the 7 line head to New Jersey? Will it loop over to Chelsea Piers or 14th St. to offer some sort of connection with the L? In the realm of the possible, the new extension is built to provide that hope for future. That discussion though should involve finding money for a station at 41st St. and 10th Ave. as well.

Anyway, check out the rest of the short piece. Horodniceanu talks about working with the community and how underappreciated the MTA’s services are in New York City. Unfortunately, the interviewer didn’t ask about onerous work rules that cause a spike in construction prices in the city, and until that part of the equation is reduced, these future projects will just remain good ideas that live on paper.

19 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts