BusesMTA Technology

Bus tracking project killed for the second time

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 30, 2009

If London can do it, why can’t New York?

A top this post sits a picture from London, England. Our brethren in the United Kingdom have long managed to figure out this whole bus tracking thing. They use a few technologies above ground to display arrival times for buses at street level (and below ground for the Tubes). When last I was in London, I found those boards to be notably accurate.

Alas, in New York, it is not meant to be for the MTA is yet again killing the bus tracking project. Somehow, someway, the MTA just can’t get it to work, and the cost of this failed project could be as high as $14 million. NY1’s Bobby Cuza has more:

It’s a project that was supposed to revolutionize bus travel, telling riders exactly how long until the next bus, and allowing them to see the exact location of buses in real time, whether on the Internet or on a handheld device.

But at a City Council oversight hearing Thursday, MTA officials said “forget about it” and have officially abandoned the project, to the disbelief of lawmakers. “It’s just incredible that in this day and age, we’re nowhere closer to being able to know where the buses are at any given point,” said Queens Councilman John Liu.

Under a contract awarded in 2005, tracking equipment was installed onboard 185 Manhattan buses. In August of 2007, screens began operating in test mode, but were turned off a few months later because the times were inaccurate. They’ve been dark ever since.

The MTA scrapped a similar project in 1996 because, Cuza reports, “satellite signals were lost in the skyscraper canyons of Manhattan — just one of many issues, the MTA says, that makes it difficult to predict arrival times.”

“It’s not just the urban canyons, but the schedules, the tight schedules, the headways, the traffic. The operating environment I think is the most challenging of any city’s,” said Sassan Davoodi, Co-Project Manager, NYC Transit.

Of course, it’s challenging. Of course, it may not be perfect. But as the MTA gears up to remove the trial boards from the already-outfitted stations, I have to wonder what went wrong. Why can’t Davoodi pick up the phone and call his counterpart at Transport for London? Why can’t the people in charge put two and two together to come up with a viable tracking plan for New York? GPS-based navigation works in the city; this should do.

John Liu, long a councilman I’ve regarded with a wary eye, summed it all up. “After nearly 20 years, there’s been zero progress,” he said. “And that’s pathetic.”

16 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Fulton Street

Fulton St. Hub rescued by stimulus billions

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 30, 2009

The dome has been saved! Long live the dome!

Rejoice, all ye Lower Manhattanites! The Dome of Fulton Street has been saved by stimulus cash heading the MTA’s way straight from Congress.

Finally, after an eternity of delays, hundreds of millions in cost overruns and 15 months of “we’ll decide next month,” the MTA can finally see a very faint glimmer of light at the end of the Fulton St. tunnel. To think, just three days ago, I was bemoaning the fact that this project will be well over half a decade late if it ever gets completed. It’s still going to wrap up late, but at least, there’s money for it again.

Anyway, joyous sarcasm aside, this is good news for the MTA. According to the agency’s CEO and Executive Director Elliot Sander, New York’s transit authority stands to gain between $1.5-$2 billion from the stimulus, and $500 million of that will head to Fulton St. Nearly William Neuman has the story:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority expects to spend $497 million in federal economic stimulus money to complete the stalled and over-budget Fulton Street Transit Center in Lower Manhattan, the agency’s executive director said on Thursday. The money would bring the project’s cost to as much as $1.4 billion, nearly double what was estimated when it was conceived in the wake of the terror attack of Sept. 11, 2001.

The additional financing would allow the authority to move ahead with plans to erect an architecturally dramatic glass building atop the transit hub, said Elliot G. Sander, the authority’s executive director. However, it was not clear if the final design would include the project’s signature feature, a conelike skylight, known as an oculus, that would channel daylight into the lower areas of the station. Mr. Sander said the oculus could add about $40 million to the cost.

“The pavilion has to be many things to many people,” Mr. Sander said, referring to the glass structure. “It has to be a building of vibrant design with as much new retail activity as possible.” He called it “a highly visible portal to a modern transportation complex.”

Originally, this project was slated for a completion date around now and a budget of $750 million. It will far exceed those expectations and not in a good way.

Meanwhile, we have to consider a few things — political and planning — to this announcement. First, Sander issued it while testifying before Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. The Man who Killed Congestion Pricing again holds the keys to the MTA’s financial future. If he can shepherd a strong bailout plan through the Assembly, there’s hope yet. In return, Silver, long an ardent supporter of the Transit Hub at Fulton St., will finally get that hub. It’s a political tit for tat.

But on the other hand, I’m a little skeptical of this is a good use of stimulus money. While this money cannot go to operation budgets, couldn’t the MTA use $2 billion for the Second Ave. Subway? It is, after all, arguably a more important piece of the city’s future than a ritzy hub on Fulton St. Sure, they had to build something. Sure, they had to placate Silver. But that’s one expensive political bribe at the cost of better projects.

Either way, though, I can’t complain too much. This is an infusion of some much-needed cash to get a long-delayed project off the ground, and that’s good transit news.

20 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Metro-North

Yankee Stadium Metro-North costs going up

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 29, 2009

Correction Notice: Please note that there is a correction to this post. You can read it here.

* * *

When the MTA, at the behest of the city, opted to take on the Metro-North stop near the new Yankee Stadium, it seemed like a good idea at the time. The agency could, for $40 million, open up a new station in an area of the city that could really use the commuter rail access.

Of course, as is the case with every other project in New York these days, initial cost estimates never come true. According to new reports, the MTA is now on the hook for at least $53 million for this new station, and costs are still going up. Metro’s Patrick Arden reports:

The cost of the new Metro-North station has climbed to $92 million —the city’s kicking in $39 million — and keeps rising: This week Metro-North approved $800,000 to keep the station clean.

“The Yankees have refused to contribute,” said Andrew Albert, a rider rep. on the MTA board.

When the Yankees’ stop was OK’d in 2006, then-MTA chair Peter Kalikow pledged a “similar level of commitment” to the Mets, spending $8 million to study improvements to the LIRR and subway stations at Shea Stadium.

The MTA is keeping Kalikow’s pledge, but its financial situation has deteriorated.

In my opinion, the Yankees shouldn’t have to bear any of the cost overruns for this project. While it certainly benefits the team, it benefits the neighborhood more. If Kalikow and his Board didn’t see fit to work out a deal to balance cost overruns with the city, the Yankees shouldn’t have to take the blame for that.

When all is said and done, these cost overruns pale in comparison to the 62 percent (and climbing) increases at Fulton St., but they are another indication of a poorly financed MTA/New York City joint project. I can’t wait for this to happen with the 7 line extension too.

2 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Absurdity

The South Ferry debacle as an MTA metaphor

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 29, 2009

All Times

It’s not a stretch to say that the South Ferry story — the first new station in 20 years delayed by a one-inch miscalculation — is indicative of the larger problems plaguing the MTA. After all, like every other recent capital project, the South Ferry station is tens of millions of dollars over budget and now 14 months late. But there’s something about the way the MTA handled this gap problem that speaks volumes about its internal organization.

When last we saw this story, Newsday had reported that a gap between the platform and train doors ranging from 0.04 inches to one inch in violation of safety standards had to be closed. Thus, the opening of the new South Ferry Terminal would be delayed by a few weeks. As Wednesday progressed, more news emerged.

Surprisingly — or not, really — the Daily News reported that it will cost $200,000 to replace and enlarge the two pieces of plastic that will close the gap. That’s about 1200 feet of plastic and labor for $200,000. No wonder the MTA is running a deficit. (For what it’s worth, the News also notes that water is already seeping into the sparkly new station. The MTA will attempt to use more grouting to stem that leak. At least the new station will fit in with the rest of the subway system’s popular Water Damage motif.)

The good story emerged from a William Neuman City Room post alleging a credibility gap at the MTA. This gap is far wider than an inch. Neuman writes:

Now members of the authority’s board are unhappy that they were not told about the problem. “I feel we’ve got to be told exactly what’s happening,” said Andrew Albert, a board member. “Mistakes do happen,” he added, “but we have to know.”

The flap began on Monday when the authority’s capital construction czar, Michael Horodniceanu, told a board committee that the station opening was being delayed because it was taking longer to test the station’s mechanical systems, such as the fire suppression system, than had been anticipated.

He made no mention of the gap problem, even as he was being questioned by board members about the delay…

On Wednesday, after a meeting of the full authority board, Mr. Horodniceanu told reporters that he had first become aware that the gap might be too wide at least a week ago. He said that measurements were taken last weekend and that he reviewed the data Monday afternoon.

Horodniceanu released a statement to the media and the Board when questioned about his unwillingness to offer up the gap problem on Monday. “Until I had clear indication that there is nothing that we can do,” he said, “and that did not happen until Monday, when I got a plot of the survey, it was not a topic that I thought ought to be brought up unless I had an answer and a solution. If I bring just problems without solutions that’s an issue. And that’s not how we do business.”

That’s the whole problem, isn’t it? At last night’s largely unremarkable but heavily attended Brooklyn-based fare hikes and service cuts hearings, the few speakers I sat through before leaving at 7:30 all noted the same thing. The MTA doesn’t do business properly. Just add this to the long list of internal problems plaguing an agency that needs public support more than it needs more bad P.R. right now.

7 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesTWU

Toussaint through as head of TWU

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 28, 2009

Roger Toussaint sure picked a good time to step down. With massive service cuts and fare hikes on tap for the MTA and plans that will inevitably include the dismissal of TWU members looming, Roger Toussaint announced yesterday that he will not run for re-election of the local union that reps the city’s transit workers. Toussaint will forever be remembered for orchestrating the 2005 transit walk out and the subsequent penalties the union suffered because of that action.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Absurdity

Delayed South Ferry opening a matter of inches

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 28, 2009

Shiny Station

Mind the one-inch gap. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak)

When I noted yesterday that the South Ferry Terminal opening has been postponed, I reported that this delay was due to some testing. It turns out the station won’t open for a few more weeks because of one whole inch.

Via Newsday:

The grand opening of New York City’s first new subway station in 20 years is being delayed by an inch.

Transit officials say the gap between the platform and the train at the $500 million South Ferry subway station is an inch too wide in some places, exceeding the three inch maximum allowed by federal regulations.

To fix the problem, authorities plan to install wider rubbing boards, a plastic strip that protects the platform edge from swaying trains, a three to four week job.

Oops.

19 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

Waiting for Senator Schumer

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 28, 2009

When he’s not down in Washington, Senator Chuck Schumer lives around on the corner from me in a nice building on Prospect Park West. His base of power stems from New York City; his roots are in Kings County. Where has he been, then, amidst all of this talk of transit stimulus plans and the financial woes of the MTA?

On a national level, things are building to a head. The Streetsblog Network has been tracking the ups and downs of the efforts to restore the transit funding to the stimulus bill that was allegedly removed by Lawrence Summers. While the House denied one transit-based amendment earlier this week, Jerrold Nadler’s efforts to add $3 billion to the stimulus plan will come to a vote soon. (To urge your member of Congress to act, check out Transportation for America.)

On a New York level, though, things are far more dire. Sure, the city could use the jobs and funding for major MTA capital projects that a massive transit stimulus package could deliver, but the focus right now is on the MTA operations budget and its $1.2 billion deficit. The MTA is in fact just one of 51 transit systems facing operations budget problems, and the federal government seems unwilling to bailout this vital artery of the nation’s economy. We are left then with internal options, and our national leaders have been notably silent on the issue.

My main gripe is with Sen. Schumer’s seeming unwillingness to thrust himself into the issue. As a Brooklynite, he could have a significant impact on the debate, but right now, the only thing Schumer is trying to get is to secure a tax break for commuters if the MTA raises its fares. Pete Donohue reports:

MTA commuters can counter pending fare hikes with increased tax savings if proposed legislation is enacted, officials said Tuesday.

Sen. Chuck Schumer said his mass transit tax break has been included in the Senate version of the economic recovery package.

The provision would raise the monthly cap on mass transit commuting costs not taxed by the federal government to $230 from $120.

That’s all well and good, but what about a statement supporting the payroll tax to counteract the MTA’s fare hikes and service cuts? What about unqualified support for the plan to toll the East River Bridges from one of Brooklyn’s native sons and prominent political representatives?

Later tonight, Brooklyn takes center stage as the MTA brings its hearings circuit our way. Council members are urging vocal protests, but where’s our solution? Will Bill de Blasio support tolls that impact just 3.1 percent of the borough’s commuters or will he offer up nothing to stop fare hikes and service cuts that will impact 60 percent of Brooklyn residents who rely on the MTA to get to and from work? Will a national leader lend his voice to this problem? Time is running out.

6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Economics

A perspective on some MTA financial blunders

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 27, 2009

In The Times today, William Neuman explores an ill-timed and ill-advised bond issue by Citigroup on behalf of the MTA. It’s your typical financial meltdown story of the kind that have grown so prevalent in over the last few months.

In August 2007, Neuman reports, Citigroup analysts grew alarmed at instability in the auction-rate securities market. Yet despite these fears, Citigroup continued to push bond offerings. Neuman tells of the MTA’s perceived woes:

But that did not stop the bank from peddling the securities to investors and working with government agencies — including the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs New York’s sprawling subway, bus and commuter rail system — to bring more bonds into the already stressed market. With Citigroup Global Markets as one of its underwriters, the authority issued $430 million of auction-rate bonds on Nov. 7, 2007.

Almost immediately the deal soured. Interest rates on the bonds, set in weekly auctions, began to climb, to 4 percent from about 3 percent, and finally, by February, to 8 percent. By then, the entire auction-rate market had collapsed as panicked investors worried that they could not get access to their money.

Stunned by the soaring rates, which were costing it up to $560,000 a week, the authority redeemed the securities in March. To do so, it issued a new round of bonds, outside the auction system and at more favorable interest rates. But the move came with a cost: about $5.6 million in fees to bankers, lawyers and others, including the state, according to data provided by the authority.

That sounds bad, right? The MTA, long in debt and facing a budget crisis, added its own demise by flushing money away in a bad Citigroup investment in 2007. Let’s break out the pitchforks and burn down MTA Headquarters! Power to the people!

If only it were that simple. In reality, this is a long and complex story about something through which nearly every single organization has suffered over the last few years. The MTA didn’t make money in a bad investment. But as the agency has a diversified portfolio, they were, until the markets went south in late 2008, able to make up for it, and they could offset these losses by saving $150 million in the variable-rate debt market. “This was a calamitous disruption in the credit markets,” MTA CFO Gary Dellaverson said to Neuman. “We managed our way through it.”

It’s other worth noting that $5.6 million represents less than 1/2 of one percent of the MTA’s overall debt. While every little bit helps, these Citigroup losses were but a drop in the MTA financial bucket. You decide how much this really matters in the grand scheme of transit in New York City.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesMTA Construction

New South Ferry Terminal delayed

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on January 27, 2009

Once upon a time, the new South Ferry Terminal was due to open in early 2008. It’s now the end of January 2009 and a good six weeks since I went on a tour of the new terminal. At the time, Michael Horodniceanu, the president of MTA Capital Construction, told the gaggle of reporters that the new station stop would open by early January. Now, in his piece on the Fulton St. hub, Bobby Cuza notes that the station opening has been delayed due to final testing. Shocking, I know. An announced opening date could come later this week.

3 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts