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

BrooklynBuses

A vote against Select Bus Service for all the wrong reasons

by Benjamin Kabak June 4, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 4, 2010

NYC DOT’s proposed Select Bus Service plan for Rogers Ave. in Brooklyn includes bulbs for BRT, inset stops for local service and fewer parking spaces. (Rendering via the MTA/DOT SBS Presentation from Dec. 2009)

When it comes to purely local government in New York City, nothing stands in the way of progress more than the Community Boards. These glorified neighborhood associations are generally stocked with people who aren’t representative of their constituents and have not embraced a pro-transit, pro-biking, pro-pedestrian livable streets/livable city agenda. They vote against protected bike lanes and true rapid transit bus lanes because their cars need valuable on-street real estate for below-market parking spots. In a sense, the community boards are a mockery of democracy.

Late last week, in a move that would surprise no one, Community Board 15 out in Sheepshead Bay voted against Select Bus Service along the B44. The DOT and MTA — two organizations that will probably not heed the non-binding CB15 vote — have been planning to unveil a Select Bus Service route from Sheepshead Bay itself to Williamsburg with subway connections to the B, Q, 2, 5, A, C, J, M and Z trains. Already, 42,000 people ride the B44, and the SBS route should increase that total.

The Community Board though doesn’t want it. In car-heavy CB15 where only 50 percent of residents rely on mass transit, its representatives say the elimination of parking spots hurts “the little guy.” “I might start riding the bus more often,” Tom Bowers, a senior who no longer uses his car, said to a reporter. “But most of the time, things like this hurt the little guy.”

Others claimed the new bus route would “inconvenience” the neighborhood while at an April Community Board meeting, members decried the lost parking spaces. Comparing the long Brooklyn route to the Bronx’s Bx12 service, CB15’s chair cast a skeptical eye on the whole thing. “For all this money they’re putting out during a time when they’re cutting service, how much time are they really saving?” Theresa Scavo said. “I dont think six minutes is worth all of this disruption.” If my commute were six minutes faster each way every day, I’d save an hour a week and over two full days in commuting per year.

Of course, these Community Board vote comes as no surprise. As Ben Fried from Streetsblog meticulously detailed in May, CB15 is opposed to safer streets for seniors and feels that SBS pre-boarding receipts would lead to an immeasurable increase in paper trash on the floor. But, hey, more car emissions. I sometimes wonder if these Community Boards are simply parodies of government.

The real problem with this Brooklyn Select Bus Service route isn’t its impact on parking or the supposed cost of painting some lines on the ground and building out some bus bulbs. It’s the route selection. The B44 already serves its purpose; it gets riders to the nearest subway line while passing through some business corridors. Few, if any, people ride from Sheepshead Bay to Williamsburg, and that probably won’t change much with the introduction of Select Bus Service. A Flatbush or Utica Ave. route would have been preferable choices over the Nostrand/Rogers Ave. combination for both the traffic-calming impact and ridership levels.

When time comes to evaluate the bus lanes, NYC DOT and the MTA aren’t bound by the Community Board 15 vote. They can disregard it as the bitter rantings of an auto-centric neighborhood that can’t stand to lose some lane and parking space for the good of everyone else. While Tom Bowers may think better transit service will “hurt the little guy,” he’s completely wrong. Community Board vote or not, the little guy will win when buses move faster.

June 4, 2010 83 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMTA Absurdity

Stuck in an elevator

by Benjamin Kabak June 3, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 3, 2010

Earlier this week, 12 passengers were trapped in an elevator at 168th St. when the only means of travel to and from the platform stalled mid flight. The incident happened on Tuesday afternoon at 4:11 p.m., and those trapped were finally rescued at 5:20 p.m. In amNew York today, Heather Haddon explores how elevator failures have plagued the MTA. The article — available only in this PDF for now — alleges that the MTA suffered through 91 elevator outages from January through March this year. That total represents an increase of 18 percent from the same time period last year.

For Transit, elevator woes are nothing new. A 2008 examination of the elevators by The Times revealed how the MTA’s $1-billion elevator investment didn’t pay off. Nearly two-thirds of all elevators had problems over the course of a year, and the repair costs were astronomical. And that’s why I take the stairs.

June 3, 2010 12 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Subway Maps

A complete look at the new subway map

by Benjamin Kabak June 3, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 3, 2010

Over the last few days, we’ve spent a lot of time discussion the MTA’s new subway map. On Friday, we explored how the MTA is using the service cuts to refresh and declutter the map. Yesterday, we examined the battle between form vs. purpose and design vs. geographic in subway map design. Today, I’ve got the goods.

Via NBC New York comes a full preview of the new subway map. I’ve embedded the a low-res version of the full map after the jump, and by clicking on it, you can download a 2.8 MB PDF file.

As you’ll see, the map looks pretty good up close and in full. The MTA has certainly started clearing up the clutter, and while the drop-shadow gray lines can be slightly awkward, I think they work to highlight the routes. Above, I’ve posted the map’s mid-day service disclaimer, and I have to wonder if the MTA should consider a return to the two-sided map with the back that shows overnight service. The authority last employed such a device in the mid-1990s when Manhattan Bridge service led to massive service changes based on the time of day. As it stands now, the new map won’t be too useful come 11 p.m.

Anyway, enjoy the finer details of the new map, and kudos to those who can spot the one mistake I’ve found so far. As a hint, it’s in Queens.

After the jump, the new map in full. Click the image for a very high-res PDF.

Continue Reading
June 3, 2010 55 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

A salary too high or simply too many employees?

by Benjamin Kabak June 3, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 3, 2010

The Empire State Center for New York State Policy — a project for the right-of-center Manhattan Institute which has turned out-of-control pension costs into its cause célèbre — released its entire MTA payroll data for 2009 yesterday, and as we can imagine, the hand-wringing has begun. If we want to assign blame, though, a bloated work force could trump inflated salaries.

As the Empire Center reported, the MTA’s total payroll increased by 2.4 percent in 2009. With the TWU, one of the MTA’s largest unions, earning its members a four percent raise last year, some of the MTA’s cost-cutting measures must have been successful. Meanwhile, more than 10 percent of the workforce take home salaries in excess of $100,000. The Center published a PDF list of the top 100 earners, and by and large, these are people who deserve their salaries. Compensation under $300,000 for agency heads seems downright cheap compared to what these workers would make in the private sector.

The Empire Center’s press release offered up some good tidbits. In the $150,000-and-over club were 11 LIRR car repairmen who nearly tripled their base salary through overtime shifts. Others included:

  • 65 Long Island Railroad and Metro-North Railroad conductors who averaged $86,837 over their base salaries which averaged $75,970;
  • 53 Bridge & Tunnel Sergeants and Lieutenants who averaged $94,962 over the average base pay of $82,594;
  • 34 Long Island and Metro-North Railroad engineers who averaged $89,109 over their $77,953;
  • 28 MTA police officers; and
  • 23 Long Island Railroad gang foremen averaging $81,718 over their base pay rate $82,249.

To drill down on the salary figures, the Empire Center has provided the public with a salary database as well. Things get interesting when we start looking at what train operators made. One took home over $81,000 on a base salary of $28.65 an hour. That comes out to 350 eight-hour shifts in one calendar year or a lot of overtime. Overall, New York City Transit’s 3487 TOs took home a combined $239.7 million last year.

I could go on and on with the numbers; it is, after all, strangely addictive and voyeuristic to see what these public employees make. But lists of not-that-outrageous compensation figures serves little purpose. To identify cost savings, the MTA has to figure out how to reduce not just overtime but man-hours as well. A proposed plan to offer early-retirement packages that the MTA and TWU are discussing could be a good start, but the issue won’t be solved by attacking overtime or adjusting work rules alone.

Rather, one of the problems facing the MTA is the sheer number of people it employs in mostly redundant positions. Metro-North and the Long Island Rail Road pay far too many people to collect train tickets, and Transit has a staff of 3487 train operators that could, with current technology, be chopped in half. While union members protective of their jobs claim that one-person train operation will slow down transit, real-life application of that advancement has done nothing of the sort throughout the transit world. We simply do not need two people driving and controlling the subways any longer.

For its part, the MTA noted its attention to payroll reduction, but the unions were largely silent after the Empire Center released the data. “We are in the process of overhauling every aspect of our business, including the elimination of approximately 3,000 positions this year,” the authority said in a statement. “One key part of this effort is a focus on the work rules, pension padding and management oversight that leads to some of the unnecessary overtime highlighted in today’s report.”

Yet, that approach almost misses the point. As management and its unionized workers square off over cost-cutting measures, inevitably, the debate turns to battles over compensation figures that aren’t too high. It’s time to reframe that debate, and while OPTO and a more efficient commuter rail ticketing system would involve cutting a large number of employees, the MTA is saddled with too many workers at all levels. That’s the real problem.

June 3, 2010 35 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Technology

At Coney Island, a new sign for the next train

by Benjamin Kabak June 2, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 2, 2010

Updated (4:15 p.m.): As the expensive PA/CIS roll-out continues along the A Division stops, New York City Transit is continuing its attempts at a low-cost solution for a few key B Division stations. The latest to enjoy this new-to-New York technology is the popular Stillwell Ave. terminal at Coney Island.

This past weekend, Transit debuted a series of screens on the station’s four platforms that inform riders which train will be leaving next. As shown above, the screen will display the line information with an arrow pointing toward the next train to depart, as the signs currently in use on the 42nd St. shuttle platforms do. This is, says Transit, Phase I of a larger pilot program that will provide train departure track and time information throughout the popular station.

“Providing easy to understand travel information to our customers is one of our primary goals as we look to introduce cost effective new technology into the system,” Transit President Thomas F. Prendergast said. “While not as sophisticated as what we have in place on the Canarsie L line, or what is going in on the IRT, this next train departure information system is something our customers will come to rely on as they head home from a fun day at Coney Island.”

For now, this solution — engineered and installed in-house with the system supplied by SolariUSA — will feature four 32-inch high-definition, sun-readable LCD screens in the middle of each track. The signs will be activated by the dispatches at Coney Island. This initial pilot features track-specific signs, but according to Transit, later phases will incorporate a larger screen near the fare-control area that displays track and time departure information in the form of a reverse countdown similar to those information boards used by commuter rails. Transit is, in other words, trying to take the guesswork out of Stillwell Ave., and riders will no longer have to use their powers of ESP to determine if, say, the Manhattan-bound N or D will be leaving before the Q or F.

As yet, there is no timeline for the future phases of this project, and the MTA has yet to release a cost estimate. It is, however, a much-needed addition to the Coney Island terminal.

After the jump, another view of the new screens.

Continue Reading
June 2, 2010 12 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Subway Maps

What purpose a subway map?

by Benjamin Kabak June 2, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 2, 2010

The current subway map iteration of Manhattan is shown here on top of the new version.

With the MTA set to introduce a new version of its subway map over the next few weeks, New Yorkers who follow these sorts of changes have been debating the purpose of a subway map. On Friday, I noted how the MTA has struggled to balance the design of the subway map with its geographical purpose. During the Vignelli years, geography took a backseat to design while in the post-1979 world, geography has been the driving force behind The Map.

In today’s Times, Design columnist Steve Heller explores the evolution of the subway map and the MTA’s attempts at getting this iconic image just right. I’ll excerpt the good parts:

Although Mr. Vignelli’s stylized, diagrammatic map earned its place in the pantheon of postwar design — the collection of the Museum of Modern Art — it has fostered considerable debate about its heretical abstractions and is cited by design historians as one of Modernism’s most fabulous failures. While failing to cater to the public’s needs, its colored linear motif nonetheless clearly and rationally conveyed the fundamental distinction of which subway line is which. By simplifying the geographical details, the map may have looked less like a conventional map and more like an electrical schematic, but it forced the eye to see only the essentials. Maybe it was ahead of its time. Or maybe it was right on time — but the public failed to recognize it.

Its replacement in 1979, a more traditional topographical version, reintroduced all the basic map conventions (including blue water) and, most important, the New York City street grid. Yet the circulatory look of the map not only lacked the aesthetic flair of the Vignelli classic, it also junked up the graphical way-finding composition by reintroducing thinner and more serpentine route lines and a mass of smaller landmark details. Making Manhattan and the boroughs more representational probably helped users recognize their locales and destinations, but it also injected a labored look to the entire document.

The revision in 1998 added even more information, including free transfer points and alternate bus service, but once again reduced the size of the colored lines and route numbers. Users adapt to almost anything over time, and adjusting to the more cluttered composition was no exception. But that should not be the determinant of good design. While the Vignelli map may not have been the most versatile or adjustable given changes in the subway system, the ’79 and ’98 maps did not solve any of the aesthetic woes.

The new map, says Heller, “does indeed reduce the level of visual noise to a more tolerable level.” It is not, however, “as great a design achievement as it might be. Less isn’t always more, but as long as the Transit Authority is married to including all the details, it will take more than plumping up Manhattan to make a beautiful and functional map.”

The problem remains the battle over function. Should a subway map attempt to show accurate geographical representations of subway lines as New York’s attempts to do or should it show schematic route maps that give passengers a sense of direction slightly removed from geography as London’s and Paris’ does? Until the MTA and its map designers have a better answer for that question, the map will remain a bit cluttered, and it will feel perhaps comfortable in the clutter even if its geographical reliability isn’t 100 percent.

June 2, 2010 37 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MetroCard

Eliminating the need for a swipe

by Benjamin Kabak June 2, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 2, 2010

How much can the MTA discern about a potential replacement for the MetroCard from a six-month pilot program? As the authority unveiled a new contactless PayPass program yesterday morning, that’s the question hovering just beneath the surface of New York’s next leap in fare-payment technology.

The details are mostly as I reported last week. On Tuesday morning, the MTA, Port Authority and New Jersey Transit along with MasterCard launched a six-month trial that will run until November. The trial enables transit riders to purchase fares and transfer between these independent systems by tapping a credit or debit card equipped with the proper RFID chip at the stations equipped to handle it. In New York City, only the Lexington Ave. IRT stations in Manhattan and Borough Hall in Brooklyn along with eight bus routes will accept the PayPass trial.

Officials from the various transit agencies praised the openness of the system. It is the first time in New York City’s history that the three rail carriers will accept the same type of payment. “The technology that we’re testing will make life easier for our customers and help reduce our cost of doing business at the same time,” MTA Chairman and CEO Jay H. Walder said in a statement. “By using an open network we’ll break down regional barriers and let people travel across the region with a card that’s already sitting in their wallets.”

From an implementation standpoint, the idea is simple. For the first two months of the pilot program, MasterCard users will be able to tap and go, and for the final four months, the pilot will be open to users of most major credit cards. Those who pay per ride won’t need to enroll while those who want to take advantage of discounted fares or unlimited ride options should head over to the Ride NY/NJ website. As I wondered last week, how will this system scale when the MTA attempts to role it out systemwide?

Beyond the technical aspects, though, the MTA has been very transparent in its goals. Walder wants to speed up bus boarding and turnstile movements while cutting down on the amount it costs the agency to collect fares. A savings of just two cents per dollar collected would net the MTA an additional $30 million a year. Additionally, this swipe-less technology will provide riders with a complete statement of transit trips made each month. That information today remains a mystery to all but the most dedicated travelers.

“The first thing people will notice is that the days of the mis-swipe are behind them,” Walder said. “It’s simple and easy to use. You touch it to a pad. You immediately go through the turnstile or get on the bus, and there’s no question about doing it.”

Yet, I have to wonder about the efficacy of such a limited pilot program. In an ideal world where money is no obstacle, every station would be equipped with at least one turnstile able to handle the pilot technology. As it stands now, few — if any — straphangers would use the unlimited ride options because the pilot is limited to just one subway route. If the agency can’t determine how widespread use would impact the new system, can they adequately assess the pilot program?

I posed that question to Aaron Donovan at the MTA yesterday, and he assured me that the authority would consider this problem in judging the new fare-collection technology. The authority anticipates that three types of costumers will use the new pilot: early adopters; regular commuters who use only the pilot routes and stations; and infrequent riders willing to use the Tap-and-Go technology to pay. Those who ride as I do — with a 30-day unlimited ride card — won’t be represented initially.

Still, authority officials believe the new faster fare payment system will be a hit. “People are going to look at it and say, ‘Why didn’t I have this sooner?'” Walder said. “It’s going to make their lifes easier. It’s going to be simple. It’s going to be quick. It’s going to be convenient.”

After the jump, a video on the new PayPass trial with soundbites from the region’s transit officials.

Continue Reading
June 2, 2010 24 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Second Avenue Subway

Rachel Maddow explores the SAS launch box

by Benjamin Kabak June 1, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 1, 2010



The tunnel boring machine head and much of the trailing equipment have progressed through the launch box and south down Second Ave. since its launch two weeks ago. (Photo via The Rachel Maddow Show on flickr)

In mid-May, I took a trip into the Second Ave. Subway launch box as part of the MTA’s ceremonial launch of the tunnel boring machine. On Friday, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow did the same, with a video camera in tow.

She ended her Geek Week special with a look at some impressive infrastructure projects. Although I’ve questioned whether or not Phase 1 of the SAS is a megaproject, the work going on underground is certainly impressive in scope, and Maddow brought it to light in an 11-minute segment, embedded below.

What I like most about Maddow’s coverage is the accompanying flickr photo set. By comparing her pictures with mine, we can see how far the 500-foot-long tunnel boring machine has dug out since it started work two weeks ago. For now, progress will be slow and steady, and the TBM should complete the two tunnels by next November.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

June 1, 2010 10 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Self Promotion

SAS on ‘Good Day, New York’

by Benjamin Kabak June 1, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 1, 2010

Earlier this morning, I appeared on Fox 5’s Good Day, New York along side Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign. The two of us talked with host Greg Kelly about the MTA’s weekend travel woes, the Congressional attempt to find money for nationwide transit authority operating deficits and the upcoming service cuts. The accompanying short story is available online, and you can watch the video below. Check it out.

June 1, 2010 15 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesTWU

TWU lawyers ask court to dismiss MTA complaint

by Benjamin Kabak June 1, 2010
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 1, 2010

Laywers for the Transport Workers Union Local 100 have asked a Manhattan judge to dismiss the MTA’s attempts at overturning the arbitration-awarded raises for 2011, The Chief-Leader reports. Last Monday, I noted how the TWU planned to sue the MTA for these raises, but now, it appears as though the legal wrangling will amount to a request to throw out the MTA’s appeal. “The law is clear: it requires that a court vacate the entire contract; not only a part of it,” Larry Cary, the TWU’s lawyer, said to Ari Paul. “The MTA is doing something not contemplated by the law. It is implementing a contract and contesting it at the same time.”

The MTA will attempt to argue that the arbitration panel did not consider the MTA’s precarious financial position when it opted to award 11 percent in raises over three years for the authority’s unionized employees. The TWU has long maintained that the authority is trying to circumvent the legal process by picking apart the award, and the judge could very well grant this motion to dismiss.

June 1, 2010 16 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