AsidesBusesSecond Avenue Subway

SAS, BRT to receive federal transportation money

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

Earlier today, the Federal Transit Administration released the list of local transit projects set to receive New and Small Start Grants, and New York’s big-ticket projects are set to benefit. Both the Second Ave. Subway and one of the City’s planned Select Bus Service routes will see federal funds flow its way. Elana Schor of Streetsblog was all over this story this morning, and she reports that SAS will get $197 million in federal funding and that the Nostrand Ave. BRT route will receive $28 million. FTA Administrator Peter Rogoff praised NYC DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Kahn for her “leadership on this and other related projects.”

The BRT grant is an interesting one because the Nostrand Ave. corridor has been subject to some car-based politicking. Local business owners who will lose their personal parking spots are not too happy about the project, and the vocal minority voices often tend to trump the silent majority who stand to benefit from faster surface transportation and a less congestion business area. While 19 elected officials have support the 1st and 2nd Ave. Select Bus Service plan without federal funding, politicians who represent the Nostrand Ave. neighborhoods have yet to speak out in favor of the Brooklyn-based plan despite the obvious need to speed up the painfully slow B44. Noah Kazis hopes that federal funds will change that anti-transit attitude. Either way, these grants are good news for some of the city’s cash-strapped projects.

10 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

New BRT-focused bus debuts in the Bronx

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

Meet the latest addition to New York City’s extensive bus fleet. The Nova Bus LFS, which debuted in mid-January along the Bx12, is being called the bus of the future by New York City Transit. First announced last June, these articulated buses feature three doors, low floors and clean engine technology. Better still, this vehicle was built by workers in Plattsburgh, New York, and it truly is a product of the MTA’s state-wide impact.

Right now, the bus above is one of the 90 Transit expect to receive. These new buses will run along the city’s Select Bus Service corridors and these buses were designed with an eye toward speeding up bus service. “This is the perfect operation for a low-floor bus with three wide entry/exit doors,” Joseph Smith, Transit’s senior vice president at the Department of Buses, said. “Our SBS service is designed to move large numbers of people quickly and efficiently. Adding one door and subtracting two steps helps to accomplish that.”

The MTA recently provided a fact sheet about the new bus model, and it seems to be a nice one. The LFS is 62 feet long — or slightly longer than the standard subway cars on the lettered lines. It can fit 54 seated customers and another 58 standees for a total capacity of 112. “Boasting corrosion-free outer skin panels and frame along with improved fuel economy from its clean diesel engine and smart transmission, this technically advanced bus is expected to cost less to operate and maintain during the course of its service life,” Transit’s release said. It also features a rear window — a relic of buses from decades past when the engine components did not block the back.

With the addition of this bus to the fleet, the MTA is moving ahead with its plans to support the bus system and make it more than the inconvenient transit step child. The low floors allow for faster street-level boarding and combined with the pre-boarding fare payment systems, should help speed up what can be painfully slow bus service. Now if only the city would propose those physically-separated bus lanes.

After the jump, a view of the inside of the Nova Bus LFS with the rear window barely visible in the back. All photos courtesy of New York City Transit.

Continue Reading
33 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Fare HikesService Cuts

Balancing the budget: fare hikes vs. service cuts

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

At the end of this post is a poll about how you think the MTA should balance its budget. Scroll down or click here to vote.

For 44 years, from 1904 to 1948, subway fares in New York City cost riders one nickel. The Buffalo Head became the symbol of a subway ride for millions of New Yorkers, and by 1948, the five-cent fare had become a political issue. Those running the city’s transit systems could not sustain the system on five cents per ride — or the 1948 equivalent of two cents in 1904 money — but politicians ran populist campaigns focused around saving the low subway fare.

If that sounds familiar, well, that’s because it is. History has a funny way of repeating itself in local politics, and the subways have long been used as a political football of sorts. Fiscal improprieties and fare hikes have been the cause of politicians for decades even as the very same politicians refuse to find adequate funds for the underground veins of New York City.

Recently, we’ve seen all sorts of fare and fiscal shenanigans involving the MTA. When the Board had to raise fares in 2008 to cover an expected economic shortfall, then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer pushed to maintain a $2 base fare while upping the price on the rest of the MTA’s fare options. In 2009, the MTA raised fares by approximately 10 percent as part of the Albany funding package.

And so we arrive in 2010. Nearly a year ago, the agency vowed to avoid a fare hike this year, and we’re seeing that political drama in the form of service cuts play out. Were a fare hike on the table, the agency would be in line to raise the fares in four consecutive years and potentially five out of seven years for a biannual cost-of-living fare adjustment is likely in 2011. This hike — a centerpiece of the Ravitch Report designed to free the MTA from some economic uncertainty — remains up to the discretion of Albany as Ravitch’s recommendations were not adopted.

As the MTA unveiled its fiscal problems to the city in December, the agency clearly did not believe it to be politically expedient to put forth a budget balanced on the backs of a fare hike. In fact, not once did anyone at the authority mention a fare hike. Rather, as the end-of-year returns and 2010 projections rolled in, the MTA quickly embraced service cuts. Although many of these service cuts could be viewed as refinements that should better help the MTA address transit needs, the fact remains that these are cuts through and through. In particular, the Student MetroCards are a prime example of that trimming.

Over the last few weeks, many have asked me why the agency didn’t consider a fare hike and what a hike proposal would potentially look like. We’ll start with the latter question. In general, a one percent increase in fare yield — or money collected — will lead to an increase in revenue at the MTA of approximately $50 million. To cover the 2010 budget gap — estimated right now at around $350-$400 million — the MTA would have to increase fare yield by eight percent. That doesn’t correspond directly to a fare increase of eight percent because of the agency’s discounts, but we could assume an increase of 10 percent. A 30-Day Unlimited Ride Card would probably be nearing that magical $100 mark, and everything else would increase accordingly.

So why didn’t the MTA go this route? As I explained above, politics played no small role in this decision. The agency seemingly did not believe it could renege on its promise to avoid a fare hike this year, and it had a better card to play. By throwing down the Student MetroCard issue and forcing politicians to respond to charges of underfunding student transportation, the MTA could hope to generate more political agita that should result in more student funds. At the least, it’s a safer bet than anything fare related. There, politicians would stomp their feet and approve another fare hike.

In the end, though, we pay through service cuts. We will see train headways increased, load guidelines revised, neighborhood bus routes restructured and eliminated and service generally slowed down. Eventually, we’ll have to pay higher fares or else the MTA won’t be able to sustain an adequate transit network for New York City. With these cuts, the authority is beginning to run up against that boundary.

So in the grand tradition of bloggers who don’t have the right answer to tough questions, I leave you with a poll. Would you rather have a service cut this year or fare hikes? I err on the side of fare hikes simply because services rolled back take a long time to restore; the fares will eventually go up anyway. Not everyone agrees.

To balance its budget, the MTA can either resort to fare hikes or service cuts. Which option would you prefer?
Total Votes: 219 Started: February 2, 2010 Back to Vote Screen
55 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Technology

Countdown clock rollout continues in the Bronx

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

The countdown clock rollout along the MTA’s A Division stations continued this past weekend as two more stops along the 6 line in the Bronx are now enjoying the real-time train arrival message screens. Buhre Ave. and Middletown Road, two lightly used stations along the IRT Pelham Line saw their PA/CIS systems activated on Friday.

With PA/CIS at these two stations now online, Transit has activated screens at seven of the 152 stations set to enjoy the new technology by the end of the first quarter of 2011. At numerous other stations throughout the system, the screens sit wrapped but unused as Transit continues to install the underlying software and accompanying communication systems. Officials at Transit say that PA/CIS will be activated at other stations not necessarily in the Bronx or along the 6 line as soon as everything is in place.

The new iteration of the countdown clocks features automated in-system announcements as well as screens in the fare control areas so that straphangers know how long they will have to wait before swiping in. Each screen features the next two trains to arrive and can be used to display and announce information related to service delays and emergency situations. For now, Transit has activated these clocks only at low-ridership stations, and Buhre Ave. and Middletown Road — the 367th and 405th most popular of the system’s 422 stops — fit that bill. I’m looking forward to seeing these debut at some of the more higher trafficked stations throughout the city.

Anyway, the photos come to me via New York City Transit, and the one below shows the clock at Middletown Road in the fare control area. As this system slowly comes online, New Yorkers can finally enjoy transit technology that others throughout the world have experienced for over a decade.

28 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

Searching for a perpetual funding source

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

Over the weekend, as part of their campaign to convince the MTA to use stimulus dollars as a quick fix for most of its budget gap, James Vacca, Christine Quinn and Gene Russianoff penned a Daily News op-ed putting forth their plan. By now, we know the argument: It is legally permissible for the MTA to use 10 percent of its stimulus dollars for operating costs. That contribution of around $120 million plus the $50 million in operating expenses reserved for pay-as-you-go capital needs would be enough to take the service cuts off the table while the city and state should work out a funding plan for the Student MetroCard program.

On the surface, their proposal doesn’t sound like a bad one, but I’ve had my reservations. Without exhausting the other options first, I don’t support taking money that should be used for capital resources or the PAYGO fund to cover operating deficits. Furthermore, having spent some time examining Transit’s service cuts proposals, I believe many of these cuts should stay as is. It simply doesn’t make sense for the MTA to run bus services that cost $12-$25 per passenger and service just 1100 riders per week as Staten Island’s S60 bus does.

In the end — at the 11th hour when no better solution is on the table — I would be willing to support this so-called Russianoff Plan, but for now, I want to see New York try to find that better solution. Today at The Transport Politic, Yonah Freemark tackles a similar subject. He explores how transit riders are no longer surprised by Doomsday cuts and questions the way American municipalities fund transit operations. He writes:

If there is no obvious way to avoid these reductions now, governments at all levels of the federal system should learn from this recession in order to prepare for the next one. In most other countries, despite economic downturns similar to the one being experienced by the United States, transit services have not been cut back at all. One explanation, of course, is a more stable source of revenues than the sales tax relied upon by most American transit systems to fund system operations and capital programs. Similarly, other countries have stronger social support networks, ensuring that when they experience recessions, they’re less likely to see tax revenues drop to a degree seen in the U.S. Finally, most other developed countries don’t immediately turn to inefficient, ineffective tax cuts to solve economic problems.

In other words, the declining state of American transit operations today is more a reflection of a general lack of political will to maintain public service stability. If it is disappointing to watch agencies reduce services dramatically now, it is downright depressing to note that nothing is being done to ensure that a similar situation won’t occur again.

Early last year when the MTA was facing another budget crisis, Freemark explored the state of MTA financing. Two aspects of our transit agency — very high payroll costs and an over-reliance on taxes that fluctuate with the economy — left the MTA high and dry. Paris, for example, relied upon some robust payroll taxes and heavy local subsidies along with a reduced payroll to avoid these economic problems while maintaining control of its fixed costs. New York now has that payroll tax, but it’s such a small part of the MTA’s overall budget that it can’t act as a countervailing measure to a bad real estate and sales economy.

Right now, the MTA’s funding problems are those of a lack of political will. Albany and City Hall have left the MTA with fewer subsidies than ever before, and payroll obligations are starting to spiral out of control. Before the MTA moves stimulus funds to cover operating deficits — a move that may bring the MTA to break-even this year but will leave them with the same problems next — the major players must try to contain these costs and find a more stable annual revenue source. The city and the MTA can’t keep playing this same economic game year in and year out.

11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
7 Line Extension

At Hudson Yards, a two-month extension for Related

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

As the Tunnel Boring Machines continue their march from 34th St. and 11th Ave. to Times Square, the MTA and Related are still hashing out their $1 billion deal for the development rights to the land above the Hudson Railyards. The deal, originally set to be signed in January with its first payment this month, has been given an additional 60 days, according to a report in The Observer, and as the real estate markets continue to struggle, the future of this deal is still not set in stone.

According to Eliot Brown, the MTA and Related have agreed to extend the deadline to sign the contract from January 31 to March 31, and he says that the real estate executives “have recently been expressing confidence that they indeed expect to sign the contract once the documents are ready.” Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs, one of Related’s funding partners, has dropped out of the deal, but Related says that will not impact their ability to pay the money owed to the MTA.

Brown has more:

A bit more info about the contract with the M.T.A. is in a memo from the agency, obtained by The Observer, sent late Friday to the M.T.A.’s board. The memo says that Related has until March 31 to sign the contract, when it will have to plunk down $21.75 million and trigger another $21.75 million in payments over the following year. (The whole deal is valued at a $1 billion transaction for the MTA in today’s dollars; the entire 12 million-square-foot mega-development, if built out fully, would run an estimated $15 billion.)

Should Related, led by Stephen Ross, indeed sign the contract by March, it would then obligate itself to close on the deal once the economy improves to the point where it hits a set of quantifiable triggers that include commercial vacancy rates, according to multiple people familiar with the deal. Thus the true test of whether or not the deal for the rail yards will happen is at that point—when Related must close on the deal and commit to the full 99-year lease (and the $1 billion in payments) or back out.

THE PROCESS HAS become considerably more drawn out and far more uncertain than imagined at the economy’s peak, when the M.T.A. was first soliciting bids for the site. The M.T.A. had planned for the $1 billion to start rolling in, and budgeted accordingly in its capital plan. Now Related must find major tenants willing to leap over to the far West Side and be anchors for a new giant complex of hotels, retail and office towers. And the development must have a certain critical mass of tenants to get going: the platforms alone for the two 13-acre rail yards are estimated to cost up to $1 billion, meaning a promised set of occupants is needed to get financing.

For the agency, this delay is obviously a fiscal inconvenience. It has been nearly two years since Tishman Speyer originally agreed to buy the land, and the MTA could see another $1 billion deal disappear at a time when they most need the money.

Meanwhile, the 7 line extension continues onward. The subway extension will be built, and at the rate Related is going, it will open well before the bulk of the Hudson Yards development takes place. At least those who eventually build there will have a subway line. Whether the extension is still the best use of city spending on transportation expansion remains an open question.

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Subway Maps

Mapping the Dharma Initiative express

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 31, 2010

For those of us who are obsessed with LOST, Tuesday night’s Season 6 premiere has been a long time coming. And so in a week dominated here by discussions of subway maps, I present to you the LOST subway map. Called the Dharma Rapid Transit system by creator John Cabrera, the map is a great representation of that all has happened on the island over the previous five seasons. John explains the origins of the map here on his site. Click the image above to enlarge; you’ll have to see the full-sized image for all of the detail. For the Losties among us, this one’s a keeper.

9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

A busy weekend work slate

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 29, 2010

I’m not going to mince words: This weekend’s slate of service advisories is a tough one. Again, nearly every train route is altered. As always, these come to me from the MTA and are subject to change. Pay attention to announcements and read the signs. Subway Weekender is back up and running, and you can find the map right here.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, downtown 12 trains skip 86th, 79th, 66th, 59th and 50th Streets due to switch renewal north of 72nd Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, Manhattan-bound 2 trains skip Burke Avenue, Allerton Avenue, Pelham Parkway, and Bronx Park East due to track work leading into East 180th Street Yard.


From 12:01 a.m. to 6:30 a.m. Saturday, January 30 and Sunday, January 31 and from 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, 3 train service is extended to/from 34th Street-Penn Station due to switch renewal north of 72nd Street.


From 1 a.m. to 1 p.m. Sunday, January 31, downtown 4 trains run local from 125th Street to Grand Central-42nd Street due to a cable pull.


From 6:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. Sunday, January 31, downtown 5 trains run local from 125th Street to Grand Central-42nd Street due to a cable pull.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, January 29, to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, there are no 5 trains between Dyre Avenue and 149th Street-Grand Concourse due to track work leading into East 180th Street Yard. Free shuttle buses replace 5 trains between Dyre Avenue and East 180th Street. 2 trains replace the 5 between East 180th Street and 149th Street-Grand Concourse.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, Manhattan-bound 6 trains run express from Parkchester to Hunts Point Avenue due to asbestos abatement for station rehabilitation at Whitlock Avenue, Elder Avenue, Morrison-Sound View Avenues, St. Lawrence Avenue, and Parkchester.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, January 29 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, there are no 7 trains between Times Square-42nd Street and Queensboro Plaza due to track panel installation on the Davis Street curve. The NQ and free shuttle buses provide alternate service. Note: 42nd Street Shuttle runs overnight. Q trains are extended to/from Ditmars Blvd.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, uptown A trains run express from Canal to 125th Streets due to Chambers Street Signal Modernization and conduit installation for public address systems north of 59th Street.


Manhattan-bound A platforms at Beach 25th and Beach 67th Streets are scheduled to close for rehabilitation at 12:01 a.m. Monday, February 1 for approximately four months.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, January 30 and Sunday, January 31, uptown C trains run express from Canal to 125th Streets due to Chambers Street Signal Modernization and conduit installation for public address systems north of 59th Street.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, uptown D trains run local from West 4th Street to 34th Street-Herald Square due to a substation rehabilitation north of 14th Street.


From 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Saturday, January 30, downtown D trains skip 167th, 161st, and 155th Streets due to track cleaning.


From 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Sunday, January 31, downtown D trains skip 174th-175th and 170th Streets due to track cleaning.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, E trains are rerouted on the F between West 4th Street and 2nd Avenue due to Chambers Street Signal Modernization. For service to Spring Street, Canal Street, and World Trade Center/Chambers Street, customers should take the A or C. Note: Uptown A and C trains skip Spring Street.


From 10:30 p.m. Friday, January 29 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1 (and also next weekend), there are no G trains running. For service between Forest Hills-71st Avenue and Queens Plaza, customers should take the R during the day and the E during the late night hours. Free shuttle buses run between Queens Plaza and Jay Street. For service to Church Avenue, customers should transfer between the shuttle bus and F trains at Jay Street. This is due to a switch replacement at Bedford-Nostrand Avenues, asbestos removal at Greenpoint Avenue, fan plant work at Jackson Avenue and track maintenance work at various locations.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, N trains are rerouted over the Manhattan Bridge between DeKalb Avenue and Canal Street due to Lawrence Street Station Rehabilitation and Construction of Underground Connector to Jay Street.


From 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Saturday, January 30, N trains skip 49th Street due to track cleaning.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, uptown Q trains run local from Canal Street to 34th Street-Herald Square due to a track chip-out at 14th Street-Union Square.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 30 to 5 a.m. Monday, February 1, Q train service is extended to/from Astoria-Ditmars Blvd due to track panel installation on the Davis Street curve.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, January 30 and Sunday, January 31, R trains are rerouted over the Manhattan Bridge between DeKalb Avenue and Canal Street due to Lawrence Street Station Rehabilitation and construction of underground connector to Jay Street.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
East Side Access Project

Inside the East Side Access project

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 29, 2010

Fifteen stories below street level, this space will hold one day hold four platforms and eight tracks 15 for the LIRR at Grand Central Terminal. (All photos courtesy of the MTA.)

As part of its increased presence on social media sites, the MTA has been sharing more information and more pictures of their ongoing projects with the public. Last night, via their MTA Insider Twitter account, the authority released some shots of the work in progress at the Grand Central end of the East Side Access project. For transit construction enthusiasts, these photos offer a glimpse of some good old fashioned digging. I’ve posted a few below, and the entire album is available on the MTA’s Facebook page. The Journal-News has profiled the ongoing work as well.

Once the location of Metro-North’s Madison Ave. train yard, this space will become a passenger concourse for the LIRR.

These workers, according to Metro, spend their days deep within the rocks below the city. The Manhattan schist proves a sturdy rock, and the Sandhogs say they are often joined in their work by hordes of rats.

Another view of the platform cavern.

This tunnel will, by 2016, be lined with tracks that will bring LIRR trains into Grand Central Terminal.

8 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA EconomicsService Cuts

The dangerous allure of a quick stimulus fix

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 29, 2010

Over the last few weeks, as the MTA’s funding woes have risen to the surface, a debate over the use of stimulus funds to cover the budget deficit has emerged. On the one side are the City Council and Gene Russianoff’s Straphangers Campaign who support using stimulus funds to cover the gap. On the other are, for example, the Regional Plan Association and I believe it to be a bad idea. Today, we see exactly why it’s a dangerous plan to put forward.

On its surface, Gene Russianoff’s idea almost makes sense. The MTA is legally allowed to take 10 percent of its stimulus dollars to cover operating costs. Of course, the capital fund too is stretched to its limit, and future investment in the system even in the face of temporary operating shortfalls is a key component to the long-term health of New York City. If the Russianoff Plan is enacted, the MTA would be robbing its future self to cover numerous services that deserve to be reexamined anyway.

One of my counterarguments to the Russianoff plan is the way it provides only a quick fix. The MTA has an institutional funding problem in that the city and state are shirking their responsibilities to the organization, and a one-off stimulus fix does nothing to address those problems. An economic crisis should be the time for New York to establish a better approach toward funding transit.

I’ve also argued that politicians will embrace the stimulus funding plan because it allows them to disregard further their duties toward the MTA. Why bother trying to solve a problem when they can just plug a hole for one year? Not surprisingly, that — with a twist — is exactly what some upstate politicians are trying to do. As the Poughkeepsie Journal reported earlier this week, five U.S. House representatives have asked Gov. David Paterson to reduce the MTA’s payroll tax and use stimulus funds to cover this year’s gap.

I won’t mince words here: This is a terrible idea. It would take another $110 million away from the MTA at a time when the authority is already running deficits of around $300-$400 million. It would leave the MTA with less guaranteed money after 2010. At Mobilizing the Region, Steven Higashide says it best: “This would blow a hole in future MTA budgets, since it would replace yearly tax revenues with one-year stimulus funds.”

Higashide’s Tri-State Transportation Campaign is one of the co-signers of the Russianoff Plan, but it is a plan that puts more faith in our politicians than they seem to deserve. The use of stimulus funds to hide this year’s budget gap is a dangerous move to make, and our politicians are slowly starting to show us why.

11 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts