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

Service Advisories

Weekend service advisories

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

It’s Friday night; you know the drill. Subway Weekender as the map.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, Manhattan-bound 2 trains skip Burke Avenue, Allerton Avenue, Pelham Parkway and Bronx Park East due to track work at Bronx Park East.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, 4 trains skip Fulton Street in both directions due to work on the Fulton Street Transit Center. Customers may use the 2, 3, A, C or J shuttle at this station as an alternative. (Note: The J shuttle operates between Chambers Street/Brooklyn Bridge and Fulton Street.)


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, March 5 and Sunday, March 6, 5 trains skip Fulton Street in both directions due to work on the Fulton Street Transit Center. Customers may use the 2, 3, A, C or J shuttle at this station as an alternative. (Note: The J shuttle operates between Chambers Street/Brooklyn Bridge and Fulton Street.)


From 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., Saturday, March 5 and Sunday, March 6, Queens-bound 7 trains skip 82nd, 90th, 103rd and 111th Streets due to cable work.


From 10:30 p.m. Friday, March 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, free shuttle buses replace A trains between Beach 90th Street and Far Rockaway due to station rehabilitation. A trains replace the Rockaway Park S shuttle between Broad Channel and Rockaway Park. (At all times until early summer, Manhattan-bound A platforms at Beach 36th Street and Beach 60th Street are closed due to station rehabilitation.)


From 4 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 10 p.m. Sunday, March 6, Brooklyn-bound D trains run on the N line from 36th Street to Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue due to track panel installation between 50th Street and 55th Street. There are no Brooklyn-bound D trains stopping at 9th Avenue, Ft. Hamilton Parkway, 50th, 55th, 71st, 79th Streets, 18th and 20th Avenues, Bay Parkway, 25th Avenue and Bay 50th Street stations.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, D trains run local between 34th Street and West 4th Street in both directions due to fan plant rehabilitation.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, E trains run on the F line between Roosevelt Avenue and 34th Street-Herald Square due to work on the 5th Avenue Interlocking Signal System. The platforms at 5th Avenue-53rd Street, Lexington Avenue-53rd Street, 23rd Street-Ely Avenue and World Trade Center are closed. Customers may take the R, G, A or shuttle bus instead. Free shuttle buses connect Court Square (G)/23rd Street-Ely Avenue (E), Queens Plaza (R) and the 21st Street-Queensbridge (F) stations. Note: During the overnight hours, E trains stop at 36th Street, Steinway Street, 46th Street, Northern Blvd and 65th Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, Queens-bound F trains run on the A line from Jay Street-MetroTech to West 4th Street due to work at the Broadway/Lafayette-to-Bleecker Street transfer connection. There are no Queens-bound F trains at York Street, East Broadway, Delancey Street, 2nd Avenue or Broadway-Lafayette Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, L trains run in two sections due to rail work:

  • Between Rockaway Parkway and Bedford Avenue and
  • Between Bedford Avenue and Union Square (Trains run every 16 minutes and skip 3rd Avenue.)

The M14 bus replaces L train service between 3rd Avenue and 8th Avenue.


During the overnight hours from 12:01 a.m. to 6:30 a.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and to 5 a.m. on Monday, Brooklyn-bound N trains run over the Manhattan Bridge between Canal Street and DeKalb Avenue due to the installation of platform tiles at Cortlandt Street. There are no Brooklyn-bound N trains at City Hall, Rector Street, Whitehall Street, Court Street and Jay Street-MetroTech. Customers may use the 4 at nearby stations instead.


From 4 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 10 p.m. Sunday, March 6, Manhattan-bound N trains skip 30th Av, Broadway, 36th Av and 39th Av due to track panel installation from Astoria Blvd to 36th Avenue.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, March 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, Manhattan-bound N trains run on the D line from Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue to 36th Street due to track panel installation from north of Kings Highway to north of Bay Parkway. There are no Manhattan-bound N trains at 86th Street, Avenue U, Kings Highway, Bay Parkway, 20th Avenue, 18th Avenue, Ft. Hamilton Parkway or 8th Avenue stations.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, March 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, there are no Q trains between 57th Street-7th Avenue and Prospect Park in either direction due to BMT track tunnel inspection and structural repair and track and switch work north of Atlantic Avenue


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, March 5 and Sunday, March 6, Brooklyn-bound R trains run over the Manhattan Bridge between Canal Street and DeKalb Avenue due to the installation of platform tiles at Cortlandt Street. There are no Brooklyn-bound R trains at City Hall, Rector Street, Whitehall Street, Court Street, and Jay Street-MetroTech stations. Customers may use the 4 at nearby stations instead.


From 11 p.m. Friday, March 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, March 7, A trains replace the Shuttle between Broad Channel and Rockaway Park. (See A above.)

March 4, 2011 2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

34th Street Fallout: Posturing and parades

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

Macy's is concerned that Transitway could disrupt its Thanksgiving Day parade. (Image via NYC DOT)

As the dust is still settling over the Department of Transportation’s plan to scale back elements of the 34th St. Transitway, news and views are flying fast and furious. Ahead of this weekend’s Transportation Camp, let’s round ’em up.

First, The Post has proclaimed victory in a backhanded way on its editorial page. In a piece that devolves into unnecessary personal attacks and blatant falsehood, Murdoch’s rag calls upon the City Council to “topple” “Janette Sadik-Khan’s little kingdom.” Why? Because a few residents will be denied curbside access along parts of 34th St. It’s tough to see through the Post’s vitriol to find a true point, but it seems as though Alexander Hamilton’s once-great paper would rather see cars zooming past businesses in Herald Square than make room for tourists and residents to shop in comfort.

The Daily News too takes a self-congratulatory tone as well in its editorial. Claiming that “Sadik-Khan may well be trying to solve a problem that has already been remedied,” the unsigned piece claims that buses along 34th Street already move fast enough. We don’t need a $125 million upgraded — funded largely through federal monies — that make the street nicer for everyone because camera enforcement of bus lanes has improved travel time.

Again, the overall point of the Transitway wasn’t just to speed up buses. It was to re-imagine an area of the city congested with pedestrian traffic that prioritizes personal safety and public transit over automobile access. Cities thrive off of pedestrian life, and public transportation — buses that bring over 30,000 people per day — should take precedence over auto space.

Meanwhile, two news stories focusing on business in the area provide us with a glimpse into the powers-that-be who are at work here. The 34th Street Partnership, the Herald Square area BID, says they supported the pedestrian area because business owners know that more pedestrians lead to more business. Dan Pisark, VP of retail services, said though that some tenants were concerned about building access. “The plaza was a problem for some of our building owners,” he said. “So the commissioner heard that.”

On the other hand, a very powerful voice in Herald Square is against the redesign entirely. Macy’s Senior Vice President Ed Goldberg blatantly admitted that the retail giant is concerned about how the 34th St. Transitway could impact Thanksgiving. His statement can speak for itself, but the emphasis is mine. “Obviously anything that we do that is an obstruction, be it sidewalk or street, is of concern to us,” he said. “It’s about our one big magic day of the year during the parade.”

Finally, the Mayor has chimed in as well. As Streetsblog reported this afternoon, Michael Bloomberg in a radio interview voiced his support for Sadik-Khan and the Transitway: “My charge to her is don’t let anybody beat you down. Do the right thing, listen to people, try to explain, try to let buy-ins and that sort of thing, but keep coming up with new ideas even if your ideas — if you can’t implement them, if the people don’t want them or whatever, don’t go back into a car or a bicycle or whatever and be afraid of trying new things.”

He spoke further about the overwhelming need to improve bus service in New York City as well. Despite the flaws of his third term, if he could realize this goal, it would be a truly successful transportation initiative. “We have to address the fact that the buses are so slow,” he said, “that they are not a good alternative to cars, because then you’re in this ever declining cycle of what’s it — non-virtuous cycle I think is what they would call it.”

The next public meeting on the Transitway is March 14. This story is far from over.

March 4, 2011 9 comments
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesSubway Security

Security Hits: NYPD radio problems, state oversight

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

As the weekend nears, how about some good old fashioned subway security fearmongering? First up, in a story that should surprise no one, the 15-year, hundred-million-dollar effort to bring subway-to-surface NYPD radio access to the subways has not been a success, amNew York reported this week. The City, TA and NYPD have invested $144 million into a system that cannot bridge the gap between stations and the world above, and the three sides are deflecting blame as it will require at least another $28 million to fix the system. “All were aware of the significant challenges that getting this system in place posed,” Kevin Ortiz, MTA spokesman, said.

Meanwhile, in Albany, a state senator from Queens wants to usher a bill through that would add another layer of oversight to the MTA’s security efforts. The bill would, as the Queens Chronicle reports, allow the Department of Homeland Security to “examine bus and subway infrastructure safeguards, issue findings and recommendations and see that those proposals are implemented.”

Mike Gianaris, a Democrat from Astoria who has sponsored this legislation, issued a statement: “We need anti-terrorism experts to oversee the security measures in place and ensure all necessary steps are being taken to make our mass-transit system as safe as possible.” Gianaris, who is concerned with the decreasing number of MTA employees working in stations, has his heart seemingly in the right place, but this effort, if it goes anywhere, should add security oversight and not unfunded obligations which the MTA cannot afford.

March 4, 2011 6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Gateway Tunnel

Looking at New York for a cross-Hudson solution

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

New Jersey expects New York to pay for some of the next cross-Hudson tunnel.

When Gov. Chris Christie killed the ARC Tunnel nearly five months ago, one of his biggest complaints concerned the allocation of funds. New Jersey, the primary benefactors of the new tunnel, were expected to add $3 billion of their own money as well as any cost overruns while New York was on the hook for nothing. We could argue over the Port Authority allocations, but the truth of the matter was that New York State would have enjoyed a new tunnel without paying much. It was a valid complaint.

This week, with plans to build either an Amtrak-sponsored Gateway Tunnel or an extension of the 7 line to Secaucus, Christie reiterated his campaign promises. He would support increased transit spending, he said, as long as it’s a good deal for his constituents and as long as New York shoulders some of the costs as well. “I’m ready to invest in mass transit between New Jersey and New York. I’m just not willing to be fleeced for it,” the governor said. “That’s what the ARC was, a fleecing.”

During a transportation summit on Wednesday, Christie emphasized that point. “We have a better project that I know at some point someone will come to us and ask us to contribute to, and we will stand ready to do that,” he said. “But we will do that as partners with the federal government and Amtrak, and we will do that, I am certain, only under the condition that New York City and state contribute as well.”

As he again reiterated his belief that canceling ARC and throwing 20 years of planning out the window was a good idea, he continued: “Do we need another tunnel under the Hudson River for mass-transit? Yes, I’ve never denied that. I am not going to sign on as governor to deals that are bad for the taxpayers of New Jersey; bad deals in terms of the way the project is put together; and bad deals in terms of fairness in the region.”

That’s all well and good, but Christie’s comments, as they often do, raise some points. First, over at Gateway Gab, Jeremy Steinemann is skeptical. Steinemann is concerned about Christie’s decision to prioritize road widening coupled with his unwillingness to raise the gas taxes and says we’ve heard it all before.

Christie’s vocal support of mass-transit but his lack of action bears a resemblance to the rhetoric he displayed in the Gubernatorial election in 2009. His cancelation of the ARC project, for example, came as a surprise after he repeatedly expressed his support of the project as a candidate. What is clear, however, is that Christie will not push a trans-Hudson rail tunnel on his own. The political will must come from NY, NJ and the federal government.

But is Christie wrong in his assertions? Once upon a time, as on Subchatter noted on Thursday, the ARC Oversight Committee — available on this 2003 website snapshot — consisted of officials from New Jersey Transit, the MTA and Port Authority. New York had a say and a stake in the project, but as the decade wore on, New York’s role diminished to essentially nothing. Perhaps we can take comfort in believing that was the project’s fatal flaw, but Christie’s willingness to siphon rail money to roads makes me skeptical.

The overarching issue with ARC, Gateway of the 7 line extension is one of local government and expenditures. Who stands to benefit most from the new tunnel — New York businesses who can bring more commuters and tourists into the city or New Jersey residents who will find their commutes quicker and less stressful? Should New Jersey pay for transportation improvements that only incidentally end up in New York or should New York add more to the pot for a tunnel that adds to its economic allure?

The answer to those question is, obviously enough, probably both. To realize a new cross-Hudson rail tunnel, New York will have to add more to the pot, and they likely should. In an age of stretched state budgets though, it’s tough to see where the money will come from, and we may be in for a long wait until the next tunnel breaks ground.

March 4, 2011 20 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

Mangano eyeing LI Bus privatization

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

Now that the MTA has announced plans to cut 25 Long Island Bus routes, Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano is again promoting the idea of privatization to save the service. Mangano, who tried to find companies interested in the fall, claims the MTA is not running the service effectively and that privatization will cure those ills. “The MTA just wants more and more money. Now they want more money and they’re giving us half the service,” he said to Newsday.

As transit advocates and LI Bus workers were quick to point out, though, Mangano’s thinking is simply wrong. If the MTA can’t operate little-used bus routes at a break-even rate, a private company looking to turn a profit certainly won’t be able to offer the same service levels. Ryan Lynch from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign noted that Suffolk County’s system is a smaller one operated privately that requires three times the subsidies Nassau County has forked over to the MTA lately. “The county would be better served, and bus riders would be better served, if Nassau partnered with the MTA,” he said.

Mangano, who foolishly called for Jay Walder’s resignation over this issue in September, took heat from the MTA and LI Bus drivers as well. The MTA, which has cut LI Bus administrative costs by 30 percent, claims Mangano is just playing politics. “Mr. Mangano is more interested in shifting blame than in providing the service Nassau bus riders need and deserve,” spokesman Kevin Ortiz said.

Cindy Tropeano, a driver who heads Committee to Save Long Island Bus, expressed her skepticism as well. “It would be worse, if not the same,” Tropeano said of privatization. “We’re hoping that they wise up and that somebody put some money into it so that all of this can go away.”

The MTA is hosting a hearing on the cuts in March, and the board will vote in April. Will Nassau County leave 16,000 of its residents out to dry or can a deal be reached? Stay tuned.

March 3, 2011 8 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMTA Politics

Meet the Assembly’s new Authorities Oversight boss

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

For much of the past decade, Richard Brodsky had been in charge of a legislative check on the MTA. As head of the Assembly Committee on Corporations, Authorities and Commissions, the Westchester Democrat had oversight power over the MTA and made sure to use his bully pulpit to push the authority toward improvement. He was, however, anti-congestion pricing, and while his good government initiatives should be applauded, he didn’t have a great grip on the financial picture. He stepped down to run an unsuccessful campaign for Attorney General, and James Brennan, a 27-year committee vet from Brooklyn, took his place.

This week, The Bond Buyer sat down for an interview with Brennan, and he talked about his oversight philosophy. So far, he’s saying all the right things when it comes to transit. “I’m a devoted supporter of mass transit because it’s the backbone of the metropolitan area,” he said. “The MTA’s got major capital budget shortfalls going forward which we’re probably not going to deal with right now.”

Recognizing that the MTA’s current financial model which relies heavily on real estate tax revenue cannot support something as necessary as the subways, Brennan is willing to look outside of the box. In fact, he was a congestion pricing supporter a few years back but didn’t mention specifics in the interview. “Real estate transactions have proven to be too volatile a financing source for them and they’re going to need something going forward that’s more stable,” he said. Brennan certainly does, as one member of the Citizens Budget Commission said have “big shoes to fill,” but for now, it sounds as though he’s up to the task. That’s welcome news indeed from Albany.

March 3, 2011 5 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

34th Street: The life and death of a Great Idea

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

Project opponents believe the 34th St. Transitway will blight the area. (Image via NYC DOT)

Once upon a time, the Department of Transportation had a Great Idea for 34th St. The Department recognized that this oft-choked road could go for some reengineering in order to deliver cars to where they want to go and better service the tens of thousands of commuters who use 34th Street-bound buses while allowing the pedestrians that drive the businesses to flourish. Thus, a Transitway was born.

Conceptually, the ideas seemed simple enough. Most traffic west of 5th Ave. is heading to the Lincoln Tunnel and most traffic east of 5th Ave. is bound for the Midtown Tunnel. The street, therefore, would go one way in its respectively direction while 34th St. from 5th to 6th — an area bound by Macy’s, the Manhattan Mall and the Empire State Building — would be closed to most traffic. A two-way, two-lane bus-only lane would span the length of the island.

For the people who ride and the people who walk, this would have been a grand experiment in restoring the streets to the people who make them thrive. But the residents, for selfish reasons, and business owners with some practical concerns that could have been addressed, did not like it. Coop and community boards played the senior citizen card. How could old ladies to get to their door steps behind bus lanes if taxis couldn’t reach them? What happens with deliveries? Won’t a wall of buses lead to constant blight?

I’ve sparred with these claims in the past. Basically, they amount to glorified NIMBYism. New Yorkers hate change, and they particularly hate being told that the streets belong primarily to people and to modes of transportation that carry more people and not to cars. The battle has grown fierce over the last few weeks as Steve Cuozzo issued an insanely wrong critique of the Transitway that Streetsblog quickly dispatched. But the opponents had the Post on their side, and as Janette Sadik-Khan and DOT took heat over the Prospect Park bike lanes, the Transitway came under fire.

Today, we learn dismayingly that DOT is starting to cave. As Michael Grynbaum reported, the Department has eliminated the pedestrian-only space between 5th and 6th Avenues, and it is reassessing the plan to usher in the city’s first physically separated bus lanes. “The design has evolved as we continue to work with the community,” Sadik-Khan said to The Times. “We want the public process to play itself out.”

For now, the city is mum on the fate of the Transitway. They will present revised design of the Transitway at a March 14th forum, and the plans will be finalized by the end of the year, four years after DOT first announced the 34th St. concept. Progress is slow in New York, and it’s hard to call it forward-looking by now.

Beneath the name-calling and the bitter debate, I wonder what’s really going on here. This project has been met with an obscene of community resistance from what many contend is the wrong or incomplete community, and the minority — a vocal and well-connected minority at that — is asserted its voice over the greater good of the city.

First, DOT does deserve a tip of the cap, in a sense, for listening to the concerns of those whose opinions it solicited. It hasn’t been a very movable participant in the redesign of New York’s streets lately, and to heed the public will lead to better cooperation.

That said, they’re not asking everyone they should. As Cap’n Transit has been pointing out for six weeks now, DOT has failed to consider how Queens and Staten Island commuters should have a say in this project. Over 33,000 people a day from Staten Island and Queens take buses that lead to 34th St. in order to get to work, and the opinions of those folks who would benefit most from improved transit aren’t actively courted by DOT.

As the Cap’n wrote, “Why did they limit the “community” to people living right near 34th Street? Why concede the frame that the only “community” that matters is the tiny group of people who really care about curbside car access? And once they did, why did they then let [Corey] Bearak in? They wound up with a bunch of entitled NIMBYs screaming about not being able to get bottled water delivered by truck, and a guy who seems to be paid to attack the Bloomberg Administration – and no express bus riders to balance them out!”

People and buses are being shunted aside by drivers along 34th Street.

Meanwhile, if any project demands a hard line from DOT, it’s this one. As the Cap’n noted last week, 34th Street could be a bellwether for the city. From personal safety to faster commute times to cleaner air and a nicer environment for pedestrians, this project matters. From a modeshare perspective, it’s a no-brainer. Cars are vastly outnumbered by pedestrians and buses, and cars, which are trying to escape 34th St., do not contribute to the area’s economy.

Right now, this project sits in the balance. If DOT unveils a new version without physically separated bus lanes, the city might as well throw in the towel on Select Bus Service. A loss here simply means the people who cry the most and scream the loudest win even when their arguments shouldn’t carry the day, and it means that buses — used by over two million New Yorkers daily — won’t get the upgrades they need to become more viable. The long-term ramifications of that decision will echo well beyond the hallowed curbs of 34th Street.

March 3, 2011 85 comments
2 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

MTA planning steep cuts to Long Island Bus

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

Nassau County has not invested in its own bus system. (Graph via TSTC)

The game of chicken between the cash-strapped MTA and Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano is about to leave approximately 16,000 residents of Nassau County without bus service. As Newsday reported this morning, the authority has failed to reach a funding agreement with the delinquent county and will cut 25 of Long Island Bus’ 48 routes.

According to Alfonso Castillo’s report, Bethpage, Elmont and Lindenhurst will be left without bus service and two other lines will enjoy weekday-only buses. “I can’t tell you that people will not be hurt by this. People will be hurt by this,” MTA CEO and Chair Jay Walder said to Newsday. “We can only provide the services that are being funded.”

Castillo has more on the long-standing conflict between Mangano and the MTA:

Walder said the bare-bones bus services are all the MTA can afford to run, given that Nassau County contributes only $9.1 million to the bus system’s $141-million annual budget. By comparison, Suffolk pays about $24 million toward its bus system’s $48.6 million budget.

MTA officials say the service cuts will save $12.2 million a year, including salaries of more than 200 LI Bus employees who will be laid off. Walder said the cuts target lines with the fewest passengers. Service for about 85 percent of riders will be kept. Because Nassau ‘s paratransit bus service – Able-Ride – mirrors fixed bus routes, about 18 percent of disabled bus riders also face losing their transportation.

Walder said the decision follows several failed attempts for more than a year to convince County Executive Edward Mangano that Nassau must give LI Bus the same support other counties give their bus services. “The reality is in this case the county has a mismatch. It has put in the funding for one level of service, but it expects a level of service that is much larger than that,” Walder said.

Once upon a time, Nassau County vowed to cover the difference between fare revenue and operating costs for the LI Bus routes, but lately, the suburban county has scaled back its contributions. Mangano’s office claims it cannot find the $24 million necessary to support bus service, and it continues to look toward private operators as a potential way out of this problem. As of early November, three companies had submitted bids.

Meanwhile, the MTA is defending this action and has highlighted how the county has failed to compromise. The agency has cut administrative costs by 33 percent and has been attempted to eke every last dollar out of the Long Island Bus holdings. “At the end of the day, even at the lowest possible costs, it’s costing more than the county is providing,” Walder said.

The people who stand to lose the most also spoke out against the cuts. As one Nassau County resident spoke of her decision to move to Forest Hills for the sake of her commute, another expressed his dismay. “I think it’s the most ridiculous thing people have ever thought of,” a Levittown bus rider said. “This is like crippling you from getting to work.”

The MTA will hold a hearing on the cuts on March 23. It’s still not too late for legislative action, but timing is slowly running short as the MTA plans to vote on the cuts in April. “It’s devastating,” Kate Slevin of the Tri-State Transprotation Campaign said. “These are people who are struggling as it is – a lot of the working poor, lots of students, lots of senior citizens who can no longer drive.”

March 2, 2011 28 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Technology

MTA’s fiberoptics network already obsolete

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

Transit's new countdown clocks are a welcome addition to the system, but the technology infrastructure behind them is already out of date. (Photo via New York City Transit)

The MTA’s not-so-new fibers optics-based communications infrastructure is already out of date even before the system is fully operative, the Daily News reports today. Work on the network, which cost $370 million is $76 million overbudget, first started in 2000 — eons ago in technology years — and will be completed later this year.

The countdown clocks are its public face, but behind the scenes, as it improves internal communications and emergency response preparedness, the system already needs an upgrade. “Due to technology evolution and other factors, many components in this network are at or nearing their end of life,” one authority document obtained by the News says.

Donohue has more:

In the document, a request for information, the agency asked technology companies for advice on designing a “next-generation” communications network and fixing shortcomings with the existing one, which is up and running in much of the subway system.

The MTA on Tuesday stressed the existing network – called ATM/SONET and designed by Siemens Transit Technologies – is functioning and carrying beneficial data, like next-train arrival times, at more than 100 stations…

MTA documents say existing problems include:

  • Some of the equipment no longer is being made, which could make it more difficult and costly to maintain or upgrade.
  • The network may not have enough capacity for remote viewing of the growing amount of video from surveillance cameras.

“This will put a large strain on [NYC Transit’s] current network, which was not originally designed to support the video capacity needs,” the October document states.

The numbers on the cost overruns are both staggering and unsurprising. The first phase of the project is four years behind schedule and $36 million over budget. The second part will cost $40 million more than expected and isn’t delivering the same public benefits — in the form of countdown clocks — that Phase 1 provided.

James Vacca, the chair of the City Council’s Transportation Committee, had some words to share. “Delays don’t just add millions of dollars to projects. They also lead to products that are obsolete even before anyone hits the ‘on’ switch,” he said. “That’s unacceptable.”

The problem with any technology project is that the product is often obsolete before anyone hits the “on” switch, but in this case, the delays have led to litigation and headlines for years. Now, as Donohue notes, the promised safety benefits of this project may go unrealized without further investment. It is, in every sense of the word, one giant snafu.

It’s worth noting too Vacca’s point. The MTA must get its capital house in order if it wants to find a way to fund the rest of the current five-year plan and close the $10 billion gap. When this project was first contracted out, Virgil Conway was the MTA Chair, and sense then, Peter Kalikow and Dale Hemmerdinger have come and gone. It’s tough to provide oversight with so much change at the top.

This is exactly the situation though for which Jay Walder was brought to New York. The countdown clocks are a welcome addition to the system, but the technology behind it with its behind-the-scenes uses will have to be maintained and brought in line with current technology standards. That is so small task indeed.

March 2, 2011 11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Metro-North

After delays, Metro-North’s M8 finally debut

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

Relief is coming to the New Haven Line.

Nearly a month to the day since Metro-North announced it would have to scale back service amidst a rough winter and a maintenance crunch, the MTA yesterday unveiled the first set of M8s to enter service. With the debut of the new rolling stock, the MTA also announced that full rush hour service would return to the New Haven Line beginning on Monday.

The new cars, though, long billed as the MTA’s commuter fleet’s next-generation rolling stock, received top billing yesterday. They deserved too after extensive delays in both funding and testing had them on blocks for months. “These cars have successfully completed extensive, systematic tests. The many challenges that were revealed during intensive, real-world operations of the most complex rail car in North America on the continent’s busiest rail corridor, have been resolved,” Metro-North President Howard Permut said. “This testing took over one year to ensure that the M-8 will provide quality service for its 30 year life. We plan to put more of these cars into service as soon as they complete individual quality assurance testing.”

The new cars, says the authority, make for a nice ride. In a press release, the agency described the upgrades:

Inside the cars, customers will notice are roomier, high-back, contoured seats with individual headrests, curved arm rests anchored at both ends in the upholstery. They will see larger windows and better lighting, especially in the vestibules for improved safety. Other features include LED displays that show the next stop and automated audio announcements. Each seat is outfitted with electrical outlets, grab bars, coat hooks and curvaceous luggage racks. The cars also are equipped with an intercom system that customers can use to contact the crew in emergencies.

Outside, customers will see prominent electronic destination signs and hear external public address speakers. Single leaf doors provide high reliability and less susceptibility to snow intrusion. The color scheme is a vibrant red, the historical color of the New Haven Railroad, predecessor to Metro-North…

In the M-8, critical, solid-state, computer-controlled electrical components are protected within the car body rather than exposed under the car so that inclement weather will not interfere with their operation.

Redundancies are built into the cars to ensure continued operation if a system malfunctions. For example, as in the M-7s, each car has two, modular air conditioning units so that if one fails, the other will continue to cool the car until the broken one can be removed and replaced with a spare. Older cars such as the M-2s have one AC unit that was integral to the car so that the entire car had to be taken out of service while repairs were made.

The cars, which cost $2.23 million each, were first ordered back in August of 2006 when the MTA and Kawasaki executed a 300-car, $761-million deal. Last month, the authority exercised two options — one for 42 more cars and another for 38 — that will bring the total to 380 cars. The authority expects to have 26 cars in service this spring with 80 total by the end of 2011. All 380 will be in service by the fall of 2013.

“I am thrilled to be able to introduce a new era of comfort and reliability for New Haven Line riders,” said Jeff Parker, Connecticut’s Transportation Commissioner. “Even a single eight-car train set will help alleviate crowding and bring hope to our beleaguered New Haven Line customers. These cars are the first of the new breed of technologically advanced trains that will serve us for decades to come.”

It’s been a long trip for the M-8s, and New Haven riders have borne the brunt of the delay. Now that these cars are in place and hitting the rails, though, Metro-North, the nation’s most popular commuter rail system, should enjoy smoother sailing in the years ahead.

March 2, 2011 33 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