AsidesMTA

Google: ‘MTA’ 2011’s top New York City search term

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 19, 2011

For online information junkies, the annual release of the Google Zeitgeist is a much-anticipated December event. This year, amidst top global searches for Rebecca Black, Fukushima and the iPhone, New Yorkers showed their true dedication to transit as the top three local search terms in NYC all focused around transportation. The MTA emerged as the reason’s clear top search term followed by NJ Transit and HopStop.

For the MTA, it was quite the year. Between hurricanes and snow storms, the authority withstood some tough weather while end-of-year politicking has left the authority looking for more funding sources. Meanwhile, Select Bus Service continued to spread throughout the region, and the abrupt departure of its CEO and Chairman left many fearful for the MTA’s long- and short-term future. I’ll wrap up the year in a few days, but as the Google searches show, for better or worse, the MTA is never far from the minds of the millions of New Yorkers who ride the rails everyday.

1 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

‘If you give a mouse a cookie…’

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 19, 2011

One of my favorite books while a little kid was a simple and clever story by Laura Numeroff called If You Give A Mouse A Cookie. It isn’t some tale of horror about NYC Department of Health inspection grades. Rather, it is a nicely-illustrated tale of a young boy who befriends a mouse by giving him a cookie and the consequences of that cookie. If he has a cookie, the mouse want some milk, and if he has milk, he wants to check the mirror to see if he has a milk mustache, but then he notices he needs a hair cut. And on and on and on.

While this mouse, which went on to spawn numerous other titles in the If You Give a ____ A ____ series, isn’t meant to be some parable for politicians passed on to little kids, the same thing applies. If you give a politician even a tiny slimmer of something he or she wants, she’ll demand the rest until there’s nothing left. Lately, the MTA has become a victim of just such a demand.

Our story begins a few years ago, when Albany approved a controversial package of taxes and fees designed to boost the MTA’s sagging bottom line. Instead of tying in a congestion pricing or bridge tolling plan with transit dollars, the state punted on the more sensible solution for a piece of legislation that included a substantial payroll tax on businesses in the counties served by the MTA. It was immediately unpopular, and numerous Republicans campaigned on a pledge of repeal.

Symbolically this year, the repeal passed the State Senate, but it was DOA in the Assembly. Despite his opposition to congestion pricing, Sheldon Silver knows the MTA needs money, and he wasn’t even going to entertain the idea of a payroll tax repeal. But then Gov. Andrew “I am the government” Cuomo got involved. In a comprehensive tax code overhaul, he jettisoned approximately 20 percent of the revenue from the payroll tax by eliminating the tax on businesses of a certain size. Somehow, he claimed, the MTA would get its money.

“Victory!” proclaimed the usual band of anti-payroll tax voices. As we know, they are cheering on the wrong thing, but they’ll learn the hard way once the MTA must cut services to make up the budget differential. After the initial euphoria of achieving this success wore off, it was time to fight anew. After all, if you give a representative a tax break, he’ll want another one.

And so now we have folks from Orange County issuing dire proclamations. “Not one business should be paying for this tax,” Chester Supervisor Steve Neuhaus, Crawford Supervisor Charles Carnes and Deerpark Supervisor Karl Brabenec all said in a joint statement. “Not one taxpayer should be paying this tax. Unfortunately, until this law goes away completely, they will continue to suffer.”

And we have folks from Hauppauge and Rockland County who want the tax fully repealed. Lee Zeldin, the voice of the repeal movement who has never had a better idea for MTA funding, held a victory rally and pledged to push forward for a full repeal. If you give an inch, someone will try to take a yard.

Of course, the MTA can’t afford to see more money taken away. That’s why the agency is so diligent in its actions and yet so political in its statements concerning state subsidies. As the MTA knows, just as when a bus line is cut so too when a subsidy is cut, it never returns. The state won’t reinstate the payroll tax, and every time it removes money that’s supposed to boost transit, the MTA has to figure out a way to reorganize its budget or cut services or raise fares or all three.

A few voices of reason have tried to reach through the din. One Nassau County writer chided the Governor for failing to identify an adequate alternate revenue source for the MTA before doing away with the payroll tax, and our mayor was even more strident in his critique. “You say, ‘Why should somebody upstate be paying for mass transit in the New York City region?’” he said. “The answer is, I suppose, the city is the economic engine of the state. We export money to other counties. They don’t quite see it that way, but that is in fact the way the funds go, and we’re all in this together.”

Perhaps the Mayor should tell that to his upstate compatriots. They’re too busy, though, asking for a glass of milk now that they’ve had that first bite of the cookie.

19 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Weekend work impacting seven lines

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 17, 2011

A little late with these but not much going on this weekend. Let’s jump right in.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, December 17 to 5 a.m. Monday, December 19, there are no 5 trains between Dyre Avenue and 149th Street-Grand Concourse due to track and finishing work for the East 180th Street Interlocking project. For service between:

  • Dyre Avenue and East 180th Street, customers may use the free shuttle buses.
  • East 180th Street and 149th Street-Grand Concourse, customers may take the 2 train.


From 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Saturday, December 17 and Sunday, December 18, Flushing-bound 7 trains skip 82nd, 90th, 103rd, and 111th Streets due to signal work in the area of Junction Blvd. and 111th Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, December 17 to 5 a.m. Monday, December 19, Bronx-bound D trains operate via the N line from Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue to 36th Street, skipping 53rd and 45th Streets due to station and line structure rehabilitation from 71st Street to Bay 50th Street and ADA work at Bay Parkway.

(Overnight)
From 11 p.m. Saturday, December 17 to 6:45 a.m. Sunday, December 18, Brooklyn-bound F trains run local from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Avenue due to stop cable replacement along the Queens Blvd. Line.


From 4 a.m. Saturday, December 17 to 10 p.m. Sunday, December 18, Queens-bound J trains skip Hewes Street, Lorimer Street and Flushing Avenue due to track panel installation north of Hewes Street.


From 4 a.m. Saturday, December 17 to 10 p.m., Sunday, December 18, M trains run every 24 minutes between Myrtle Avenue and Metropolitan Avenue due to track panel installation north of Hewes Street. (Every 20 minutes overnight.)


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, December 17 to 5 a.m. Monday, December 19, Coney Island-bound N trains run via the D line from 36th Street to Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue due to track panel installation south of 59th Street.

0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

Photo: Vintage buses hitting the M42

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 16, 2011

As the Nostalgia Train continues to make its ride along the M line on Saturdays this month, the MTA unveiled its historic bus rides for the holidays this week as well. Every weekday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., the MTA will run its fleet of vintage buses along the M42 route. Everything, says Transit, is original except for the MetroCard farebox.

“These buses are a piece of New York City’s commuting past,” said Darryl Irick, head of MTA’s bus divisions. “I started my MTA career as a bus operator, driving these types of buses. As charming as they are, you cannot help but realize how far we have advanced when you ride one of our modern, low-floor buses.”

For transit buffs, a chance to ride these old buses comes but once a year. While the MTA rolls out its fleet for the bus fare during the September Atlantic Antic, only in December do these old vehicles run routes in Manhattan. Catch one now before they’re gone again.

5 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesView from Underground

Link: Inside the Transit Museum

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 16, 2011

Some of my earliest memories as a youngster growing up in New York City involve the Transit Museum. Housed at the abandoned Court St. subway station — once a terminus for the IND Fulton St. line and a vague part of some plans for the Second Ave. Subway — the two-track museum features comprehensive exhibits upstairs and a stellar collection of vintage trains below. Now that I’m a grown-up, I can’t run through the trains with wild abandon, but I will be hosting a discussion series at the museum next year.

In today’s Times, the Transit Museum takes center stage. Edward Rothstein reviews the museum through the lens its newest exhibit “ElectriCity: Powering New York’s Rails.” The exhibit, he says, highlights the way subway technology is slow to change: “It is also astonishing how much equipment from the turn of the 20th century was used almost to the century’s end. A wooden ammeter for measuring current was in use from 1900 until the 1980s; the system’s rotary converters that changed alternating current into direct current were used until 1999; a 1932 control board was in service until 1994. How is this possible, given the ordinary pace of technological change?”

I’ve always believed the Transit Museum to be an undiscovered gem in New York’s museum-rich landscape. As a little kid, Brooklyn seemed so exotic to me, but today, it’s a short subway ride and a jump back in time away. If you’ve never been, give yourself a treat and go.

7 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
TWU

Union, MTA square off over work rules changes

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 16, 2011

In just 30 days from now, the current contract between the TWU and the MTA will expire, and while a strike seems rather unlikely, so too does a smooth resolution of the labor situation. The MTA, under Jay Walder, had pledged a net-zero increase in labor costs, and the authority’s long-term budget planning dictates such a result. Union leaders, on the other hand, realize such a commitment means firings or wage freezers for their members. It’s turning out to be quite a stalemate.

One of the key areas of concern for the MTA focuses around workrules. The authority wants more flexibility in defining jobs. There’s no reason why a station cleaner can’t also address routine maintenance concerns, and yet, as Pete Donohue reported yesterday, the TWU is pushing back on these issues. He writes:

The MTA is seeking dozens of work-rule changes it believes will increase productivity and reduce labor costs. Generally, it wants to break down previously negotiated barriers establishing the different pay rates and tasks for job titles like cleaner and station maintainer.

The Transport Workers Union is willing to negotiate reasonable contract changes, Local 100 President John Samuelsen said. Loading more chores on station cleaners may not fit that description, in his view.

“They don’t have enough cleaners in stations to keep them clean right now, which is why there’s a rat problem,” Samuelsen said. “Taking them away from their duties to do something else doesn’t seem to make sense,” he said. “They have the right to bargain over what they want — but that’s not something we’re interested in doing.”

Of course, as president of the union, Samuelsen won’t admit to any concessions in the pages of a major daily newspaper. They are going to come though one way or another.

As Donohue relates, asking cleaners to “change a light bulb or unclog the toilet” is but one in a series of work rule revisions the authority has requested. The management also would like to require bus drivers to help change tires and refuel their vehicles. The MTA wants to eliminate rest periods at terminals following end-to-end subway runs, and they want to cut the full-time staff who must work at least eight hours by 20 percent. These are no small demands.

Right now, negotiations are in the early stages, and both sides are angling for good press. The MTA though simply cannot afford labor increases. After losing out on a few hundred million dollars as state tax revenues fell short and the payroll tax was partially repealed, a labor increase would put further pressure on the authority’s bottom line. Bigger operational issues — such as system-wide OPTO and overtime reform — might have to wait it out as well. What the next thirty days may bring will have an impact on our transit system one way or another.

75 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesNew York City Transit

Transit: Targeted weeknight shutdowns ‘not a replacement for weekend work’

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 15, 2011

Transit is ready to unveil its Fastrack construction schedule. Starting Jan. 9 and continuing through the 13th, the MTA will shutter the Lexington Ave. line from 10 p.m. until 5 a.m. each night between Grand Central and Atlantic Ave. in order to blitz the line with needed repairs. The new plan, announced last month, is designed to save the MTA money while also speeding up improvements that can often drag on for months as crews navigate live third rails and avoid trains in service.

According to numbers released today by Transit, the systemwide weeknight ridership is only approximately 250,000, and the shutdowns — one per Manhattan trunk line per quarter — will affect between 10-15 percent of riders. Those riders are expected to see a 20-minute jump in late-night commute times, and the MTA expects to realize productivity savings of $10-$15 million annually. Transit says, that in order to minimize disruptions to travel patterns, it has targeted lines where “there are substantial subway alternatives have been selected for the overnight shutdowns.”

Meanwhile, the agency stressed again that these weeknight shutdowns are “not a replacement for weekend work.” While workers can target critical maintenance and upgrades during the week, the capital work will continue to lead to massive weekend service changes. The next Fastrack shutdown will occur along the Seventh Ave. line between Penn Station and Atlantic Ave. from February 13-17.

21 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Taxis

Time running out on livery cab bill as Cuomo stalls

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 15, 2011

In a week or so, the ambitious plan to improve transportation options for New Yorkers who live north of 96th St. and outside of Manhattan will expire as it awaits Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s signature. The bill, finally presented the governor earlier this week, has been subjected to a tremendous amount of back-and-forth. Even though it has the support of the state Assembly and Senate, the governor has found ways to criticize it.

As Kathleen Horan summarized for WNYC, the hangup seems to concern accessibility issues. Cuomo claims that stakeholders want more licenses for cabs that are wheelchair-accessible while also noting that no one will buy these expensive vehicles. In reality, the medallion owners are using their lobbying influence to sway the vote.

Horan explains:

Following the summit, Cuomo said “even though government comes with the best of intentions, to redesign a system, there can be unanticipated consequences.” He said one of the main sticking points in the plan to allow livery cars to accept street hails is wheelchair accessibility — and if anyone would purchase accessible permits since the vehicles are more expensive.

“The industry says that nobody is going to buy those permits because it’s not economically feasible. They can’t afford to buy the cars given the revenue. That’s a big hole in the current plan,” Cuomo explained.

He added another key issue to be worked out is how the plan would be enforced. The governor has until next week to veto or sign before the bill before it expires. If he does sign, it’ll likely to be contingent on significant changes to the bill happening through a chapter amendment.

By and large, these are red herrings designed to obscure the fact that medallion owners — and not taxi drivers or residents — are fighting against the bill. They have something to lose while the rest of us have something to gain. The Times urged Cuomo to sign off on the measure yesterday, and I could not agree more.

In other taxi news, check out this great story on what it takes to test drive a taxi. In the heart of Arizona, Nissan engineered have rigged up a course that approximates the bumps, bruises and potholes of New York’s suffering city streets. The Taxi of Tomorrow must be built to withstand the streets of today.

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Brooklyn

From the archives: A history of futility for Utica, Nostrand extension plans

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 15, 2011

It’s been a busy week for me, and I find myself without much strength to write a full post tonight. So let’s dig into the Second Ave. Sagas Wayback Machine and visit a post on a once-planned and still-needed subway extension deep in the heart of Brooklyn…

The proposed Second System subway expansion plans issued in 1929 called for subway lines down Nostrand and Utica Aves.

In the annals of New York City subway history, the Second Ave. Subway carries with it the grand stigma of futility. First proposed in 1920, the SAS went through various iterations, groundbreakings and funding crises before the current construction efforts relaunched in 1995. Barring an economic catastrophe, at least Phase 1 of the Second Ave. line will open before the end of the decade, and the Second Ave. Subway will pass from myth to reality.

Elsewhere, though, other subway expansion plans have languished for nearly as long as the Second Ave. Subway. While none of these plans have as tortured a history as the future T line does, many of them are common-sense system expansions that have been on and off the city’s transit table since the early days of New York’s subway system. Take, for instance, the Marine Park-Sheepshead Bay-Gerritsen Beach area.

Although Brooklyn’s subway service is nearly as comprehensive as Manhattan’s, a glance at the borough map reveals a large gap in service in the southern reaches of eastern Brooklyn. The Marine Park-Sheepshead Bay-Gerritsen Beach triangle is serviced only by the B and Q along Flatbush Ave. to the west and a bunch of local buses. To the north, the Flatbush Ave./Brooklyn College stop serves as a terminal for the 2 and 5 trains, and with Nostrand Ave. running south from that station, that road would serve as the natural starting point for new service.

In fact, that’s long been the dream of city planners, and that final stop on the 2 and 5 wasn’t built as such. Rather, it was supposed to lead into the Nostrand Ave. subway line. Talk of the Nostrand and Utica Ave. subway extensions pop up as early as 1910 when The Times discusses future expansion of the young system into Brooklyn. A century ago, planners anticipated a branch of the subway running out to the ocean, and the IRT awarded its Brooklyn expansion plans in two contracts. Only the first part saw the light of day, and when Flatbush Ave./Brooklyn College opened in 1920, no one knew this station would become the de facto terminal for the IRT.

In 1929, when the city unveiled its ambitious Second System proposal, both Nostrand and Utica Ave. extensions were included. The Nostrand spur would have completed the IRT’s early 1910 plans for subway expansion, and the Utica Ave. route would have been the southern part of the new Williamsburg train lines. A 1939 post-Depression version of the Second System had the Utica Ave. line reaching Floyd Bennett Field.

The 1939 plans for subway service to Floyd Bennett Field.

As we know from the history of the Second Ave. subway, though, a World War interrupted the city’s ambitious expansion plans, and the Nostrand and Utica subway lines were once again shelved for nearly 15 years. As the mid-1950s dawned and the city looked to build the Second Ave. line, so too did it give approval for the Nostrand and Utica Avenue extension plans. The Nostrand spur would again see what we now call the 2 and 5 extended south while the Utica Avenue plans were scaled back. Instead of a new line coming south from Williamsburg, the 1950s plan called for a spur from what is today the end of the 4 line in Brooklyn. The extensions were estimated to cost $82.15 million — or around $656 million in today’s money — and be ready for service by 1960.

A proposed rendering from 1969 of the Utica and Nostrand Avenue subway expansion plans.

But the city’s debt and deferred system maintenance led to a different reality. By 1957, it was clear that the two subway lines in Brooklyn would not see the light of day, and as transportation money went to modernization instead of growth, the plans laid dormant for another ten years. In 1968, the city again approved a massive subway expansion plan that included the Nostrand and Utica Avenue lines, and again, the city’s financial situation would intervene. Over the next three years, the bond request that would fund these expansion plans became a hot political issue. The city and state had no money, and many transit watchers did not believe the price tags for the capital plans were accurate. With Theodore Kheel, a current advocate for free transit, banging the financial drum, voters turned down the transportation bond request, and although another bill would pass a few years later, the Nostrand and Utica Avenue subways died in 1971.

On March 21, 1971, The Times penned a requiem for these plans. City planners thought the Utica Ave. routing would lead to even more overcrowding on the already-stuffed IRT lines and wanted to extend the Canarsie BMT — today’s L train — instead. The price tags for the two projects had reached $350 million in 1971 or $1.8 billion today, and no one believed that estimate to be accurate. These concerns still ring true today, and when Kheel attained his victory in the early 1970s, the Nostrand and Utica Ave. plans would become but another unbuilt relic of the subway system.

Today, the areas that would have enjoyed subway system 80 or 90 years ago are among the more isolated and car-dependent neighborhoods in Brooklyn. While the Second Ave. line, whose fate was seemingly intertwined with the Nostrand and Utica Avenue plans, is now under way, no one is advocating for service in southern Brooklyn even though the city would be better off for it.

13 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesWMATA

Link: DC without Metro a capital parking lot

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 14, 2011

In 1976, the first stations along the WMATA’s Red Line opened, and with it, came a new era of development and mobility for the Nation’s Capital. Today, Metro is expanding outward toward Dulles Airport, and talk of a purple line that would ring around the district, connecting Silver Spring, Bethesda and beyond, bubbles up now and again. But what would happen to the area of there was no mass transit network?

As it argues for better funding, that’s the question one WMATA transportation analyst has tried to answer. As Emily Badger at The Atlantic Cities blog writes, a Capital without its subway system is a strange place indeed. Instead of a centralized downtown area, the region would be choked with traffic, thus leading to more localized economic development. “We looked at that and realized we were watching the economy splinter,” Justin Anthos, the author of the study said. “All of a sudden, we weren’t watching a regional economy function where workers could find jobs in the whole region.”

As 200,000 per day take the Metro into D.C., Antos’ research found that to maintain such commuting levels would require 15 new lanes of freeways and 166 blocks of five-story parking garages. The absurdity of it all, he says, is the point of the investigation. “Part of the study was to put in context the choices that our region faces in the future, which are that we can either continue to protect and expand our transit investment, or we can basically just keep it static, or even let it degrade,” he said. “You can’t just say ‘we chose not to expand.’ There’s some other alternative that you would be forced to live in. And we have to take a gander at what that alternative would be, so we can make informed decisions.” It is a lesson our fair city and its politicians should take to heart as well.

9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts