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

AsidesMTA Economics

Sen. Fuschillo: Fare-jumping fine should be $500

by Benjamin Kabak August 4, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 4, 2011

On the heels of a report that the MTA is losing $31 million to fare-jumpers, one State Senator wants to jack up the penalty. Charles Fuschillo, a Nassau County Republican, has proposed to raise the fine for fare-jumpers from $100 to $500, and he wants scofflaws who fail to pay the fine in a timely fashion to be penalized an additional $100.

Fuschillo, who has submitted a bill with these proposed changes, says he has the MTA’s bottom line in mind. “Fare-paying riders are being forced to pay the multi-million tab for those who are trying to beat the system. At a time when every dollar counts, the MTA and its riders can’t afford to pay for freeloading fare-beaters. Raising the fines for fare evasion will create a stronger deterrent by making the cost of an illegal free ride far more expensive,” he said.

The bill, which has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee, is numbered S05870 and is available here. The $500 fine would likely to be high enough to serve as a serious deterrent.

August 4, 2011 28 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Subway History

From the Archives: Remembering the 9 train

by Benjamin Kabak August 4, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 4, 2011

I got back to New York City pretty late tonight after my flight north from Florida was left circling above Wednesday’s thunderstorms. Instead of a new piece, I’ve decided to run something from the archives so I can get to sleep. I’ll have more later this morning. In the meantime, enjoy this look back at some recent subway history that I wrote originally back in August of 2009.

75px-NYCS-bull-trans-9.svg I grew up three blocks away from the West Side IRT station at 96th and Broadway. For the first six years of my life, I learned the subway from the front windows of the 1, 2 or 3 trains. The 2 — the old red birds — were my favorite until one day in 1989 when the MTA introduced the 9 train.

Six-year-old Benjamin was smitten. It was a brand new subway train that would stop at his home station and skip some far-away stations in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx in which I as a child never set foot. I was disappointed when I realized that the 9 trains were just 1 trains with a different bullet, but to me, that 9 always looked like a big grin. It was a welcoming child of the subway system.

In high school, I came to enjoy the 9 train. During my junior and senior years, I would take the subway from 96th St. north up Broadway to 242nd St. before walking up Post Road to my school on 246th St. Each day, I would hope for a 9 train because, in my mind, it was faster. The 9 train skipped four stops north of 125th St. while the 1 skipped only three. It was simple subway math.

After high school, the 9 train faded from my subway conscious. I didn’t have to use it any longer, and on Sept. 11, 2001, the MTA suspended 9 train service as they had to change a slew of routes to accommodate for the damage to the subway system in and around Ground Zero. While the 9 returned a few days after the one-year anniversary of those terrorist attacks, it was but an afterthought. Less than three years later, it would be wiped from the map, a victim of the northern Manhattan population boom that continues to this day.

Soon, we’ll celebrate the 22nd anniversary of the good old 9 train. The first 9 — in reality, a rebranded 1 — rolled off the line Monday, August 21, 1989, twenty years and six days ago. Donatella Lorch reported on this service addition for The Times:

The new service provides ”skip-stop” service between 6:30 A.M and 7 P.M. on weekdays, freeing the old No. 1 local to skip four stops between 137th and 242d Street. The purpose, says the Transit Authority, is to provide a faster and less crowded ride for people in the Bronx and Upper Manhattan. Not everyone believes this will happen. Some passengers say they will spend more time on platforms, transferring or waiting for the right train to come along…

“It slows me down because I have to change trains for no good reason,” complained Frank Gary as he waited yesterday evening at 137th Street for an uptown train to 157th Street. “I knew about it this morning so I did not get confused.”

Jared Lebow, a Transit Authority spokesman, said the new line would save up to three minutes on a ride from South Ferry to 242d Street. That’s not much, he said, but cumulatively, over the course of a day, enough time is saved to get more use out of the trains. He also said that a total of 28 No. 1 and 9 trains would now run during each rush hour, instead of the 25 that used to run on the No. 1 line.

For 16 years, residents of northern Manhattan complained about the 9 service. While those of us passing through enjoyed the luxury and perceived speed of the seat-saving skip-stop service, people in Marble Hill, Inwood, Washington Heights and Harlem felt slighted by the MTA.

By 2005, the need for this service had greatly diminished. In fact, as the skipped stations had grown in ridership, Transit had to restore full-line service to Upper Manhattan and the Bronx, and 12,000 per day experienced more frequent service when the 9 was axed. “Skip-stop service on the 1 line is an idea which today doesn’t make sense for our operations or our customers,” Lawrence G. Reuter, the president of New York City Transit at the time, said to Sewell Chan in 2005. “By eliminating skip-stop service, the majority of riders along the 1 line will benefit from shorter travel times and will no longer have to stand on platforms as trains pass them by during rush hour.”

The last 9 train rode up and down the West Side IRT local tracks on May 31, 2005, and it passed quietly into subway lore. Nearly 22 years ago, it debuted, and now it is but a memory in the minds of New Yorkers, a fleeting part of straphanger past. Sometimes, I believe the MTA should revisit skip-stop service to better apportion crowds on locals, but for now, the 9 simply rests in peace.

August 4, 2011 17 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Second Avenue Subway

Video of the Day: Second Ave. songs

by Benjamin Kabak August 3, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 3, 2011

This one’s been making the rounds this week. It’s a video of Gary Russo, a member of Local 40 and current Second Ave. Subway ironworker, who serenades Upper East Siders during his crew’s lunch break. With all of the noise surrounding the construction site, Russo just wants to give back something to the neighborhood, he told The Post. “We’re trying to give back a little bit, you know know? Lunchtime,” the singer said to Gothamist.

Russo, a Queens native, has garnered some praise from his fellow workers and disgruntled Second Ave. neighbors alike for his 30-minute lunchtime performances. “I got this one lady who hates the construction,” Paul Rodriguez, a fellow sandhog, said. “She’s always looking for something to complain about. One day she was walking across the street and she saw Gary singing.”
The woman was star-struck. It was the first time I saw her smile.”

August 3, 2011 1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Editorial of the Day: On pointless comptroller reports

by Benjamin Kabak August 3, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 3, 2011

Remember that Captain Obvious report buried on a Sunday by Comptrollers John Liu and Thomas DiNapoli that highlighted how the MTA handles service changes and track work? It seems that some folks did not take too kindly to Liu and DiNapoli’s blustering attempt at a blatant headline grab. The Daily News’ editorial board, for one, found the report misguided and petty.

Here’s how they put it:

The press release trumpeted that the state and city controllers had conducted their first joint audit in more than a decade. Thomas DiNapoli (Albany) and John Liu (New York) had trained their collective investigative firepower on the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, their highly paid publicity aides announced. Gee, they must have discovered something huge. Right?

No, not exactly.

The report released Sunday by DiNapoli and Liu was more like a junior high school research paper than a serious examination of the state of mass transit in New York City. Did you know that auditors visited 39 subway stations where service had been diverted for track repairs? And did you know, horror of horrors, that the transit authority posted no more than 20 signs in each station alerting riders to the disruption? Well, now you do, thanks to the crusading of DiNapoli and Liu, who want every straphanger to know whose side they are on.

While this is one of the oldest PR tricks in the book, rarely have two such high officials attempted it with such feeble results. It goes this way: Zero in on something that annoys riders, such as service disruptions for repairs. Then count up the numbers and look for anything that suggests the MTA is bollixing up the work.

The News, not exactly a friend of the MTA’s over the years, has a better solution: Focus on the big picture and show how “the MTA is struggling to complete necessary repairs and system upgrades without proper state funding.” The paper is probably being a little tougher on Liu and DiNapoli than they need to be, but their point — that nothing new comes out of the comptrollers’ offices — is one I’ve made before. All we hear about from them are issues the MTA has already vowed to address or institutional problems that transcend an audit.

Once upon a time, the Citizens Budget Commission explored how funding from Albany for the MTA’s capital plans had dried up over the course of the Pataki Administration. If DiNapoli and Liu want to make waves, they should conduct that forensic audit of the MTA’s books while looking at Albany’s support as well. Perhaps then they would find real savings and real reform rather than the complaint that stations which see a few thousand riders per day have only 20 service change posters instead of 50.

August 3, 2011 9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Absurdity

The signs of a customer-focused approach

by Benjamin Kabak August 3, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 3, 2011

The MTA's budget problems apparently rendered the rest of platform too expensive for this sign.

Throughout his abbreviated tenure as CEO and Chairman of the MTA, Jay Walder has tried to focus on customer service. Even as he was forced to preside over cuts in bus and subway service and numerous layoffs, Walder has ushered through some initiatives designed to improve the customer experience, and his successor should do even more. The system’s information presentation certainly could use the overhaul.

For Walder, three intertwined initiatives aimed at improving customer service are likely to be the high points of his two years at the MTA. The new PA/CIS system — colloquially known as countdown clocks — was in the planning stages long before Walder returned from London, but he pushed the project through. Now, riders along the IRT routes know when their trains are coming and how long they must wait. Similarly, a bus tracking system is in the works, and the authority’s overhauled website along with a new commitment to open data make it slowly easier for the public to find tools that make their commutes easier.

Yet, despite the increase in information, the subway system itself can be maddeningly obtuse to navigate. The signs — remnants of the Massimo Vignelli overhaul in the 1960s — haven’t been updated in decades, and teasing information out of them can be difficult. My personal favorite is the one at right above. For the sake of visual appeal, the MTA has shortened platform to “plat” on their “No Exit” signs. Someone unfamiliar with the system sure would be excused if they didn’t know what that meant.

Another personal favorite is this one from West 4th Street:

As a regular rider of the B and D, I know what this confusing array of words means. In an attempt to decipher the text in a missive on signs I published last March, I wrote: “The B train stops at W 4th St., except when it doesn’t, and then you can take the D and transfer to the Q at De Kalb Ave. Usually, the D train runs express and skips DeKalb, except during late nights when it runs local and stops at DeKalb. Good luck, too, determining when that “late night” period is or figuring out what to do for those 90 minutes after the B stops running and before the D makes its stop at De Kalb. Even the MTA’s website is helpless on that front.”

I am not, apparently, alone. In his column this week on Sheepshead Bites, Allan Rosen delves into the world of confusing MTA signage, and he urges the authority to pay attention to customer complaints. On the same confusion regarding the B train, he writes:

Regarding signage, the IND provided timetables accurate to the half-minute at major subway stations informing passengers when trains would arrive. The MTA doesn’t wish to burden us with such details and has instead taken the path of simplicity. For example, a typical sign now reads “No B (in an orange bullet of course) Nights and Weekends.” Although useful information, what does one do at 10 or 11 p.m.? How do you know if you missed the last B train or not? I am all for simplicity and clarity, but sometimes functionality should override. While I think the IND went overboard by using half minutes, and that timetables on the stations are not really necessary today, the MTA at least should inform passengers on their signage when the first and last trains are due. “No ‘B’ before 6:20 a.m. or after 10:18 p.m., Mondays through Fridays” is far more useful information than “No ‘B’ Nights and Weekends.”

I’ve played the B train guessing game at West 4th St. before, and Transit never announces if B trains stop running or which train is the last to pass through the station. I enjoy a good mystery as much as the next person, but that is one time when I’d rather have the answer handed to me on a silver platter.

One solution is as Rosen proposes: Ask the customer. Find out which signs work and which do not. Find out what information a typical subway rider needs at various times of the day, and figure out how to deliver that information to the subway system. At West 4th St., for instance, clocks that had the wrong time in 2007 still don’t keep an accurate hour. If those could be used to notify customers of the last B train, they would be far more useful than they are today, and that is a type of customer service improvement the next MTA head should look to bring to the system.

August 3, 2011 32 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Finding Walder’s replacement: A job description

by Benjamin Kabak August 2, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 2, 2011

I missed this gem when Jay Walder originally announced his resignation a few weeks ago, but as Gov. Andrew Cuomo has yet to name a successor, it’s still timely. From Little Littlefield comes a job description:

Wanted, politically savvy transit manager willing to preside over the gradual re-collapse of New York City’s transit system due to deferred maintenance while denying it is occuring, be publicly blamed for the consequences by those actually responsible (all of whom drive everywhere to parking spaces reserved for them by placard), and hated by the suckers who believe them. In exchange for decent pay, little work, and a fat pension.

The successful applicant is expected to live outside New York City in an undisclosed location, and not appear in public except during the first half hour of public hearings, during which elected officials castigate them for the very situation they created while the MTA head sits in silence. Among the key selection criteria are the willingness to not object to an assertion that a 20/50 pension enhancement wil cost nothing, the willingness to go on borrowing money the MTA cannot possibly repay, and the ability to make sure those affluent municipal bond holders and Florida residents get paid, no matter what. Any interest in actual transportation is optional, as most public services are optional as well. However, the ability to come up with cutsey distractions like shifting the transit map around to generate favorable New York Times press is always helpful. Apply to Sheldon Silver and Dean Skelos Andrew Cuomo.

Larry might be slightly more pessimistic about the MTA’s physical future than I am. I believe we’re witnessing only the political and economic collapse of the transit system and not the physical collapse as well. Yet, this critique is right on the money, and it highlights how the next MTA head will be in a very tough position with little support and a future that does not look too bright.

August 2, 2011 6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Fulton Street

Photo of the Day: Making progress at Fulton St.

by Benjamin Kabak August 2, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 2, 2011

The MTA and local politicians celebrated the opening of a new entrance at William Street yesterday. (Photo courtesy of New York City Transit)

As the MTA’s general capital future remains unknown, its funded projects are moving forward at a brisk pace. Yesterday morning, MTA officials and New York politicians gathered in Lower Manhattan to celebrate the opening of a new entrance at Williams St. that leads into the Fulton St. complex. Overall, the Transit Center is now more than 50 percent complete and on target for its 2014 opening.

“We have reached yet another significant milestone as we move forward to complete what will become a landmark transportation facility,” MTA Chairman and CEO Jay Walder said. “Once complete, this complex will provide our customers with a more seamless experience at this major downtown hub. The Transit Center will improve travel for hundreds of thousands of daily commuters and Lower Manhattan residents and visitors while providing a modern and convenient retail location.”

The new entrance — located at 135 William St. — provides immediate access to the 7th Ave. IRT platform and the former Nassau St. stop on the IND. Next year, the MTA will open entrances at 150 William St. and 129 Fulton St. that will allow for similar improvements.

As part of this entrance, the MTA included a restored mural — seen below — and a gate from the McAlpin hotel. These items had previously been installed on the A/C/ station but were removed in 2009. The mural is one of six being refurbished for the Fulton St. Transit Center. It certainly looks nice. Whether it’s worth the federal expenditure remains in doubt.

Click through for a view of the Marine Grill mural.

Continue Reading
August 2, 2011 22 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

Fare-jumping: A $31 million problem or an inconvenience?

by Benjamin Kabak August 2, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 2, 2011

One way or another, the MTA's turnstiles will earn some revenue. (Photo by flickr user Karen Foto)

Every few months, the MTA rolls out another report on the revenue lost to fare-jumping, and every few months, the same report leads to a bunch of outrage. How could the MTA give up so much fare revenue? Why aren’t more cops patrolling the stations? This is why we can’t trust the authority do anything properly. And over and over and over again.

This year’s story rings true to form. After finding that the MTA lost approximately $27 million to fare-jumpers in 2009, a report covering 2010 found $31 million in lost revenue due to fare-beaters in 2010. According to coverage of the report, fare-jumpers entered the system in 2009 18.5 million times without paying. That’s 50,684 per day, and cops handed out 120,000 summonses all year.

Per The Daily News, turnstile-hopping seems to be the rare case where crime does pay. As The Daily News notes, a fare-jumper who gets caught just once every six weeks would gain money. Six 7-day MetroCards cost $174 while the summons sets them back $100. This year, with the economy stagnant and the fares up over early 2010, the MTA estimates that’s 1.5 percent of riders jumped the fare as compared with 0.9 percent last year.

Pete Donohue had more on the MTA’s response:

The MTA said the report – presented at a transportation think tank’s conference this year – was not an official document. Average weekday ridership is about 5.4 million.

“New York City Transit takes fare evasion very seriously and is continually working with the NYPD on cost-effective strategies to combat it, such as targeting high-incidence locations and placing cameras in key areas,” MTA spokeswoman Deirdre Parker said.

She said transit cops have made 12,468 arrests for fare evasion this year, up 5.5% from the same time last year. Officers have issued 37,825 summonses to evaders this year, a 1.7% increase from the same period in 2010.

Whether or not there is an actual problem, police officers have called upon politicians to raise the fine. A 2009 effort to jack up fare-jumping penalties to $250 went nowhere in Albany, but NYPD officials want a renewed effort. “I think the state legislature should consider raising the fine,” Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said. “It would probably be a good idea.”

What would be a good idea though? Perhaps raising the fine makes sense. If the price is high enough to deter fare-jumping, then the penalty would be ideal. If, as the News says, jumpers get caught on average of once every 6-13 week, it would have to be a substantial fine.

Beyond that though, the MTA and the NYPD probably shouldn’t do much. While the pure numbers sound high — 18.5 million! — in percentage terms, they’re not. As even the News noted, only 1.5 percent of riders are jumping this year. For any business that’s more than an acceptable bleed rate, and it’s tough to tell how much extra revenue one police office at nearly $80,000 a year would net. Perhaps it would make sense, but perhaps it wouldn’t be the best use of police resources.

Basically, fare-jumping is a sunk cost for the MTA. It is the price of doing business in a system that can’t station a cop in 468 stations 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. A higher fine should temper the problem, but anything else is simply overkill.

August 2, 2011 31 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesQueens

A thought on density, development and transportation in Flushing

by Benjamin Kabak August 1, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 1, 2011

For the first time since 2003, a non-Manhattan subway stop has cracked the MTA’s list of ten busiest. The folks in Flushing are patting themselves on the back as their station is the tenth busiest in the system. In fact, with this on-again, off-again popularity comes politicians who want more more more. In a profile of the 7 line’s eastern terminus and the area around it, Crain’s New York spoke with some politicians who want to “capitalize on their station’s exalted status.”

Both City Council reps and Community Board members want to see the MTA invest in the station. They are requesting a larger mezzanine space, bathrooms and a new look for the Flushing-Main Street LIRR station which is just a block away. “We have the potential to become the Penn Station of Queens,” Peter Koo, the City Council representative from the district, said.

It’s all well and good to want better transit, but as Stephen Smith noted on Twitter, that commitment should come with some urban policy changes. As Smith said, “If Flushing wants ‘the Penn Station of Queens,’ it should be forced to accept some upzoning.” Right now, development around the Flushing terminal isn’t primed for transit-oriented development. Buildings are stunted, and the area has too much parking. It’s a gateway to eastern Queens, but it should also become a beacon of TOD at the end of the 7. Only then could it become the “Penn Station of Queens.”

August 1, 2011 16 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Between Cuomo and Walder, a lukewarm embrace

by Benjamin Kabak August 1, 2011
written by Benjamin Kabak on August 1, 2011

For two years, Jay Walder was literally and figuratively the center of attention at the MTA. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak)

The week of Jay Walder has continued into August as civic leaders and politicians are still coming to grips with Waler’s departure. The biggest news came from a Times article published on Saturday that illuminated Walder’s motivations for leaving.

As I’ve heard from the beginning, much of the impetus behind the MTA CEO and Chairman’s decision came about because of money and circumstances. The MTR offer simply overwhelmed his current MTA salary, and he had grown tired of politicians who would use the MTA as their personal whipping boy without offering political or fiscal stability. But our new Governor, who hasn’t embraced transit and never warmed to Walder, had much to do with it as well.

Michael Grynbaum and Christine Haughney report:

Jay H. Walder, chairman of the embattled Metropolitan Transportation Authority, traveled to Albany earlier this year seeking help for a transit system in peril. Mr. Walder, a kid from Queens who rose to the top of his field and harbored big ambitions for his state, was not unlike the man he had hoped to see: Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo.

And he did see him. For a moment.

Mr. Walder was meeting the governor’s staff at the Capitol when Mr. Cuomo walked in. The governor greeted Mr. Walder, then promptly turned his attention to his director of state operations, Howard Glaser, with whom he spoke for several moments before departing, said two people familiar with the meeting. Mr. Cuomo and the man in charge of the biggest mass transit system in the nation did not meet in person again, suggesting a lack of interest by Mr. Cuomo that irked and discouraged Mr. Walder, several officials said.

The Times notes that Cuomo was “caught…by surprise” by Walder’s departure and “had no plans” to replace him before his term expired. Yet, still, Cuomo reportedly shunned Walder and has garnered more headlines for his collection of muscle cars than he has his support of transit.

During his campaign last year, Gov. Cuomo vowed to stand behind the MTA. “I believe the governor should be accountable for the MTA,” he said in October. “These authorities that are often nameless and faceless–I understand the theory behind an authority. I also understand the theory behind accountability. In a situation like the MTA. I think that people have the right to know who’s in charge, who’s responsible and I think it should be the governor of the state.”

Now, Cuomo can put his money where his mouth is, and he will have some fight on his hands. The Times has urged him to avoid naming a political friend as head of the MTA and urged him to find someone who will “provide the best service for 8.5 million commuters.” Crain’s New York suggests two women for the job: either Karen Rae, currently with the Federal Railroad Administration, or Polly Trottenberg, assistant secretary for transportation policy at the U.S. Department of Transportation who once worked for Senator Chuck Schumer.

No matter who Cuomo picks, the next MTA head will have to negotiation with the labor unions, deal with fare hikes and debt levels and confront a system that must move forward with its capital plans as money grows ever tighter. It’s an unenviable job, and the number of people qualified to take it are quickly dwindling. Soon, Cuomo will have to name a replacement. For now, though, we’ll continue to find out just how the governor’s lukewarm embrace of the MTA head helped push him toward a decision to depart.

August 1, 2011 15 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