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

News and Views on New York City Transportation

View from Underground

‘Ooooh that smell. Can’t you smell that smell?’

by Benjamin Kabak September 13, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 13, 2011

If any frequently complaint about the New York City subways holds water, it is the one about the smells. Throughout the city, the subways often smell really bad, and it has become a part of the city’s collective identity. Maybe it shouldn’t be though.

My recent tale of olfactory woe in the subway came last week when I traveled down to the West Village to meet a friend of mine for dinner. I exited the West 4th St. station via the staircase on the downtown-bound platform. That exit is a lonely one. It features a pair of iron maiden turnstiles, no personnel presence even in the good times and a dark staircase that leads to Waverly Place. Back in 2007, the sign at the entrance told straphangers that the F, F and orange Q trains stopped there. It is a lonely, sad station.

Last week, it also had the distinction of smelling strongly like human excrement. As I passed through the turnstile, a strong odor slammed me in the face, and I and my fellow passengers hurried to find some fresh air. With standing water, discarded coffee cups and weeks’ old newspaper littering the floor, it was tough to say when that station had been cleaned. It wasn’t particularly recent.

Were this an isolated incident, I would probably be willing to overlook it, but it’s not. Throughout the city, various stations — some more isolated that others — carry strange smells. Dirty water snakes along tracks, sewage drips down station walls, garbage piles up and odors emanate. Try waiting for a train at the 2nd Ave. stop along the F for more than a few minutes; it’s not a fun experience.

A few years ago, when the MTA had money to clean stations, it wasn’t any better. Gawker published a now-defunct map of subway smells, and straphangers from all over pinpointed the various locations that smelled bad. Maybe it’s the sheer number of homeless people who live in the system; maybe its the groundwater that seeps through shoddily engineered or 80-year-old walls; maybe it’s the blatant disregard for cleanliness that riders have. It’s probably a combination of everything, and as the MTA faces a situation in which discretionary funds are scarce, cleanliness will suffer.

Smells, particularly those in exits and staircases and fare control areas, set the stage for the rest of the system. If someone entering the system encounters the odor of human waste, they will have little incentive to take good care of their portion of the subway. They won’t think twice about adding to the smell or littering. It’s a vicious vicious cycle.

Of course, it all comes back to money: The MTA doesn’t have enough money to inspect and clean the entrances even at stations as popular and centrally located as West 4th. How can they hope to reach little used stations tucked away in the far corners of the five boroughs? Nassau Ave. on the G train smelled nearly as bad this past Saturday.

So we suffer the smells. We plug our noises; we stop breathing; we hurry out of stations. What choice do we have? It’s the price we pay and another sign of a system sliding into disrepair.

September 13, 2011 16 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMetroCard

Tales from a fare-jumping high school student

by Benjamin Kabak September 12, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 12, 2011

Pete Donohue’s weekly column made its appearance in the Daily News today, and it is a thought-provoking one, to say the least. In it, Donohue follows a 17-year-old student who attends high school in Park Slope but lives in a neighborhood far away both physically and socioeconomically, and the main thrust of the column focuses on Alicia’s fare-jumping.

Although Alicia has a Student MetroCard, she says she still jumps the turnstiles as often as possible in order to save up her student rides for non-school-related activities. She told Donohue that she uses the rides to travel elsewhere — to the movies, to visit friends — and she doesn’t worry about a potential summons. “Why would I?” she said. “I know when to hop and where to hop. I know where the police are going to be and when they’re going to be there.”

The 17-year-old has a very them-vs.-us approach to her illegal activities (and her abuse of the Student MetroCard as well). “The cops, the MTA, they’re all going to get paid whether I pay or not, whether I hop or don’t hop. I could put the money I save aside into a college fund or something,” she said. The article, though, is about more than just this one girl’s experiences; it’s about socioeconomic class in New York, attitudes toward transit and the role of the much maligned and underfunded Student MetroCard program. It’s worth a read and some deeper thoughts as well.

September 12, 2011 16 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesSubway Security

If you see something, sue someone

by Benjamin Kabak September 12, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 12, 2011

With the 10th anniversary of the September 11 attacks dominating the news lately, various anti-terrorism efforts have made headline. The MTA, of course, has burned their “See something, say something” campaign into our collective consciousness over the past few years, and they’ve licensed it to transit and security agences around the world. Now and then, though, groups use it or a derivative slogan without permission, and the authority doesn’t like that.

As The Post detailed last week, the MTA moved to trademark the slogan in 2007 and is now challenging a t-shirt retailers’ attempt and an online security firm’s effort to do the same. Over the years, the MTA has gone after numerous copycats — including a few universities — who haven’t requested permission. Allen Kay, head of the Korey Kay & Partners agency, is steamed when others steal his work too. “I don’t think they have a right to it,” he said. “I live for original ideas. It galls me anytime someone does something derivative — or outright steals. I think that’s despicable.”

September 12, 2011 1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MetroCardMTA Technology

A fare technology lesson from the Bay Area

by Benjamin Kabak September 12, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 12, 2011

Despite Jay Walder’s looming departure from the MTA in six weeks, the MTA is still moving ahead with a variety of technological innovations. Staten Island will soon have real-time tracking throughout its entire bus system, and the MetroCard replacement project will slog forward toward a mid-decade completion date. While that project has more uncertainty surrounding it in the face of Walder’s departure, the authority appears committed to finding a newer fare payment system than the MetroCard.

New York isn’t alone in that regard. Across the world, cities and transit agencies of all stripes are moving forward with various plans to unify fare payment sometimes. Some are looking at charge card-based technology as the MTA is and others are examining tried-and-true smart card-based solutions run by the usual private players in the fare media field. Not every effort is going smoothly.

Recently, San Francisco unveiled the Clipper card, a payment system designed to unify the Bay Area’s seven different transit agencies. As Scott James of The Bay Citizen detailed for The Times, the new system is suffering through some growing pains. As James details, San Francisco commuters have taken to Twitter and other social media outlets to voice their complaints over the new service, and while BART, Caltrain and SF MUNI downplay the problems, they are indeed out there.

James writes:

Clipper, named for the high-speed 19th-century ships that revolutionized sea travel, is hitting a few head winds, including system failures and overcharging customers. The service began in June 2010 — the first one-card-serves-all solution for the region’s fragmented transit system — simplifying access and payment to regional trains, buses, subway lines, streetcars and ferries, all with varying fare systems.

In some ways it has been remarkably successful…But it has proved difficult to eliminate all the glitches. And some expected improvements, like increasing Muni efficiency, have failed to materialize. Clipper was built and is operated by Cubic, a San Diego military contractor and transportation company. To date, the system has cost $140 million, with another $17.6 million expected in the 2011-12 fiscal year…

Although Cubic officials declined to be interviewed, e-mail sent by the company said there were 38,000 calls to its customer service hot line in August. “The fact that 99.7 percent of transactions did not require interaction with Cubic customer service representatives suggests a successful system,” Matt Newsome, a Cubic vice president, said in a statement.

But that math obscures the truth: transactions (500,000 daily, 14 million monthly) do not equal passengers. Each leg of a journey counts as a transaction. A weekday round-trip BART to Muni transfer, for example, counts as four transactions a day (two BART transactions, two Muni transactions), 84 a month. Officials said it was too difficult to determine how many passengers regularly used the card, but it is clear that far more than 0.3 percent of passengers are complaining.

Cubic, no stranger to unfavorable press, has always been a major player in the fare payment field, and theirs is is a name familiar to us on the East Coast. They have supplied the MTA with its MetroCard system, and the ever-increasing maintenance costs, I am told, is one of the drivers behind the push for an open fare payment system. That they are encountering problems or “growing pains” in San Francisco is not much of a surprise.

Now, the MTA is in a situation where they can get something right. They can see how other transit agencies adopt to this new technology, and they can see which companies provide good service and which do not. They could compile some best practices as they identify potential MetroCard replacements, and they can usher in a technology that is both forward-looking and flexible. It’s a tall order for an agency that has struggled to adopt an old system to new technologies, but the other outcome — more pain from closed systems — seems less desirable all the time. Just ask San Francisco.

September 12, 2011 36 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
View from Underground

When the subways ran again

by Benjamin Kabak September 11, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 11, 2011

September 11, 2011 9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Service changes impacting eight subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak September 9, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 9, 2011

With the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks upon us, the MTA has a few special service changes for Sunday only. As the ceremony at the World Trade Center site is schedule from 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m., the R train will bypass Cortlandt St. in both directions from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. that day. Furthermore all subway staircases on Church Street at Park Place, Barclay Street and Vesey Street will be closed as well.

On to the weekend changes. Feel free to use the comments in this thread to discuss anything.


From 6:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturday, September 10, 3 trains operate in two sections due to conduit installation (for new fiber optic cable) between Nostrand Avenue and Sutter Avenue-Rutland Road:

  • Between 148th Street and Utica Avenue and
  • Between Utica Avenue and New Lots Avenue (service begins at 12:01 a.m. Saturday and operates every 24 minutes


From 6:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturday, September 10, Brooklyn-bound 3 trains skip Bergen Street, Grand Army Plaza, Eastern Parkway, Nostrand Avenue and Kingston Avenue due to conduit installation (for new fiber optic cable) between Nostrand Avenue and Sutter Avenue-Rutland Road.


From 12:01 a.m. to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, September 10, Brooklyn-bound 4 trains skip Bergen Street, Grand Army Plaza, Eastern Parkway, Nostrand Avenue and Kingston Avenue due to conduit installation (for new fiber optic cable) between Nostrand Avenue and Sutter Avenue-Rutland Road.


From 6:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturday, September 10, there are no 4 trains between Atlantic Avenue and Utica Avenue due to conduit installation (for new fiber optic cable) between Nostrand Avenue and Sutter Avenue-Rutland Road. Customers may take the 2 or 3 instead.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 10 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 12, Manhattan-bound D trains run on the N line from Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue to 36th Street (Brooklyn) due to structural repair and station rehabilitation from 71st Street to Bay 50th Street and ADA work at Bay Parkway. Note: At all times until Friday, October 28, the southbound D is bypassing 71st Street due to stair reconstruction. So, there is no D service at 71st Street this weekend.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 10 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 12, Brooklyn-bound F trains run on the M line from Roosevelt Avenue to 47th-50th Sts due to station reconstruction at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 10 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 12, there are no L trains between 8th Avenue and Broadway Junction due to CBTC track and signal work between Bedford Avenue and 3rd Avenue. The M train, M14 and free shuttle buses provide alternate service. M train service is extended to 57th Street-6th Avenue. The M14 bus replaces L service between 1st and 8th Avenues. Free shuttle buses operate:

  1. Between Broadway Junction and Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs.
  2. Between Myrtle-Wyckoff Avs and Lorimer Street-Metropolitan Ave G station
  3. Between Lorimer Street-Metropolitan Ave G station and the Marcy Avenue J, M station


From 6 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, September 10 and from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday, September 11, M service is extended to 57th Street-6th Avenue F station due to CBTC track and signal work between Bedford Avenue and 3rd Avenue on the L line.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 10 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 12, Coney Island-bound N trains run on the D line from 36th Street (Brooklyn) to Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue due to track panel installation on the Sea Beach Line between 59th Street and 86th Street.


From 4 a.m. Saturday, September 10 to 10 p.m. Sunday, September 11, southbound N trains run express from Astoria Boulevard to Queensboro Plaza, skipping 30th Avenue, Broadway, 36th Avenue and 39th Avenue due to track panel installation between Astoria Boulevard and 36th Avenue.


From 10 p.m. Friday, September 9 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 12, there are no Q trains between Prospect Park and Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue due to track and signal work, removal of temporary platform and bridge and Brighton line overcoat painting. – Sounds like we’re geting awfully close to the restoration of express service on the Brighton line.


From 10 p.m. Friday, September 9 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 12, uptown Q trains run local from Canal Street to 34th Street-Herald Square due to platform edge rehabilitation at 34th Street.

September 9, 2011 18 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
ARC TunnelAsides

ARC dollars officially moved to NJ’s Transportation Trust Fund

by Benjamin Kabak September 9, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 9, 2011

It was but a mere formality, but the New Jersey Turnpike Authority voted this Wednesday to redirect $1.25 billion originally slated for the ARC Tunnel to the state’s ailing Transportation Trust Fund. Instead of support rail expansion, the money will now go toward a turnpike widening project, various road maintenance plans and, if any is left over, New Jersey Transit’s capital plan.

As Mike Frassinelli from The Star-Ledger noted, “The move allows Gov. Chris Christie to boost the state’s Transportation Trust Fund that pays for road and bridge repairs and transit services, while at the same time keeping his pledge not to raise the state’s comparatively low gas tax.”

While the move had been announced by Christie some months ago, the state’s pro-rail contingent were none too pleased. “This toll revenue was supposed to be used to build a desperately needed trans-Hudson tunnel for New Jersey commuters,” Sen. Frank Lautenberg said in a statement. “Using this money as a slush fund for other transportation projects is a disservice to New Jersey residents facing congestion on our roads and seeking access to more jobs and more trains in and out of New York.” The trans-Hudson future — whether it be the Gateway Tunnel or an extension of the 7 to Secaucus — remains to be seen.

September 9, 2011 11 comments
3 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BrooklynView from Underground

Under the El: Thoughts on urban development

by Benjamin Kabak September 9, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 9, 2011

One Brooklyn native has proposed building a pedestrian space underneath the Culver Viaduct. Rendering by John McGill.

Thanks to a confluence of history and economics, many of New York City’s streets outside of Manhattan’s Central Business District are lined with elevated train tracks. From Astoria to Woodlawn, from Coney Island to Williamsburg and even through Morningside Heights, elevated train lines soar over city streets. How to incorporate these structures into the urban landscape has long proven to be problematic for New York City planners.

In certain parts of the city, the elevated trains are less intrusive than in others. The 7, as it travels above Queens Boulevard, occupies an elegant structure away from pedestrians and the flow of traffic, but the N and Q tracks through Astoria darken the streets below while impeding the flow of both people and traffic. One area in Brooklyn — the space under the Culver Viaduct — is a particular wasteland of former and current industrial usages mixed with an urban void.

A walk or a drive past the Viaduct on the border between Park Slope, Gowanus, Carroll Gardens and Red Hook isn’t very scenic. The trip passes through row houses overshadowed by the looming structure, a Lowes warehouse store and some industrial spaces that look abandoned. Until the train goes back underground at 4th Ave. and just south of 2nd Place and Smith Street, the area is an odd nothingness of quasi-development. It doesn’t have to be this way.

While digging through some old emails this week, I came across a post from the Architectural League of New York’s Urban Omnibus blog. Written by Brooklyn native John McGill, it explores possible development schemes for the area underneath the Viaduct. While the city has turned a former rail line into a popular public space and burgeoning tourist attraction, they could do something similar to the space under a current rail line.

McGill seems to call his proposal the anti-High Line as it doesn’t rely on deactivating a rail line. Rather, it is, he says, “an opportunistic repurposing of existing, functioning infrastructure to address the need for a vibrant and coherent public realm.” The proposal itself enters into some architecturally technical areas. After all, you can’t redevelop the space in and around the Viaduct in such a way that would threaten the structural integrity of the active train tracks above.

The plan itself would incorporate access to and views of the Gowanus Canal — a Superfund site that will eventually be cleaned — and relies upon the shuttering of a concrete plant, the only active business in the area. With some modifications to the Viaduct itself, McGill then proposes a variety of uses:

Four types of “preservation” emerged as essential to the architectural strategy: preservation of sunlight, of structural stability, of limited footprint at ground level, and of existing (historic) character. Informed by these criteria, Underline offers four potential modes of intervention: the creation of flexible space for public assembly; precast concrete decking hung from above on steel rods as a public landscape “ribbon;” pure infill at ground level; and adaptive reuse of, or interface with, existing adjacent structures…

Preserving this set of desirable existing conditions results in a series of distributed spaces connected by a linear public park. This establishes a sequence of unique visual experiences as one moves along, offering glimpses of unexpected adjacent activities, the regular appearance of moving trains overhead, and the rhythmic discharge and departure of passengers to and from the stations at either end of the project site — not to mention views of the city currently reserved for F and G subway riders.

Despite being distributed, however, the program is arranged in discernible clusters so that points of access to each component of the project are clearly legible from the street. Starting from the south, the first of these might contain an EPA monitoring station and public exhibition space, a café, public outdoor amphitheater, rock-climbing wall, and classrooms. The next section consists of covered outdoor basketball courts and a small public fitness center and lap pool, and in the final group retail and production spaces. Because each element is knit into the whole by the landscape ribbon, a loose affiliation emerges between both related and unrelated events in time and space.

It’s a fascinating plan really and one that New Yorkers do not see too frequently. It takes an underused urban space at the confluence of numerous neighborhoods that also supports key infrastructure and turns it into a potentially popular urban destination. Eleven months after McGill first published the proposal, we can also say that it’s not going to happen, and Brooklyn is worse off for it.

One of the major reasons why subway construction has stalled over the past 60 years is a public aversion to elevated lines. With the noise and dirt and debris that an above-ground subway causes, residents do not want to see these structures — which are much cheaper than a bored tunnel — dominate the landscape any more than they already do. But just maybe it’s possible to develop an elevated train with the neighborhood in mind.

September 9, 2011 39 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

Fitch downgrades MTA revenue bonds

by Benjamin Kabak September 8, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2011

Fitch, the investor ratings company, has assigned nearly $100 million in MTA revenue variable rate bonds an A rating and has downgraded over $14 billion in preexisting debt from an A+ to an A, the company announced today. According to the press release, available on Transportation Nation, “the downgrade reflects higher than expected near-to-medium term financial pressure.”

The release explains further:

The downgrade reflects higher than expected near-to-medium term financial pressure stemming from increasing operating costs (projected to moderate in growth in the outer years) and pension obligations and growing annual debt service obligations from expected near-term issuance associated with the capital program. This is exacerbated by the strong likelihood that operating subsides (dedicated tax sources) will not grow as anticipated in the near term leading to wider deficits. The Stable Outlook reflects the authority’s institutional focus on monitoring developments and willingness to take corrective action albeit that the options available are fewer in the current environment.

The downgrade comes following the release of a long-term capital plan that relies heavily on debt-backed bonds and other shaky assumptions. Transit advocates were none too pleased to hear the news. “Just like in Washington, decisions made by our elected officials in Albany caused this downgrade,” Paul Steely White, Executive Director of Transportation Alternatives, said. “The State’s raids on public transit funding have forced the MTA to pay for subways and buses with debt. Now, it will cost more for the MTA to run the system, and this will hit New Yorkers where it hurts—fare hikes and service cuts; unless our elected officials in Albany find secure revenue for public transit.”

Apparently my talk of debt earlier today was not all that premature.

September 8, 2011 9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

Chart of the Day: Let’s talk about debt, baby

by Benjamin Kabak September 8, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2011

Debt payments are making up an ever-increasing amount of the MTA's annual budget. Image via RPA/ESTA.

A few weeks ago, the Regional Plan Association and the Empire State Transportation Alliance dug deep into the MTA’s budget projections and voiced their concerns over the MTA’s ballooning debt balloons. For long-time transit watchers, the agency’s debt isn’t a new storyline, but the numbers are increasingly heading upwards. The system is saddled with more debt than every before, and there’s no sign of relief on the horizon.

Yesterday, Streetsblog excerpted parts of the presentation which I’ve seen as well, and the picture isn’t a pretty one. According to the MTA’s own metrics, debt payments will account for over 17.5 percent of its operating budget by 2014, and according to the RPA and ESTA, the real total based upon the MTA’s sleight-of-hand accounting may be closer to 23 percent. Labor costs will fall to around 53 percent of expenditures.

“Every year,” Noah Kazis wrote, “more and more money that might go toward paying bus drivers, buying fuel, cleaning stations or keeping fares affordable is instead spent on debt service. Even over a period when pension costs will have risen by a billion dollars per year, it’s debt that is chewing up the MTA’s budget.”

Besides the debt, though, the other area of growth concerns pensions. In 2003, pension spending accounting for under five percent of the MTA’s operating budget, but by 2014, that number will rise to around 9.36 percent. That type of growth is unsustainable and worrisome. The MTA cannot become a pension and debt organization while running a subway system, but by 2014, over 30 percent of its operating budget will be tied up in those two areas.

So why so much debt? Kazis explains:

That debt is the outcome of decades of diminishing state support for public transit. After a major infusion of capital under the Hugh Carey administration, Governor Mario Cuomo cut all direct support for the MTA capital program. Though Cuomo found other revenues for the capital plan, notably by repurposing Westway dollars for transit, George Pataki just let those zeroes stand and put the cost of the capital plan on the MTA’s credit card, starting the debt build-up in earnest. Pataki also started using dedicated transit funds to pay the state’s commitments to the MTA, essentially double-dipping on those funds and costing transit almost $200 million a year.

The 2009 passage of the payroll tax helped the MTA’s budgets significantly — it is now the agency’s largest dedicated revenue source – but Albany’s decisions to kill congestion pricing and bridge tolls meant that the MTA still had to borrow heavily to pay for repairs and mega-projects like the Second Avenue Subway.

The result is a massive run-up in debt. Though the MTA spent only $848 million on debt service in 2004, according to RPA, it is projected to spend more than three times as much, $2.67 billion, in 2014. Debt alone will eat up 17.6 percent of the MTA’s operating budget by 2014; worse, RPA says that an alternative calculation shows the 2014 debt load at 23.1 percent of the operating budget.

Talk about debt often causes other people’s eyes to glaze over. They just want to know that trains will run frequently and on time, that the fare won’t go up and that there will be a seat for them on the next train. But these debt payments will impact the MTA’s ability to provide service. The authority can cut employees; they can cut trains and buses; they can raise; but they cannot cut debt. Without better and more concrete investment in the system, debt will balloon, and the rest of us — the riders and commuters who depend upon the subways — will lose out.

September 8, 2011 9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts

About The Author

Name: Benjamin Kabak
E-mail: Contact Me

Become a Patron!
Follow @2AvSagas

Upcoming Events
TBD

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

Instagram



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

Categories

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

Archives

Meta

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

@2019 - All Right Reserved.


Back To Top