MTA Politics

Walder confirmed as Senate preens

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 11, 2009

After a two-month circus that saw a bunch of uninformed State Senators sound off on transit issues, the MTA finally has a new permanent chairman and CEO. In a 47-13 vote that saw a unified Democratic front joined by a splintered state GOP faction, the Senate voted to approve Jay Walder as the new head of the MTA.

“I am confident that Jay will shepherd the MTA into a new era – one that benefits all riders, whether in the Hudson Valley, the five boroughs or on Long Island,” Gov. David Paterson said this evening. “I applaud this confirmation and look forward to working with Jay as we strive to make the MTA more efficient, transparent and accountable.”

Of course, as we’re talking about the State Senate, Thursday evening’s vote was hardly a smooth affair, and numerous Senators showed their utter ignorance and lack of perspective in voting down Walder’s nomination. With reports from all major outlets, let’s see what everyone was saying.

Per Elizabeth Benjamin, one Binghamton-based GOP Senator voted against Walder because his area has no MTA. “As an upstater, I have roads and bridges,” Tom Libous said in an effort to explain his “no vote. “I don’t have an MTA where I live.” Libous voted as he did to “send a message” to the rest of the state government. “We have no plan for roads and bridges. We need to have a comprehensive capital plan.” That is petty state politics at its finest.

John Flanagan, another Republican from Long Island, voted no because Walder had previously MTA experience. “He’s not a newbie to the situation here,” Flanagan said. “He’s got a track record – no pun intended – having worked for this authority.” For that and for Walder’s unwillingness to take a strong stand during this confirmation sideshow, Flanagan declined to approve a qualified candidate.

Stephen Saland, a Hudson Valley Republican, also voted no for no good reason. According to The Times’ coverage of the confirmation vote, Saland neglected to lend his support to Walder because his Senate colleagues refused to host one of their confirmation hearings in his district. Somehow, Saland is upholding his public duty with this vote.

Finally, one man who voted yes — Carl Kruger — continued to sound ignorant of reality. “There is still much work to be done to repair the frayed relationship between the MTA and its frustrated and beleaguered ridership,” the Senate Finance Committee Chair said in a statement. “But Mr. Walder answered our questions, allayed our concerns and appears committed to heralding the new era of transparency and accountability at the MTA that we fought so hard to achieve during the past year.”

I again question Carl Kruger’s ability to pay attention to reality. For years, the MTA has put numerous budget documents on its website. For years, the MTA has been more forthcoming than any other public authority with its fiscal information. It hosts multiple public forums and has opened its books for all to see. This “new era” began before Elliot Sander arrived; it’s not beginning today. I wouldn’t expect Carl Kruger — a politician who feels that bus lane enforcement will lead to increased congestion — to understand that.

In the end, this tomfoolery doesn’t really lead anywhere. The Senate is mocked, and the MTA has its head. On paper, Walder is eminently qualified, but during the confirmation hearings, he ducked answering questions on a few hot-button issues. He has his work cut out for him, and as the Senate will be keeping a close eye on him, it won’t be an easy task.

3 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Subway History

When you could finally take the A train

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 10, 2009

A relic of a naming convention lost to time. (Photo by flickr user wallyg)

Today, we celebrate a birthday. The venerable A train, made famous by Billy Strayhorn in 1939, is 77 years old for it was at midnight on September 10, 1932 that the A and its local sister the AA started operating along the 8th Ave. IND lines.

The Independent Subway line has, unsurprisingly, a long and tortured history. It took 12 years from the point of conception to open just the 8th Ave. line and parts of the original IND system did not open until 1988, 56 years after the first A train rolled up the tracks. Meanwhile, the Second System, which I explored in depth last year, has never materialized, and we’re still waiting for the Second Ave. Subway to arrive.

While you can read a complete history of the IND at NYCSubway.org, I want to put aside historical skepticism and look instead at the reports of the new subway’s opening. The Times covered the event in great detail, and the article is a gem of 1930s New York City reporting.

The opening itself was not marked by any ceremony. The line took seven years to build, and it cost $191.2 million. By mid-1932, the city was looking for someone else to operate the trains, but amidst a Great Depression, no one stepped forward. Paul Crowell reported on the first passengers to reach the platform:

There was no official “first train,” no official opening ceremony, no laudatory speech-making program. The chains which have blocked access to the turnstiles were removed just before midnight last night, and those who dropped their nickels in the turnstile slots were free to board a train at any station along the line. The full operating schedule has been in effect since Wednesday afternoon, and at every station on the line, uptown or downtown, a local or express was available within a few minutes after the prospective rider reached the station platform.

At Times Square, New Yorkers gathered en masse to await the opening of this new subway line with its brand new R1 rolling stock, wide platforms and mezzanine express stops. Crowell writes of the maddening crowds all waiting to drop their nickels into the turnstiles:

The largest crowd to board trains immediately after the official opening was at the Forty-second Street station. At that point Mr. Delaney gave the signal to throw the turnstiles open to the public. The first person to drop his coin into the slot was Billy Reilly, 7 years old, of 406 West Forty-sixth Street, who had been waiting several hours for his first ride on the new line. He got a preferred place on line when, Mr. Delaney learned that he was born March 14, 1925, the day ground was first broken for the new subway.

At this station, as well as at Columbus Circle and Thirty-fourth Street, a carnival spirit was manifested by those who waited to board the first trains. They rushed through the turnstiles, cheering and shouting and rushed down the stairways to the platforms. The first train to pull in was a southbound express. It was filled to capacity and carried the first load of straphangers to ride on the new line. Fifteen minutes after this train pulled out there was still a line in front of the main change booth at the Forty-second Street entrance of the station.

Of course, not everything was smooth sailing for the A train. One passenger alleged that the turnstile had eaten his nickel, called the new line a “rotten subway” and ran off to catch his train. Other rowdy teenagers stuck gum into the turnstile slots as lines grew long. That’s the 1930s equivalent of “Swipe Again at This Turnstile.”

Meanwhile, New Yorkers celebrated the night away, and many came out just for the spectacle of it. According to Crowell’s reporting, 2808 passed through the Times Square turnstiles between midnight and 1 a.m. on a Saturday, and at 2 a.m., the trains were still packed. “Of this number not all were riders, however, for many were satisfied to pay their nickel, make a complete inspection of the new station and return to the street,” Cowell wrote.

As the MTA and city and state officials have proclaimed the Second Ave. Subway an eventual boon for the Upper East Side, so too did New York officials proclaim the IND for the West Side. “The opening of the Eighth Avenue subway, will, in my opinion, do more constructively to bring about the rejuvenation of the west side than any other single known factor,” one-time Governor and then-head of the West Association of Commerce Alfred E. Smith said.

The technical details of the new subway, meanwhile, were impressive. The city, in fact, learned from the previous mistakes of the Interborough Rapid Transit planners. While the IRT served as the city’s first subway, many of its stations are far too close together, and some key stops are built on curved sections of the tracks. Trains can’t maintain or achieve top speeds as they navigate the Union Square curve or run from Bowling Green to Wall St. to Fulton St. Crowell noted the changes:

Subway stations have been located with respect to the density of population in connection with running distances between stops. The stations are at least 600 feet long, with provisions for extension to 660 feet if necessary. They will accommodate ten-car trains with ease. They are lighted under a new system designed to eliminate shadows. All platforms are straight-edged, locations on curves having been avoided.

The cars are designed in accordance with the view of a committee of experts which gave its services without charge. Tests conducted by the board’s engineers indicate that the trains can be loaded and unloaded in 33.3 percent faster time than those on the B.M.T. and Interborough. Each car will seat 60 persons and provide standing room for 220.

And thus a subway line was born. Today, we take the IND for granted and wait for the Second Ave. Subway. Will we witness “gay midnight crowds” when the 33-block, four-stop extension of the Q train opens up in 2017 or 2018? Will we witness a spectacle and a ceremony or will just shrug its collective shoulders? If history is our guide, it will be a momentous night indeed.

21 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
TWU

MTA pleads poverty in TWU arb appeal

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 10, 2009

As the MTA attempts to avoid an arbitration ruling that guaranteed TWU workers 11 percent raises over the next three years, the agency has plead poverty in its court filings. In its motion to overturn the arbitration decision, filed Tuesday in Manhattan Supreme Court, the transportation authority said it does not have the money to pay its workers and adequately operate its trains at the same time.

For its legal claim, the MTA is alleging that the arbitration panel made egregious fiscal mistakes in evaluating the MTA’s ability to pay the raise. The agency has also threatened to scale back service and raise fares to maker labor ends meet. Pete Donohue has more:

In legal papers filed in Manhattan Supreme Court, transit officials also say the arbitration panel that crafted the contract last month made critical blunders when evaluating the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s finances.

In one instance, the panel said the MTA has a $75 million rainy-day fund, which the authority says has been drained. “The MTA simply does not have the money to pay for the ramped-up, out-of-scale unbudgeted costs…without foisting upon the public some very unpleasant choices regarding fares, service levels…and maintenance of the system,” the MTA argues.

While I haven’t yet secured the filings, The Post has more:

The suit said the raises would waste millions of dollars of a new payroll tax — 34 cents of every $100 of a business’ income — on “out-of-scale compensation increases for employees who, by all accounts, already are well paid.”

… [Arbitrator John] Zuccotti and [TWU President Roger] Toussaint both agreed the MTA can take money from its capital programs — the same budget that funds the Second Avenue Subway, the purchase of new buses and station rehabilitation — to pay the raises.

I certainly don’t agree that the MTA should be removing capital funds to cover labor costs. That represents a backwards investment in moving transit in New York City forward.

No matter the outcome though this appeal could turn labor relations toward an acrimonious stalemate. The case is set to be heard on Tuesday, and both the MTA and TWU have a lot at stake.

6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Arts for Transit

Color amidst Columbus Circle construction

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 10, 2009

MTA Arts for Transit, Permanent Art Program

The Sol LeWitt installation at 59th St./Columbus Circle. (Photo courtesy of Metropolitan Transportation Authority/Rob Wilson. Click to enlarge.)

Taking a walk through the Columbus Circle station right now is one of the least pleasant experiences in the subway. Undergoing a complete rehab that is behind schedule, the station is hot and dusty. Platforms are cut off; walls are exposed; staircases are closed.

Eventually, the station will be completely transformed, but for now, it is in a perpetual state of construction. On Wednesday, a glimpse of color appeared amidst the construction as the Sol LeWitt Arts for Transit installation opened on a double-wide wall on a mezzanine in between the A/B/C/D and 1 train platforms.

The piece, shown above and again at the bottom of the post, was commissioned in 2004, and LeWitt, who passed away two years ago, selected the site himself. The work is 53 feet wide by 11 feet tall and is made of 250 porcelain tiles of six varying colors. It is called “Whirls and twirls (MTA)” and is one of the more vibrantly-colored entries in the Arts for Transit program.

“LeWitt’s genius comes through in this artwork, which is a major work of precision with its curves and bands in vibrant color that completely fills the space,” MTA Chairman H. Dale Hemmerdinger said. “It will become a landmark and is a great tribute to one of our major artists.”

Sadly, LeWitt is no longer with us to see the piece’s grand unveiling. He died in April 2007, but the artist is enjoying much posthumous success. As his obituary says, LeWitt was known for “deceptively simple geometric sculptures and drawings and ecstatically colored and jazzy wall paintings.” An exhibit of his works, recently named one of the top art shows in the nation, is on display for 25 years at Mass MoCA in North Adams, Massachusetts, and LeWitt was very much looking forward to his collaboration with the MTA.

“When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art,” he said in an Arts for Transit interview a year before his death.

After LeWitt’s death, Sandra Bloodworth, director of Arts for Transit and Facilities Design, worked closely with the artist’s family to ensure that his vision would be realized. “This project,” she said, “was filled with challenges, as we prepared several samples of tile and glazes to meet with Mr. LeWitt’s approval and found a facility that could produce large tiles mandated by the design. Working with Arts for Transit, his family and colleagues helped bring the project to completion. It is a very special and unique creation because it is a permanent public installation of a wall drawing, executed in porcelain tile. Usually the wall drawings are executed in paint or pencil based on exacting instructions by the artist.”

While some may criticize Arts for Transit as a superfluous use of money in tight economic times, LeWitt’s piece brings some color and levity to our normally serious commutes. It lightens up a once-dull space and should be recognized and embraced as a leading example of underground art.

Click through for another view.

Continue Reading
17 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Fulton Street

Fulton St. costs rising after legal ruling

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 9, 2009

The tortured history of the Fulton St. Hub is one we know quite well. Nearly seven years behind schedule and 100 percent over budget, this project aimed at revitalizing Lower Manhattan has become a symbol of the MTA’s construction problems. Recently, the MTA faced another economic setback as a New York State Supreme Court judge ruled that the agency owes displaced real estate owners another $40 million.

While I first saw this write-up in the Post, GlobeSt.com has a more thorough story. In a ruling issued late last month, State Justice Walter Tolub told the MTA that it will have to up its valuation of three Lower Manhattan parcels seized as part of the Fulton St. Transit Center project. The MTA had priced them as individual parcels, but the judge is considering them to be an assemblage with a higher price tag. Paul Bubny has more:

“The highest, best and most profitable use of the properties would have resulted in the construction of residential rental and condominium development, with ground and second floor retail development,” Tolub wrote in his August 28 ruling. Given that, “there is simply no question” that the three northernmost parcels along lower Broadway between Fulton and John streets “would have constituted an assemblage, and that the parties would have entered into a zoning lot merger, transferring the development rights. These lots were, for all intents and purposes, under common ownership and control.”

That common ownership of the four properties on these parcels came from the Reformed Protestant Church of the City of New York, the fee owners of 192, 198 and 204-210 Broadway; and from Brookfield Properties, which entered into a joint venture with the church on ownership of 200 Broadway. Brookfield and the church had discussed an assemblage of these parcels well before the MTA’s eminent domain seizure of the properties in March 2006, Tolub wrote. All have since been demolished.

According to Tolub’s ruling, the church had also been in active negotiations with the Riese Organization, which owned 194 Broadway, for developmental rights prior to the MTA’s taking the property. Based on comparable sales that took place in early 2006, Tolub ordered the MTA to pay the Rieses $35.2 million for 194 Broadway, and to pay the church and Brookfield a total of $106.5 million for the four other properties.

In a statement to me about the ruling, the MTA expressed its plans to file an appeal. “The MTA disagrees with the court’s valuation of property required by the MTA to complete the Fulton Street Transit Center and intends to appeal the decision,” the statement said.

Despite this legal setback and the potential for a higher price tag, the Fulton St. plans are not in fiscal jeopardy. “The project’s budget and the proposed 2010-2014 capital program include reserves for contingencies, which, if necessary, would cover these increased valuation costs,” the MTA said.

Attorneys for the victorious plaintiffs said they would seek fees and other expenses from the MTA as the case heads to an appeal. I certainly hope this transit center is worth it in the end.

15 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Politics

Walder says something and nothing as vote looms

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 9, 2009

The Jay Walder confirmation circus hit Harlem on Tuesday. While it seems as though the State Senate will confirm Walder as the new top dog for the MTA, Walder is still speaking in platitudes while offering few glimpses into his MTA strategy.

I unfortunately could not venture uptown yesterday to attend the hearings, but both The Times and amNew York, among other outlets, sent reporters. The tone and substance of the coverage is widely divergent. Michael Grynbaum is skeptical of Walder and his non-answers while Heather Haddon found promises of innovation. We start with The Times:

Based on a public hearing in Harlem on Tuesday, Mr. Walder has already mastered at least one political sleight of hand: the nonanswer answer. Asked about the transportation authority’s much-publicized new labor agreement, Mr. Walder said he had not read the proceedings and could not comment. He said the authority “can do much more with the bus system,” but he was vague on the details, saying he hoped to see more enforcement of bus lanes.

In his testimony, he also said that he hoped to encourage “a new communications strategy with the communities we serve” and to make public information about the system more “comprehensive and comprehensible.” But he declined to be any more specific, leaving the several dozen people attending the hearing with more generic phrases often associated with management consultants, like McKinsey & Company, Mr. Walder’s current employer.

“We need to address the issues of credibility, accountability and transparency,” he said when asked about his goals. “I’m sure we can all agree on that.”

Haddon, meanwhile, highlights three areas of in which the MTA can look to upgrade its system. Walder wants to bring a contact-lass payment system online; he wants to install train-arrival boards with real-time train information; and he wants to beef up the bus operations through consistent ticketing of those who block the bus lanes and an expansion of the city’s nascent bus rapid transit system.

“We walk to the edge of the platform, we look over, we wait to see if there’s a white light. And if we see the white light and hope it’s not a reflection, then we know that the train is actually coming. This is simply not the way to operate a 21st century transit system,” Walder said of the MTA’s technological woes.

It’s hard to argue with either Grynbaum’s or Haddon’s take on the Walder confirmation hearings. On the one hand, Walder can’t really say anything inflammatory during these sessions because he risks losing the support of the State Senate. He can’t bash the labor deal or discuss much about the ongoing legal battle with the TWU — although he could do more than say that he hasn’t read the arbitration award yet. He can’t address the MTA’s real economic short comings right now either without upsetting Senators already antsy about a tax- and fee-heavy MTA bailout plan.

On the other, it always comes back to the money. Walder can talk about technological innovation and our need to catch up with our global transit competitors until he is blue in the face. Without the money, the MTA is stuck spinning its wheels and trying to maintain its State of Good Repair. Walder needs to be confirmed, and he’ll have to be realistic about the MTA’s short- and long-term future. He may have the support of transit advocates, but Walder has yet to show me that he deserves to replace Elliot Sander, the man the Senate and Governor unceremoniously kicked to the curb.

3 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Second Avenue Subway

Second Ave. relocation sagas

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2009

Over the last few years, as work on the Second Ave. subway has progressed, I’ve written extensively about the impact construction has on local businesses. With streets and sidewalks torn up, foot traffic to many Upper East Side businesses has slowed to a crawl, and more than a few shops have closed up in the face of a decade-long threat of subway construction.

Over time, I’ve been less sympathetic to the business owners who bemoan these inconveniences. In the end, the Second Ave. subway will benefit Upper East Side businesses and New Yorkers as a whole. If a few owners who had ample warning of impending construction are facing a tough time, that is a price the city must willing to pay for transportation progress. (For more on the business side of the equation, check out this piece from Friday’s amNew York.)

The residential part of the relocation issue, though, is a different story. Because the MTA has to purchase some Second Ave. properties for substations, ventilation shafts, emergency access stairwells and other infrastructure-related needs, federal law imposes an obligation on the agency to find displaced residents “comparable housing.” As Michael Grynbaum reports, this process has been plagued with problems as residents and the MTA struggle to define what comparable housing really is. He writes:

Dave Zigerelli was told to consider low-income housing across from an on-ramp to the Queensboro Bridge. The first apartment shown to Nicolle Poian was half the size of her own. Ann and Conrad Riedi, ensconced in the same rent-stabilized apartment for 40 years, said they were encouraged to move out of Manhattan — and their dog, Biscuit, might not be allowed to come along. “They told us to think outside the box,” said Ms. Riedi, 64.

The Riedis’ apartment, a big three-bedroom in a stucco-walled walk-up, is one of 60 homes on the Upper East Side that will soon be converted into ventilation shafts, public stairwells and electronics hubs, the infrastructure for the $4.5 billion underground line, scheduled to open in 2017.

The transportation authority said that it was doing its best to accommodate residents who want to stay in the neighborhood, and that no one was being forced to leave the area. Affordable housing was suggested to residents who might be eligible, said a transportation authority spokesman, Kevin Ortiz.

But the options for tenants are limited. At first, Mr. Ortiz denied that the relocation service hired by the authority, a national real estate company called O. R. Colan Associates, had suggested that residents move outside their district, which stretches from East 59th Street to East 96th Street. Given an e-mail message showing that one tenant was encouraged to consider housing in Harlem, at East 116th Street, Mr. Ortiz said the authority wanted to offer as many choices as possible.

“We’re doing our due diligence,” he said. In the case of the Harlem apartments, he added, “No one seemed to be interested.”

According to Grynbaum, officials generally interpret “comparable housing” to be of the same size and rent in the same or a nearby neighborhood. If someone opts to upgrade their housing, says Grynbaum, the MTA will be on the hook for the rent different for 3.5 years. Based on the anecdotes he tracks down, though, this idea of “comparable” has so far eluded the MTA.

Numerous couples report being shown low-income housing. Others talk about options to relocate to Roosevelt Island or an apartment underneath the tram at 60th St. and 3rd Ave. Still others talk about being shown smaller apartments without similar amenities.

In the end, the MTA has few choices in this matter. They are legally obligated to relocate these residents to “comparable housing,” and if the agency cannot accommodate that demand, then the residents can sue for an injunction. Any legal proceedings would slow the long-delayed project to a halt. It is in the best interests of the MTA to find the right housing, and they owe it to these Second Ave. residents to do so.

20 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesTWU

Bloomberg to stay out of TWU/MTA fray

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2009

In a piece critical of New York City’s mayor, The Post’s David Seifman calls Michael Bloomberg’s noise on the MTA/TWU flap just politics. While the mayor has expressed his displeasure with the arbitration finding in favor of the TWU and while he is currently engaging in what I’ve termed a faux-populist takedown of the MTA, he won’t join the MTA in appealing the TWU decision. While a city spokesman says that the Mayor’s Office will be “vigorously supporting” the MTA in its appeal, the city won’t join the suit because its lawyers do not believe it is a “affected party.” Support by any other name…

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
New York City TransitView from Underground

Musings on holding the doors

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 8, 2009

HoldingDoors

Every year, New York City Transit evaluates why its trains are late, and every year, the leading cause of subway delays is generally straphanger-generated. People holding the doors and people preventing the doors from closing are the two leading culprits behind delayed trains.

To combat this epidemic of door-holding, New York City Transit has unveiled a new public-service campaign. The poster, above, now appears in 2200 subway cars throughout the system, and the message is a simple one. Don’t hold the doors. It delays this train; it delays the next one. Everyone will see — the red person — and everyone will know that you are responsible for the train delays. (In addition to the posters, a new automated announcement will debut soon as well.)

“The selfish act of holding the doors while one tries to board or exit a train can delay several trains along a line, particularly during rush hour when trains run more closely together,” Steven Feil, senior vice president of Subways for NYC Transit, said. “But aside from that aspect, you can get hurt.”

It’s a simple message, but will it resonate with New Yorkers? The question is one of subway ethics. It involves why we hold doors, why we shimmy into trains too full to fit us and why it doesn’t really matter if this train or the one right behind it is delayed. The delay, after all, is on paper only. The train isn’t delayed if everyone expects to wait at crowded stations during rush hour as people inevitably block or hold the doors.

We start the first questions: Why do we hold doors and why do we block doors? The answer to this conundrum brings us back to my on-again, off-again series of pieces about underground ethics. On the one hand are the people who block doors. These people either cram themselves into subway cars too crowded for another person or insert their arms, legs and backpacks into closing train doors. These are introverted masses. They hold the doors for themselves because they don’t want to be late and can’t deign to wait four minutes for the next train. They don’t really care about this PSA.

On the other hand are the people who hold train doors. Sometimes, these people hold train doors because they see a harried commuter rushing down the staircase, hoping the train won’t leave. Sometimes, these people hold train doors because their friends are right behind them, because the baby stroller is slowly getting on board, because the conductor can’t see the lines of people at the far end of the platform. These are the extroverted helpers, and the PSA probably won’t impact their generally altruistic behavior too much.

In the end, then, I posit that this PSA doesn’t add much to the realm of underground ethics. The subways are delayed only if New York City Transit considers them to be delayed. When I board a rush hour train in the morning or afternoon, I expect a few slow station stops. I expect people to cram into a crowded car, too impatient to wait for the next train. I expect a modicum of door-holding. I expect door-related delays to slow down my ride, and in the end, it’s not really slowing down my ride because I am expecting it.

Maybe this PSA will help. Maybe a few people won’t hold the doors, and a few more people may find themselves waiting for another train. But none of us like to wait; we all want to get to where we need to be as soon as possible. For that, straphangers will continue to hold doors.

24 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Long weekend service advisories

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on September 4, 2009

It’s time for the unofficial end of summer, and I’m out of the city for a few days. The subways are going to be running on a Sunday schedule on Monday but with few service disruptions. The following though are in place for the weekend. Remember: These come to me from the MTA and are subject to change without notice. Check signs at your local station and listen to on-board announcements for the latest and greatest.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, August 7, 1 trains skip 28th, 23rd, and 18th Streets in both directions due to a track chip-out at Chambers Street station. 2 and 3 trains provide alternate service.


From 11:30 p.m. Friday, September 4 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 7, there are no 1 trains operating between 14th Street and South Ferry due to a track chip-out at Chambers Street station. 2 and 3 trains provide alternate service between 14th Street and Chambers Street. Free shuttle buses replace 1 trains between Chambers Street and South Ferry.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 7, 2 trains run local between 96th Street and Chambers Street due to a track chip-out at Chambers Street station.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, September 5 and Sunday, September 6, 3 trains run local between 96th Street and Chambers Street due to a track chip-out at Chambers Street station.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 5 a.m. Monday, September 7, Manhattan-bound 6 trains run express from Hunts Point Avenue to 3rd Avenue-138th Street due to a track chip-out at East 143rd Street.


From 7 a.m. to 4 p.m., Saturday, September 5 and Sunday, September 6, Manhattan-bound A trains skip 111th and 104th Streets (in Woodhaven, Queens) due to track rail and tie installation.


From 5 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 10 p.m. Sunday, September 6, Coney Island-bound D trains run on the N line from 36th Street to Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue due to 38th Street Yard work.


From 5 a.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday, September 6, D trains run local between DeKalb Avenue and 36th Street due to cable work south of 59th Street-4th Avenue.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 8, D trains run local between 34th Street and West 4th Street due to a track chip-out in the 53rd Street tunnel.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 8, E trains are rerouted on the F line in Manhattan and Queens due to a track chip-out in the 53rd Street tunnel:

  • There are no E trains between 34th Street-Penn Station and World Trade Center. Customers should take the A or C instead.
  • Manhattan-bound E trains run on the F from 21st Street-Queensbridge to 34th Street-Herald Square/6 Avenue.
  • Queens-bound E trains run on the F from 34th Street-Herald Square/6th Avenue to 47th-50th Sts. Trains resume normal E service from 5th Avenue-53rd Street to Roosevelt Avenue.
  • In Queens, the Manhattan-bound E platforms at Queens Plaza and 23rd Street-Ely Avenue are closed. Free shuttle buses connect these stations with the 21st Street-Queensbridge F station where Manhattan-bound service is available.


From 12:30 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 8, Jamaica-bound E trains run local from Queens Plaza to Roosevelt Avenue due to track maintenance.


From 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Saturday, September 5, Manhattan-bound E trains run express from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Roosevelt Avenue due to track cleaning.


From 12:30 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 5 a.m. Tuesday, September 8, F trains run local between Roosevelt Avenue and 21st Street-Queensbridge due to track maintenance.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, September 5, Sunday, September 6, and Monday, September 7, there is no Queens-bound G train service from Court Square to Forest Hills-71st Avenue due to a track chip-out in the 53rd Street tunnel. Customers should take the E or R trains instead.

  • Manhattan-bound F trains run local from Roosevelt Avenue to 21st Street-Queensbridge during this time.
  • Free shuttle buses connect stations at Court Square G/23rd Street-Ely Avenue, Queens Plaza, and 21st Street Queensbridge F stations.


From 6:30 a.m. to midnight, Saturday, September 5, Sunday, September 6, and Monday, September 7, there are no Brooklyn-bound G trains from Forest Hills-71st Avenue to Court Square due to a track chip-out in the 53rd Street tunnel. Customers may take the R instead.


From 12:01 a.m. to 5 a.m. Saturday, September 5, Brooklyn-bound G trains run express from Forest Hills-71st Street to Roosevelt Avenue due to track cleaning.


From 4:30 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 10 p.m. Sunday, September 6, there are no J trains between Myrtle Avenue and Broadway Junction due to switch renewal north of Broadway Junction. Free shuttle buses provide alternate service. Customers may transfer to and from shuttle buses and J trains at Myrtle Avenue and Broadway Junction.


From 5 a.m. Saturday, September 5 to 10 p.m. Sunday, September 6, there are no M trains running due to switch renewal north of Broadway Junction. Rerouted J trains replace the M between Myrtle and Metropolitan Avenues.


From 5 a.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday, September 6, N trains run on the R between Canal Street and 59th Street (Brooklyn) due to conduit and cable work south of 59th Street-4th Avenue.


From 4:30 a.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday, September 6, there are no R trains between Whitehall Street and Bay Ridge-95th Street due to conduit and cable work south of 59th Street-4th Avenue.

  • N trains provide alternate service between Whitehall Street and 59th Street (Brooklyn)
  • Free shuttle buses replace R trains between 59th Street and 95th Street.
6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts