Subway Cell Service

The next 25 stations to enjoy cell service are…

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 29, 2011

As New Yorkers adjust to life in this new era of underground cell service, Transit Wireless is moving ahead with plans to equip the entire system within the next four years. That would allow New Yorkers — or at least those with AT&T and T-Mobile – to enjoy underground signals before Phase 1 of the Second Ave. Subway opens. Both of these projects are just, uh, zooming by.

Anyway, with the announcement of the six-station pilot earlier this week, Transit Wireless and the MTA said that 30-50 more Manhattan stations would be equipped with cell service within the next 12 months. Among those will be Times Square, Columbus Circle and Herald Square. Now, we learn what some of the remaining ones are. Drumroll please….

96th Street (1, 2, 3)
96th Street (B, C)
86th Street (1)
86th Street (B, C)
79th Street (1)
81 Street (B, C)
72nd Street (1, 2, 3)
72nd Street (B, C)
66th Street (1)
59th Street/Columbus Circle (1, A, C, B, D)
Fifth Avenue and 59th Street (N, R, Q)
57th Street (N, R, Q)
7th Av (E, B, D)
57th Street (F)
50th Street (C, E)
50th Street (1)
49th Street (N, R, Q)
47th-50th Streets/Rockefeller Center (B, D, F, M)
42nd Street/Times Square (1, 2, 3; A, C, E; N, R, Q)
34th Street/Herald Square (B, D, F, M; N, R, Q)
28th Street (1)
28th Street (N, R)
23rd Street (1)
23rd Street (N, R)
18th Street (1)

Unsurprisingly, these list of 25 features stations all in Manhattan and all south of 96th Street. That’s where the system’s more crowded stations are and where the call volume is likely to be highest. If implementation is successful there, it should be far easier elsewhere. I’m still working on finding the remaining 25.

And so as cell phone service begins to inch its way across the subway, I have to wonder what will happen first: underground mobile service for all or the opening of Phase 1 of the Second Ave. Subway? Transit Wireless says they’ll win the race, but with the MTA and its adventures in technology, anything can happen.

17 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesPANYNJ

Times: Ward set to leave PA post

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 29, 2011

Over the next few weeks, Gov. Andrew Cuomo will have an opportunity to make a long and lasting impact on the New York City region’s transportation future for a week after Jay Walder is leaving the MTA, Chris Ward will resign as the Port Authority’s Executive Director, according to a report in The Times. Ward’s departure comes after months of speculation and seems to stem, as Walder’s did, in part, from a similarly icy relationship with the New York state governor. Neither Ward nor Cuomo offered a comment to The Times.

For the Governor, then, the challenge facing him is a tough one. As Michael Grynbaum writes, Ward earned accolades from the transit community. “Under his tenure,” he says, “the Port Authority froze its operating budget for three consecutive years, lowered its number of employees and reduced its budget for major capital improvement and maintenance projects.” Yet, similarly to Walder, Ward has also presided over some steep fare and toll increases and progress at the World Trade Center site, while moving forward, is very slow.

Despite this legacy though, Ward had, as Kate Slevin from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign noted, a “very strong and convincing case for more investment in our infrastructure,” and Cuomo will now have to find not one but two people who are both qualified and willing enough to enter the New York City area transportation morass. It will not be an easy task.

7 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Thoughts on Walder’s last dance

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 29, 2011

Wednesday morning marked the beginning of the end for Jay Walder, the outgoing Chairman and CEO of the MTA. Yesterday, the Hong Kong-bound transit expert presided over his final MTA Board meeting, and the last part of the meeting was a veritable love-fest. Walder’s fellow board members all wished him luck in his future endeavors, and nearly all of them praised his leadership. I couldn’t help but feel that the kind words were premature.

The praise came fast and easy. “You are the best transportation operator on the planet,” Mark Lebow said. Patrick Foye echoed that praise: “At a time when public and private sector is in retrenchment, you were able to develop new initiatives that made a significant impact on the public and community.” Charles Moerdler, a fairly recent MTA appointee, praised Walder for his willingness to respond to complaints about service in his home borough of the Bronx.

The lone dissenting voice came from Norman Brown. The holdover appointee who is a strong friend of labor rightly criticized Walder for both leaving too soon and creating a strong sense of conflict between management and the authority’s labor forces. Walder, said Brown, isn’t through with the job, but he’s leaving nonetheless.

Walder himself deflected certain questions surrounding his departure. He insisted that he has a good relationship with Gov. Andrew Cuomo despite unsourced reports to the contrary, and he said that the lure of the job in Hong Kong pushed him to take it. He also spoke about any potential predecssor. “Whoever runs this organization should be dedicated to the organization,” he said. That person has to be “edicated to what it does on a day-to-day basis. I think it is helpful to have a knowledge of mass transit. I don’t know that it’s an absolutely essential quality.”

These statements seemed to be echoing sentiments from the Governor himself. “To me,” Cuomo said to Transportation Nation, “the management is very important. Of course, the technical expertise, but you give me a good manager, who can run an organization, and find efficiency, that this organization is going to have to find, that’s going to be paramount.” It sounds as though the governor wants someone who is at least as strong on leadership and creative management as they are on transit planning. That does not bode well for the TWU.

But the real question surrounding Walder’s departure is one of public effectiveness. During the meeting yesterday, one of the MTA Board members — I didn’t see who — issued some high praise: “You have left this place much better than when you came in.” That statement raised my eyebrow. I don’t disagree with it, but I’m not sure the public agrees.

The MTA’s problem right now is one of external perception vs. internal reality. During Walder’s two-year tenure, the MTA has streamlined a significant portion of its operations, and it has come to embrace technological innovations while moving stalled projects forward. It’s budget is leaner than it was half a decade ago, and the agency has programs in place to realize more savings. Anyone looking at it from the inside will see improvements.

Yet, to Joe and Jane Straphanger — the folks who just want their trains to come frequently, run smoothly and have seats for them — the system isn’t really better off. Headways are longer; the bus network is becoming less reliable and convenient; the subways cost more and trains are more crowded. We’re paying more and waiting longer for less service. Does that mean the MTA is better off today than it was before Jay Walder showed up? Publicly, at least, that’s a tough argument to make.

The next MTA head, whoever that may be, has his or her work cut out for them. That person will have to address a combative union, an obstinate legislature and a gaping hole in the capital budget. He or she will have to deal with rising debt costs and the desire to move the system forward. For the public, at least, “better off” might be slipping further out of hand, and the next MTA CEO will have some mighty high expectations to live up to.

18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Arts for Transit

Zoetrope of the Day: Union Square in Motion

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 28, 2011

Union Square in Motion is the world's largest digital linear zoetrope (Photo via Joshua Spodek)

I wonder how many transit systems can say they are home to two life-sized zoetropes. While Manhattan-bound riders on the B and Q have long spied the Masstransiscope just east of the Manhattan Bridge, straphangers passing through Union Square can now marvel at the world’s largest digital linear zoetrope.

As part of a temporary Arts for Transit installation, the MTA along with a professor from Parsons the New School of Design and his students unveiled “Union Square in Motion” earlier this week. Consisting of abstract and organic images, the scenes move as subway riders walk past the display. The installation is similar to a project designer Joshua Spodek and his team installed in Bryant Park last year.

“When you see two strangers stop to look then start talking to each other, amazed at the art they’re seeing in the subway, you realize what art can do to create community and draw people together,” Spodek said.

The display is current housed in a temporarily vacant retail space outside of the fare control area and below the Food Emporium along 14th Street east of Fourth Avenue. “These works of art will be shown in series, so subway riders will get a fresh visual treat each time they walk through the station,” Lester Burg, Program Manager for MTA Arts for Transit, explained. For more on the project, check out Spodek’s website. I’ve embedded a behind-the-scenes video of the installation process after the jump.

Continue Reading
12 comments
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Metro-North

Port Jervis Line repairs to total $50 million

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 28, 2011

Twisted rails and eroded track beds mark the Port Jervis line. Photo by Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Hilary Ring.

The restoration of the MTA’s little-used Port Jervis Line in the aftermath of damage inflicted upon it by Hurricane Irene will cost the cash-strapped agency $50 million, Metro-North said earlier this week. Furthermore, the railroad does not anticipate returning to a full timetable until the Fall of 2012, over a year after the storm.

“We are committed to restoring the Port Jervis Line as quickly as possible. It is an important part of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s regional network,” MRN President Howard Permut said earlier this week. “In the meantime, Metro-North has marshaled the resources of MTA Bus to provide alternative service during reconstruction and Metro-North forces are building access roads to the tracks to literally lay the groundwork for the outside contractor.”

According to initial engineering assessments, approximately 90 percent of the repair work will involve replacing stones and trackbed washed away over a 14-mile stretch from Suffern to Harriman. In the aftermath of the flooding, over 50 washouts destroyed over two miles of the MTA’s right-of-way. The remainder of the work will involved repairs to the signal system.

As Metro-North said, “Water infiltration and erosion of the right-of-way have undermined circuit houses, signal cases and associated battery wells. In many areas, signal and fiber optic cables have been exposed and must be reburied and tested.” All told, the MTA is trying to restore service between Harriman and Suffern first before implementing repairs that will usher a return to the old timetable.

With a lofty pricetag and low ridership — only 2800 people per day use the Port Jervis line — many have wondered if this expenditure is a good use of MTA funds. Between the busing service and repairs, the total bill will top $60 million, and while the authority believes FEMA and insurance will cover some of the costs, they’ll have to foot part of the bill out of their dwindling cash reserves. As I said a few weeks ago, will the MTA take advantage of an opportunity or just throw money at a lesser-used commuter line?

21 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
New York City TransitService Cuts

Assessing the impact of the 2010 service changes

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 28, 2011

When the MTA announced its sweeping subway service changes last year, the news was, by and large, bad for straphangers. With the V and W chopped, the G train scaled back and load guidelines adjusted to allow for less frequent service, I assumed that most subway riders would feel the pain of the service cuts. The only winners would be those folks from the Middle Village area who could enjoy a one-seat ride into Midtown on the rerouted M train.

Over a year later, the MTA has unveiled its findings on the impact of the service cuts, and the claims are fairly sweeping. First, as I’ve noted in the past, bus ridership has suffered the most. In the wake of the cuts, it’s down across every borough. In fact, subway ridership increased in the year following the cuts by approximately 0.3 percent, but bus ridership declined significantly. The MTA says the economy, demographics changes and fare hikes may be to blame, but as bus routes have become longer and more circuitous and frequency diminished, ridership will flee for more reliable and speedier routes.

On the subway front, the MTA says that 95 percent of all riders were “unaffected or minimally affected.” That’s a fairly bold claim all things considered, and anecdotally at least, it seems to be one that may be tough to sustain. Particularly during off-peak hours, train waits have been longer and trains more crowded. That combination might not make people head aboveground for expensive cab rides or longer walks, but it certainly makes a commute less pleasant. Subway ridership might increase but begrudgingly so.

The part of Transit’s report concerning the cuts though focused on the M/V switch and the reactivation of the Chrystie Street Cut. I thought the M switch would prove to be quite popular, and the numbers seemed to bear out that intuition. Overall M ridership was up by about five percent from September – November 2010 as compared with the same period the year before, and total ridership along the J/M/Z Middle Village-to-Williamsburg segment was up by over six percent. M trains are now at 86 percent of their load guidelines as compared with 66 percent the year before. Transit believes the increase is due in part to former L train riders opting for a one-seat ride on the M instead. I’d like to know if the M rerouting has increased property value along the one-seat ride.

Meanwhile, the one big sore spot among F train riders hasn’t seen much of a decline. A few vocal East Village and Alphabet City residents bemoaned the lack of a second train at Second Ave., and the station saw a slight dip in passengers. However, at Essex/Delancey, average weekday entries increased by over 4500, more than making up for the 363-person decline at Second Ave. Those closer to Essex/Delancey simply shifted their commute patterns.

With any winner comes a loser, and the Southern Brooklyn lines that no longer enjoyed both the M and R service suffered though. Ridership numbers along 4th Ave. did not decline, but R train loads are now at 69 percent of the guidelines as compared with 48 percent beforehand. Queens Boulevard riders who have to take the 480-foot-long M trains as opposed to the 600-foot-long V trains have noticed some additional crowding as well.

Ultimately, this slate of numbers offers us a peak into the impact of the service changes. The MTA, of course, wants to spin this as positively as possible, but the truth is that we have fewer trains and less frequent service today than we did 16 months ago. These trains aren’t coming back anytime soon, and no matter what the numbers say, New Yorkers as a whole all lose out because of that.

38 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Subway Cell Service

It’s cellmageddon in New York as mobile service heads underground!

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 27, 2011

It is a day of reckoning for New Yorkers who have long enjoyed the quietude, peacefulness and tranquility of the New York City Subway system for today is the day that the dreaded cell service reaches underground. Panic in the subways! Rude conversations! Cell rage! Cats and dogs living together! It’s the end of the world as we know it!

Okay, okay, okay. It’s not going to be that bad, but after reading news coverage of this event, you may be forgiven for thinking so. Everyone from CBS to The Wall Street Journal to The Times is reporting this story as though 200 stations and hundreds of miles of subway tracks aren’t aboveground with cell service. Clyde Haberman, tongue firmly in cheek, even called it the dying gasp of civilization. That honor, I believe, belongs to people who don’t know how to use the volume controls on their iPods, but I digress.

The news is, well, not new. Since 2007, the MTA and Transit Wireless has tried to equip six stations in Chelsea and along 14th Street with cell service, and after stops and starts, the pilot officially went live today at the following stations:

  • A, C, E station at Eighth Avenue and West 14th Street;
  • L station at Eighth Avenue and West 14th Street;
  • C, E station at Eighth Avenue and West 23rd Street;
  • 1, 2, 3 station at Seventh Avenue and West 14th Street;
  • F, M station at Sixth Avenue and West 14th Street;
  • L station at Sixth Avenue and West 14th Street.

The signal, while not strong in the tunnel, reportedly can span stations. Jamie Shupak from NY1 said she had full bars to 34th Street during her ride today.

Transit Wireless had originally said that the pilot would go live in mid-2012, and the MTA praised the company for exceeding expectations. “Bringing wireless service into our subway system is the latest milestone in the MTA’s effort to use technology to improve the service we provide for our customers,” \MTA Chairman and CEO Jay H. Walder said. “Whether you’re checking your email, calling your kids or looking for emergency assistance, wireless service will bring the conveniences we’re used to throughout our lives into the subway system.”

Moving forward, Transit Wireless is aiming to provide service in the remaining 271 underground stations before 2015 is out. The next 30 stations — including Times Square Herald Square and Columbus Circle — will be along the west side of Manhattan, mostly in Midtown, and they should be cell-ready within the next 12 months.

Using fiber nodes and a signal delivery system, Transit Wireless is now providing AT&T and T-Mobile service underground. It is a neutral host, though, and hopes to sign up the remaining wireless carriers soon. Currently, the company and carriers are paying 100 percent of the costs of the project, and that total covers the Transit forces that provide flagging, protection and support services. The MTA will split occupancy fee revenues and sub-licenses. “Transit Wireless has created a win-win-win scenario in the New York City subway system,” Transit Wireless CEO William A. Bayne Jr. said. “Commuters have improved access to communication; the MTA realizes additional revenue and the wireless carriers can provide added value to their customers.”

From a ridership perspective, that’s all good news. The MTA makes money while straphangers now have access to data services and cell capabilities underground. That commute won’t be dead time that may hinder productivity. The news media though has tried to turn this into some apocalypse of rudeness. “I’m planning to be more annoyed on the subway,” Chris Wancura said to The Journal.

Others echoed that complaint. “There was always something about transportation – planes, trains, subways – that no one could get in touch with you. And that was a relief,” Abby Stokes bemoaned. “Now they can.”

From quotes to headlines that suggested cell service is only now arriving in the subway, the coverage looked very Manhattan-centric this week. As a native of the island who now lives in Brooklyn, I’ve seen this battle between the so-called City and so-called Outer Boroughs unfold frequently and from both sides. With transportation policy and improvement stories, though, it creates a problematic dichotomy.

In parts of Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx and Staten Island, cell service has long been a part of the commute. Take the 7 to Flushing and folks are on the phones the entire way. Journey to Coney Island, and cell phone patter is just another sound. Some people hate it; some people tune it out. By and large though, most talkers are polite enough to hold conversations at a respectable volume. The world has not ended as cell phones have invaded.

But now it’s come to Manhattan, the purview of newspapers and journalists who don’t need to cross a river. This type of coverage creates a very us-versus-them atmosphere. It’s why newspapers give only perfunctory coverage of poor intra-borough, non-Manhattan transits options. It’s why people scoff at the pipe dream of a TriboroRX line and why the G train is looked down upon by those who do not ride it very frequently. No one is championing these causes in the pages of the paper that matter because for these papers, it’s about Manhattan first and everything else second. The cohesion of a transit network that spans five boroughs is often missing from that news coverage.

Perhaps I’m being too sensitive. Perhaps reporters are just writing what their readers want to hear. Perhaps cell coverage underground — something that seemed technologically impossible for years — is just that much of a novelty. But now that people on the other end of the phone from those in the subway in Manhattan can hear them now, how about the rest of us?

18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesEast Side Access Project

East Side Access completion date postponed to 2018

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 27, 2011

When the MTA Board gathered for its most recent meeting in July, the authority’s leaders addressed concerns over the East Side Access Project’s rate of progress. With federal officials predicting a 16-month delay, the MTA admitted that it had exhausted its schedule contingency for a variety of reasons. This week, we learn that the authority has officially delayed the project completion date to April 2018, sixteen months later than scheduled. “This is a project facing significant challenges,” MTA CEO and Chair Jay Walder said during subcommittee meetings yesterday.

Ultimately, shaky project management as well as conflicts with Amtrak over the Harold Interlocking has led to these delays, and the news is only going to get worse for LIRR riders. Beginning in October and continuing through 2015, Amtrak is set to replace the track in all four of its East River tunnels after inspections following a May derailment found significant track damage. The work will take place in 55-hour spurts over nearly every weekend until 2015. Tracks will be out of service from 10 p.m. on Fridays through 5 a.m. on Mondays and during some weekday overnight periods. The LIRR says the work will have “little or no impact” on its service, but the work will leave less operating flexibility during the weekends. This tunnel work will delay work on the Harold Interlocking which, in turn, will delay the East Side Access project.

Meanwhile, official recognition of this delay leaves me worried over the fate of the Second Avenue Subway as well. At the same time they predicted this postponement, the Feds also said that SAS was likely headed toward a similar fate. Such a substantial delay along the Upper East Side would be disastrous for the neighborhood and for the MTA politically. Meanwhile, as foreign transit agencies build at a quick rate and for less money, the MTA is stuck with a deep cavern north of Grand Central for upwards of $8 billion and 12 years of construction. That’s a problem.

16 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

MTA eying outside development at 370 Jay St.

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 27, 2011

In a sense, 370 Jay St., the once and former headquarters for the New York City Transit Authority has come to symbolize the MTA’s bureaucratic ineptitude over the past 15 years. Since 1995 when it was first draped in scaffolding, the authority has always had the dream of renovating the building, but it never had the alleged $150 million such a project would cost. As it took out leases in Lower Manhattan, Transit continued to resist calls to sell or develop the building, and it lay empty and shrouded amidst a renaissance in Downtown Brooklyn.

Now, though, with money tight and the capital budget deficit looming large, the MTA has found fiscal responsibility, and Downtown Brooklyn may find a savior for this building. The authority announced today that it will attempt to sell or lease out nine properties throughout New York City including 370 Jay St. It will soon issue requests for proposals for these properties, and although the authority doesn’t anticipate bringing in life-changing revenues, it will be doing something with properties that have long been looked upon as institutional waste by city and state politicians.

“We are fully committed to deriving the maximum value we can from our real estate holdings, and I’m pleased that our thorough review of the properties we own or otherwise control in the City has turned up a number of opportunities,” Jeffrey Rosen, MTA Director of Real Estate, said. “All proceeds help pay for the MTA’s critical Capital Program. While these revenues represent just a very small fraction of the MTA’s capital funding needs, every bit helps.”

In addition to the Jay St. building, the MTA said the following would be put up for bids, and the authority is prepared to lease or sell properties if the price is right. The others include:

  • A vacant parcel adjoining the Gun Hill Bus Depot, at Gun Hill Road and Interstate 95 in the Bronx
  • A triangular parcel at Houston Street and Broadway in Manhattan
  • 351 East 139th Street (between Willis and Alexander Avenues) in the Mott Haven section of the Bronx
  • 707 East 211th Street near White Plains Road and Gun Hill Road in the Bronx
  • A parcel on Van Sinderen Avenue in Brooklyn
  • 851 Avenue I in Midwood, Brooklyn
  • 103-54 99th Street in South Ozone Park, Queens
  • An elongated parcel at Varick Avenue & Johnson Avenue in Bushwick, Brooklyn

Some of these properties, such as the one in Ozone Park, are simply vacant lots that the MTA is looking to develop. Others, such as 851 Avenue I in Brooklyn, are in dead-end locations that won’t be too desirable. A few of them are in front of preexisting structure or inhabit small lots in between larger buildings. It’s unclear just how much revenue the MTA can milk from those areas.

It was Jay Street though that is the most desirable, and it is Jay Street that drew the most attention. “The rest of Downtown Brooklyn has undergone tremendous and transformative growth, yet 370 Jay St. has remained a virtually vacant eyesore. The MTA has recently renovated the property’s adjacent subway station, Jay Street-MetroTech, and now the city can finally move forward with plans to transform 370 Jay St. into a job-creating economic anchor in Downtown Brooklyn, supporting the growth of neighboring Class A tenants and existing academic and cultural institutions,” Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, who has been a long-time critic of the MTA’s decision to let Jay St. lay fallow, said.

Despite the optimism though, real estate experts warned that it might be a tough sell. “It’s a good location, but the building needs a complete renovation, and leasing across all markets is down,” David Noonan of Newmark Knight Frank told The Wall Street Journal. Rough estimates put the building’s worth at around $90 million, a drop in the bucket considering the agency’s $10 billion capital gap.

But the decision to put these buildings up for RFPs is about more than just the dollars. It’s about proving to politicians that they’re making the most out of their current portfolio. It’s about disarming critics who point to real estate holdings as some sort of panacea when the dollars that generate represent one-time infusions of small amounts of cash. It is largely symbolic, but in Downtown Brooklyn, at least, this move could generate waves.

Postscript: Selling the MTA’s air rights

In addition to the decision to put these nine properties on the market, the MTA is exploring some potential air rights deals as well. The MTA is considering allowing development on top of the Michael J. Quill Bus Depot at 41st and Eleventh Ave; the parking garages near the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel; the N train’s Sea Beach Line trench and Bay Ridge Freight Branch; and a pair of rights-of-ways along the LIRR. “We need to address these potential overbuild projects opportunistically as market conditions permit,” Rosen said. As long as such a development doesn’t stunt plans for future transit growth, the market opportunities may yet emerge.

12 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesPANYNJ

Dispatches from New Jersey: Tolls up, driving down

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 26, 2011

When the Port Authority raised its river crossing tolls and PATH fares a few weeks ago, I viewed it as a trial run for a congestion pricing scheme. With such a substantial toll increase, the city would finally see first-hand what impact a significant charge for entering Manhattan would have on both traffic and the public transit infrastructure. According to anecdotal evidence from the first week of travel, the changes have been substantial.

As The Post reports today, “thanks to the hikes, buses are now packed to the gills, NJ Transit and PATH trains are standing-room-only, and dust is gathering in Manhattan parking garages that used to be filled with commuters’ cars.” In its infinite wisdom, The Post makes it seem as though fewer cars entering Manhattan is a negative, and it even has the requisite whine over higher fees. “My wife usually drives over the George Washington Bridge,” one New Jersey resident said. “She carpools now. It’s too expensive to drive by herself.” Can you believe that? She has to carpool.

But the reality is that less traffic and fewer cars is a net positive for the city. I feel for the garage owners who lose business, but I also feel that the city has devoted too much dead space to those garages in the first place. Now, with tolls up, riders are flocking to PATH and finding more efficient and environmentally friendly ways of reaching the city. It’s too early to draw definite conclusions from the fare hikes, but everyone has their price when it comes to ditching a solo car ride into Manhattan.

32 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts