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

View from Underground

From Crain’s, a transit wishlist without subways or buses

by Benjamin Kabak December 25, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 25, 2013

With Bill de Blasio’s inauguration less than a week away, a bunch of news outlets are offering up their wishlists for New York’s first new mayor since 2001. Shortly after the election, I put forward a transit “To Do” list for de Blasio, and a few others have set out their ideas for improving transportation in and around the city. One, in particular, deserves some attention as it focuses outside the traditional realms of subways and buses.

As part of its package of articles previewing de Blasio’s administration, Crain’s New York polled a group of experts on a variety of topics and tried to propose innovative approaches to city problems. The transportation list is an intriguing one as it barely touches upon subways and buses. It seemingly recognizes that the MTA, a state agency, is somewhat immune to the charms and whims of Gracie Mansion and instead answers to higher powers in Albany. Rather it looks as approaches a new mayor could explore with the resources of the city at his hands.

The problem with this approach though is that subways and, to a lesser extent, buses are the backbones of city transit. The subways provide the best and fastest way to move a lot of people over greater distances in relatively short amount of times, and no amount of attention paid to or money spent on, say, ferries can change the fact that waterfront access is limited to people with relatively good transit options. Nothing can revolutionize transit in New York City quite like new subway lines.

That said, the Crain’s list touches upon ideas that should happen. Transportation Alternatives has proposed redesigning Queens Boulevard, Atlantic Ave., Grand Concourses and Manhattan thoroughfares with pedestrian plazas, bike lanes and extended curbs. I’d add dedicated and physically separated bus lanes to some of these routes as well. Residential parking permits is an idea whose time should have come years ago as well, and Dan Doctoroff found another outlet to spread his light rail gospel.

But one idea has me raising an eyebrow. Crain’s wants to see the mayor “Reopen trackless old subway tunnels for electric express buses.” This isn’t the first time Crain’s has beaten their drum, and it’s hard to say which expert is pushing this plan. The problem is that there are no trackless old subway tunnels just lying about. In their coverage, Crain’s links to this list of permanently closed subway stations, but despite repeated inquiries, no one has identified trackless subway tunnels that could support bus infrastructure (or any that couldn’t, for that matter).

As now, the only potential unused sections of tracked subway tunnel are on the BMT Nassau St. Line and consist of part of the Brooklyn Loops that weren’t intersected by the Chrystie St. Cut in the late 1960s. The second platforms at Bowery and Canal St. are currently unused, and of course, the Essex St. Trolley Terminal is unused. No one will be ripping out unused subway tracks, and it’s unclear if the Essex St. space could support bus infrastructure. It’s certainly nothing a new mayor should focus on at the expense of real solutions to the city’s transit problems.

Ultimately, it’s odd to see a wishlist that doesn’t focus on bus rapid transit or even more city-funded subways. Everything else seems more futuristic or “21st Century,” but the truth is that for New York to grow, it’s current high-capacity transit infrastructure needs to grow. Enough about ferries or seemingly out-of-the-box ideas that aren’t even possible. Let’s talk instead about real expansion and investment.

December 25, 2013 32 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
WMATA

In D.C., a $26 billion plan for Metro expansion

by Benjamin Kabak December 24, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 24, 2013

Is this the Washington DC Metro system of the future? Plans for 2040 call for a loop line servicing ten stations.

When the MTA unveiled its Twenty Years Needs Assessment earlier this year, I was disappointed. The fantasy planner in me wanted something more adventurous, and the 20-year wants were more exciting the 20-year needs. A few decades ago, when the MTA’s needs assessment included East Side Access and the Second Ave. Subway, the report seemed more exciting, but now the agency needs to make sure its trains can keep running over the existing track over the next few decades. Expansion will have to wait.

To the south of New York City, though, expansion is all the rage. If we want to find a transit agency eying a multi-billion-dollar growth initiative replete with fantasy maps that could become reality, we need look no further than the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. As part of their 2040 assessment — or really their needs for today or tomorrow — the WMATA has proposed adding 10 stations and a new loop line that would alleviate congestion on crowded trains while serving criminally under-served areas. The plans don’t, unfortunately, include bench seating in their new rolling stock, but their $26 billion investment could solve a lot of Metro’s access issues.

When the plans were first announced a few weeks ago, The Washington Post ran an extensive piece on the upgrades, and Metro’s own planning blog showcased the map. The Post summarized:

Metro’s planners have begun suggesting that the region add 10 new stations and create four “super stations” by adding capacity and connections around the two Farragut Square stations, Union Station, the Capitol South station and the Pentagon station.

The 10 new stations have not been named. But going clockwise from Rosslyn, they look something like Rosslyn II, Georgetown University, Georgetown, West End, Thomas Circle, Mount Vernon Triangle, Capitol Hill North, Navy Yard II, Waterfront II and Potomac Park.

The actual locations have not been decided, but the idea is to have them built by 2040…The proposed stations and connections, chosen over three other concepts, reflect the need to expand capacity in the system’s core, said Shyam Kannan, Metro’s chief planner. “The inner lining, where we share tracks for two lines, worked for 40 years but becomes a problem going forward given the demands of the system,” he said.

The Post goes on to discuss the challenges facing the WMATA, and they, of course, start with the price tag. It’s not a stretch to say that $26 billion for new or expanded stations and a good amount of tunneling is wildly optimistic. It would require Virginia and DC to convince their third partner to spend on a rail extension that doesn’t touch Maryland and would need to convince everyone that more than 14 percent of area residents would turn to the subway for their daily commuting needs. Despite population growth in D.C. and crushing congestion, that figure hasn’t gone up in nearly two decades.

Outside of the WMATA, DC is forging ahead with transit in ways New York is not. They’re planning out a streetcar/light rail system that will put our Select Bus Service to shame and seem willing to tackle capacity issues. Whether the money and political support materializes is another question entirely, but the will is there in a way it doesn’t seem to be in New York right now.

Of course, maybe this is all just fantasyland. It’s easy to make a map and toss up on the Internet. It’s hard to fight for dollars, spend them properly and improve service. Still, for once, I envy DC and the WMATA’s forward-looking proposals. It’s a hell of a lot sexier than a bunch of signal system upgrades.

December 24, 2013 57 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesQueens

Another Queens CB votes for rail over QueensWay

by Benjamin Kabak December 23, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 23, 2013

The fight over the future of the Rockaway Beach Branch right-of-way is raising interesting questions about local decision-making in the context of the overall shape of New York City as a third Queens Community Board has rejected the QueensWay park plan in favor of the restoration of rail service. As the Queens Chronicle reported last week, CB5 — whose area encompasses an oft-congested stretch of Woodhaven Boulevard — voted 36-2 for the rail option. So far, CB 10 and CB 14 have voiced a preference for transit while only CB 9, whose leaders and members make up the Friends of the QueensWay organization, has supported the park plan.

Community Board 5 leaders spoke of the need to focus on mass transit as a way to solve the area’s traffic and accessibility issues. “Woodhaven Boulevard is just overwhelmed. We need relief and the only way to relieve traffic is with public transportation,” CB 5 Chair Vincent Arcuri said. “The people in the Rockaways have been clamoring for public transportation better than what they currently have for years. That A train is like going on a safari.”

Andrea Crawford, who heads both Friends of the QueensWay and CB 9, told the Chronicle that CB 5’s vote was “ridiculous.” She said, “This is a right of way that has absolutely no infrastructure and is deteriorating. The bridges would have to be rebuilt to carry modern train equipment. A rail line would help traffic in what, 20 or 30 years when it’s reactivated?”

The issue though isn’t focusing on “helping traffic.” It’s about a forward-looking approach to transit development and urban growth while encouraging sustainability throughout Queens. As I mentioned, too, this war of words showcases how hyperlocal planning is flawed. Just because most of the right of way runs through CB 9 doesn’t mean they should have the final say or even more of one over land use. The space should not be turned into a park until every other avenue of development is exhausted first, and that’s what’s best for the city.

December 23, 2013 45 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
7 Line Extension

What New York gained and lost from the 7 line extension

by Benjamin Kabak December 23, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 23, 2013

MTA contractors survey an unfinished station at 34th St. and 11th Ave. (Photo: Benjamin Kabak)

It will be six months yet — and, judging from the photos I snapped, maybe more — before passengers can ride the 7 train to 34th St. and 11th Ave., but as Friday’s ceremonial first ride demonstrated, uncharted territories of Manhattan will soon be on the (subway) map. When the official ribbon-cutting arrives, it will be a big day with New York’s first new subway stop nearly three decades, and as with any project of this magnitude, the gains are real but so are the mistakes. As Mayor Bloomberg stood at his podium Friday afternoon, I pondered some of those mistakes.

As has been the party line for some time now, Bloomberg repeated that the 7 line extension was “on time and on budget.” It’s a $2.4 billion, one-stop extension from 41st St. between 7th and 8th Avenues to 26th and 11th with a station that spans 34th-36th St. in front of the Javits Center. By the time the Hudson Yards development is in full swing, it will see tens of thousands of riders per day and has already opened up some of the last underutilized space in Manhattan to development. Even in 2013, where the subways go, people and business will follow.

But what did we give up to make sure the 7 line extension was on time and on budget? The economics of it all are a bit shady. The city forked over $2.1 billion initially, and the MTA had to pick up some cost overruns. Ultimately, as the MTA didn’t want to build this subway extension if it had to fund any of it, the parties agreed on a funding scheme that worked for all involved but at a big cost. The initial plans called for a two-stop extension with a interim station at 41st St. and 10th Ave. Shortly after I started this site in 2006, that station fell by the wayside, and the MTA and Mayor’s Office engaged in a battle of attrition over the project’s plans.

A panoramic view of the mezzanine at the 7 line’s 34th St. station. (Photo: Benjamin Kabak)

When it became clear that the second station wouldn’t see the light of day during the initial stages of construction, the city and MTA tried to come to an agreement on a station shell. The construction would have cost around $500 million. Again, the city wouldn’t pay, and the MTA had no spare capital funding. So the shell was axed, and the MTA built in bare provisioning for a future station. The incline of the tunnel flattens out for a few hundred feet near 10th Ave. should money materialize in the future for two platforms on either side of the street. In a fight over the paltry sum of half a billion dollars, New York residents of today and tomorrow lost out. That station will cost significantly more to build in the future than it would have today.

During the battle over that station, we had a glimpse into the machinations of the Mayor’s Office. Dan Doctoroff, when he was the deputy mayor for economic development, was the public face of the fight over the second station, and one line from a Bloomberg P.R. rep, in particular, highlights Doctoroff’s and Bloomberg’s thinking. “Unlike the extension to 34th Street and 11th Avenue, which the city is funding, a 10th Avenue station is not necessary to drive growth there,” the statement said. “A Tenth Avenue station would be nice, but it’s really a straight transportation project versus an economic development catalyst. We do recognize the difficult financial situation in which the M.T.A. finds itself as pressure on all of our budgets intensifies.”

Doctoroff has pursued this line of thinking in recent comments on the Second Ave. Subway, and I worry about what it means for future city investment in transit expansion. During Friday’s ceremony, Ann Weisbrod of the Hudson Yards Development Corporation spoke, and Stephen M. Ross, the chairman of the Related Companies took the mic as well. For all the pomp and circumstance over infrastructure expansion, this was about development first and transportation a distant second.

So what happens in the future? Are we doomed to subway expansion efforts funded by the city only if they feed development in the relative wildness of New York? If so, we’re out of luck because there are no more Hudson Yards-type spaces in New York City. The need to invest in transportation for the sake of transportation looms large, and Bloomberg, as a fighter for congestion pricing, traffic calming and pedestrian safety, should have recognized it five years ago as he did through his words on Friday. Where can we expand next is a very good question indeed.

December 23, 2013 79 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Service Advisories

Weekend work affecting just five subway lines

by Benjamin Kabak December 21, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 21, 2013

As you peruse the subway’s future, remember that this is the final weekend to revisit subway past during 2013. The holiday edition of the Nostalgia Train will run for the final time this Sunday, leaving from 2nd Ave. every 90 minutes and making local stops along the 6th Ave. line to Queens Plaza. Hop on before it’s gone or else you’ll be left with faux-nostalgic photos of nostalgia.

Meanwhile, with the holidays comes a near-total shutdown of weekend work. The originally scheduled G.O. for the J train has been cancelled, and we’re left with just five advisories, none of which have brought impacts. Nonetheless, here they are:


From 11:45 p.m. Friday, December 20 to 4 a.m. Monday, December 23, Pelham Bay Park-bound 6 trains run express from Parkchester to Pelham Bay Park due to platform demolition and thru span work at Castle Hill Avenue and Middletown Road.


From 11:00 p.m. Friday, December 20 to 5 a.m. Monday, December 23, A trains are suspended between Broad Channel and Far Rockaway-Mott Avenue due to track panel replacement. Far Rockaway-bound A trains are rerouted to Rockaway Park. Free shuttle buses operate between Beach 90th Street and Far Rockaway.


From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, December 21 to 5 a.m. Monday, December 23, D trains operate in two sections between Stillwell Avenue and Bedford Park Boulevard, and between Bedford Park Blvd and 205th Street due to track maintenance north of Bedford Park Boulevard.


From 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Saturday, December 21, and from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday, December 22, E train customers travelling to Jamaica-Van Wyck, Sutphin Blvd-JFK AirTrain, and Jamaica Center should note that some E trains travelling from Manhattan are rerouted to the 179th St F station.

(Rockaway Shuttle)
From 11:00 p.m. Friday, December 20 to 5 a.m. Monday, December 23, Rockaway Park Shuttle trains are suspended and replaced by A train service due to panel installation.

December 21, 2013 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
7 Line Extension

Scenes from Future Subways: A ceremony amidst construction

by Benjamin Kabak December 20, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 20, 2013

Mayor Bloomberg flashes a thumbs up as his 7 train heads east from 34th St. and 11th Ave. (Photo: Benjamin Kabak)

The 7 line extension down to 11th Ave. and 34th St. isn’t quite what I’d call ready for passengers. In some spots, the floor is down; in some areas — conveniently behind the train that pulled in carrying the mayor this afternoon — the wile tiling is there. But mostly, it’s a station without finishes. Wiring, paneling, ceilings, walls and floors: None of it is in place yet, and it doesn’t have to be. The opening date for the station, perhaps optimistically, isn’t until June of 2014.

Still, with Mayor Bloomberg’s tenure up in a little bit more than a week, he wanted the opportunity to talk about his contributions to New York City. It wasn’t quite a ribbon-cutting; that will come when the station is complete. But it was a ceremony as a 7 train rolled down the tracks from 42nd St. to deliver the mayor to the station he helped see through with $2.4 billion in city money. Since this was, after all, the first city-funded subway extension since the Queens Boulevard line went east to Jamaica-179th Street in 1950, the mayor, flanked by his daughters, wanted to be there himself to see something through. I don’t blame him.

A wall, nearly finished, just for the mayor. (Photo: Benjamin Kabak)

Press materials distributed by the Mayor’s Office today spoke about how the extension “demonstrates the commitment by the Bloomberg Administration to invest in infrastructure projects that will ensure New York City continues to be a leading global city in the future.” For a one-stop subway extension priced at $2.4 billion, the pomp and circumstance was almost too much, and when Bloomberg dropped an “on time and on budget” reference into his remarks, I shed a tear for our dearly departed station at 41st St. and 10th Ave. Yet, in the mayor’s comments, what he said about investment rang true.

The mayor, who flashed his senior MetroCard, admitted to “virtually never taking the bus” and spoke about how he rides the subway often, spoke about the need to invest in infrastructure. New York City, he noted, will not have more streets, and it is going to be even more dependent on mass transit. Yet, the transportation network hasn’t kept pace with the growth of the city. “We stopped building subways,” he said, “but the population keep moving.”

In his remarks, Bloomberg touched upon areas I’ve covered over the years. He spoke about subway service deeper into Brooklyn, extending lines into eastern Queens and a connection for Staten Island. He talked about he need to renovate and overhaul the city’s aging airports, and he discussed how he expects congestion pricing to one day return and pass. “There will never be a time,” he said, “when you don’t have the opportunity or necessity to expand infrastructure.”

Much work remains on the 7 line extension stop at 34th St. and 11th Ave. (Photo: Benjamin Kabak)

Through it all, I thought about my lukewarm embrace of Bill de Blasio and if he truly understands the need to focus on infrastructure expansion, but I also thought on Bloomberg’s past 12 years. He seems to get the role mass transit plays, and his contributions — Select Bus Service, borough taxis, Citi Bikes, pedestrian plazas — have been multi-faceted. But considering how many areas could use a subway extension, even of a stop or two, and how there are no firm plans on the horizon for more capital work after Phase 1 of the Second Ave. Subway wraps, I wondered if we had missed some good opportunities to exploit shorter expansions to deliver better service for New Yorkers. We don’t always need to build full lines; even just 2.5 miles down Utica Ave., for instance, would make a big difference.

So today the 7 line had its moment in the sun, but it’s debut is a while away. The wall tiling is up only where the Mayor’s train pulled in, and the floor isn’t in place everywhere. Work remains to be done on the mezzanine and platform, but it’s coming along. And when it opens and tens of thousands of people a day start using this new station, the Far West Side won’t be so far after all.

After the jump, a slideshow of all of my photographs from today. You can find a few more on my Instagram account as well.

Continue Reading
December 20, 2013 17 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA EconomicsTWU

On the net-zero approach to labor and a tense TWU

by Benjamin Kabak December 19, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 19, 2013

Allow me to dip for just a minute into a quote from 2012’s The Dark Knight Rises. As Anne Hathaway’s Selina Kyle shares a dance with Bruce Wayne at a masquerade ball, she warns him of impending troubles. “There’s a storm coming, Mr. Wayne,” she warns Wayne. “You and your friends better batten down the hatches, because when it hits, you’re all going to wonder how you ever thought you could live so large and leave so little for the rest of us.”

It’s a bit of an overly dramatic line, but when Bane takes over, Kyle’s words aren’t wrong. Today, when I read WNYC’s coverage of the MTA’s latest budget machinations and the current state of management’s relationship with labor, I had a flashback to the film. “Underground where I work,” Christine Williams, a station agent based in Brooklyn, said. “There’s a storm brewing — and it’s not good. It’s not a merry Christmas when you can’t afford to get to work and when you get to work you’re working at a $7 an hour job. It’s like you can’t win in New York.”

This too a bit overly dramatic. A search through the SeeThroughNY database revealed that Ms. Williams earned $25 an hour back in 2008 — which is hardly a challenging amount — and it’s a far cry from minimum wage. Still, the point remains: As the MTA passed a $13.5 billion budget that rests largely on the shaky assumption of a net-zero labor spending increase, the workers are not happy. “We’re certainly not looking for the stars,” TWU president John Samuelson said during a protest outside this week’s MTA Board meeting. “We’re looking for raises that keep up with the cost of living.”

The debate and the battle aren’t necessarily either/or propositions. The MTA’s stated goal — and one that will help avert massive fare hikes or service increases — is a net-zero scenario. That doesn’t mean wages can’t go up. Rather, it means if wages go up, something else moves along with it. Wages go up; worker count and staffing levels go down. Wages go up; pension contributions go down or retirement age goes up or benefits contributions go down. The options are out there, but the TWU isn’t readily embracing anything at a time of good economic feelings for the MTA.

The real question right now as the TWU Local 100 heads to work each day nearly two years removed from the expiration of their last contract concerns a strike. We all still remember those few days in 2005 when the TWU walked out of the job. For New Yorkers, it was disruptive; for the TWU, it was destructive. Would they do it again? The Taylor Law makes a strike seem doubtful, but union officials are threatening “job actions” which could be slowdowns of any shape or form. They grow tiresome after a while.

Meanwhile, within the MTA’s leadership, the net-zero concept is a controversial one. Perennial Board gadfly Charles Moerdler challenged the assumption this week. Moerdler called such an approach “indefensible and fictional.” As Prendergast pointed out that each percentage point increase in wage increases would add $50 million to the MTA budget, the idea of net-zero seems both perfectly defensible and nearly entirely necessary. A five-percent raise, for instance, would be devastating to the MTA’s budget.

So this gap between the rock and the hard place seems to be narrowing. Rank-and-file are growing dismayed over the fact that it’s been years since their last raise (though non-unionized labor have felt that sting for even longer). At MTA HQ, the lack of labor spending could lead to an even faster brain drain while disgruntled union workers could make service worse. Of course, there’s plenty of room for reform across the board. Will we get there or will this awkward detente be steady enough to support slow movement on a new contract for the TWU? It’s a key issue for the MTA heading into 2014.

December 19, 2013 17 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesFulton Street

Westfield tabbed to bring retail to Fulton St.

by Benjamin Kabak December 19, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 19, 2013

With the Fulton St. Transit Hub set to open within the next six months, the MTA has chosen the Westfield Group, an Australian mall developer will annual revenue over $4 billion, to serve as Master Lessee for the space. Westfield will now be responsible for subletting the ample commercial space in the new facility and overseeing ad sales. It will also have to maintain and clean the leased portions of the Fulton St. Hub, and the MTA will share in a split of revenues. The company will sign a twenty-year lease with two ten-year renewal options.

“This master lease structure will unite risk and reward in a single, highly qualified and experienced private sector operator, while relieving the MTA of ongoing capital and operating costs and expenses and generating revenue for our operating budgets,” MTA Chairman and CEO Thomas F. Prendergast said earlier this week. “We are confident that Westfield will be motivated to maximize the revenues from the facility while maintaining in accordance with standards befitting the substantial investment the public has made in creating this wonderful new landmark.”

The lease will commence in June when the building opens to the public, and Westfield’s responsibilities include nearly all of the non-station areas in the transit center, Corbin Building and Dey Street Headhouse. The space encompasses approximately 180,000 square feet including 63,000 square feet for commercial uses. The MTA anticipates retail in approximately 42,000 square feet, and I’m sure everyone would love a Lower Manhattan Apple store. The so-called “public circulation areas” account for 60,000 square feet, and the remainder is back-of-house. Now, the pressure is on Westfield to turn this new station complex into a shopping destination as well.

December 19, 2013 1 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Buses

The case for, and the problems with, Bus Rapid Transit

by Benjamin Kabak December 19, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 19, 2013

The Pratt Center has proposed eight new BRT routes for New York City.

Every time a think tank or urban policy center starts in on a bus rapid transit kick, I sigh dejectedly. It’s not that bus rapid transit isn’t something we should have, but it’s just a tiring debate. The discussion in favor of BRT focuses on the wrong things, and the solutions have been so half-hearted. Real bus rapid transit — center-running dedicated lanes with platform-level boarding and signal prioritization — should be a gateway to higher capacity transit systems, but so far all we have is Select Bus Service.

The latest round of BRT dreams come to us from a familiar source. The Pratt Center for Community Development has released yet another policy book on bus rapid transit in New York City. They’ve identified eight likely corridors for BRT and a litany of reasons why these routes are ripe for real BRT — not just Select Bus Service — and how BRT is really not that bad for people who drive. In theory, the argument is there, but in a vacuum, BRT can’t stand on its own.

In the policy book [pdf], the Pratt Center argues for the eight routes you see in the map atop this post, and with a new mayor coming in who claims to want 20 more Select Bus Service routes, the BRT approach should take center stage. Here are a smattering of ways in which Pratt makes the case for BRT. If you’re underwhelmed, join the club.

  • “There is no realistic prospect of expanding the subway system to serve outlying neighborhoods…Cost aside, subway construction below New York City’s streets and buried infrastructure is difficult and disruptive, subject to unpredictable delays and cost escalation.
  • “By locating bus lanes offset from the curb, BRT preserves space for parking.”
  • “On most of the densely-built initial corridors, physical constraints were daunting, and pre-existing urban and economic activity were relatively high, reducing the increment of value that a more ambitious BRT model might have delivered. The political barriers have proven to be substantial, as evidenced in the resistance to what would have been a full-featured BRT corridor on 34th Street.”

I realize I’m cherry-picking key quotes and taking them somewhat out of context, but this has been a long-running theme of BRT advocates. We have to preserve free or below-market-rate curbside parking at any costs, and it may be tough to overcome political obstacles. We can’t build subways because of cost and temporary disruptions to the streetscape. Even though these eight corridors — SI’s North Shore rail right-of-way, some airport and interborough routes — are the right focus, this is a fight that doesn’t excite me.

In a distilled version of the report prepared for the Daily News Opinions pages, Judith Roden and Joan Byron make similar arguments. BRT can be transformative, they say, while subway construction is just too complicated. That’s true, and New York needs some intense focus on overcoming Community Board opposition to anything that restructures street space. Yet, BRT is a fractional substitute for subway service, and any successful BRT planning will require frequent service, a network of routes and a plan to move the transit system from wheels to rails.

There’s a map in the Pratt policy book that I think sums up the debate. This map on page 4 shows population growth in various census tracts over the last two decades. While many of those areas without ready access to transit have shown growth, the biggest spikes come in tracts that have direct subway service. The conclusion is right there for anyone to see: Real Bus Rapid Transit would be a great first step, but ultimately, we’ll need rail construction to grow neighborhoods and meet the demands of New York City in the 21st Century. Until we recognize that need and engage in serious conversations about construction techniques and controlling costs, buses will just a passing fad and an incremental improvement at best.

December 19, 2013 71 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Podcast

Ep. 10 of ‘The Next Stop Is…’ on the 7 line, South Ferry and Metro-North

by Benjamin Kabak December 18, 2013
written by Benjamin Kabak on December 18, 2013

NextStopis Welcome to the tenth episode of “The Next Stop Is…” the one and only podcast for Second Ave. Sagas. It’s also the last one of the year as we won’t be releasing a new segment on New Year’s Day (but we’ll back on January 8).

In this week’s episode, we tackle a plethora of news that’s emerged over the past few days. Eric and I discuss Friday’s ceremonial opening of the 7 train extension and South Ferry’s Sandy recover. We discuss the latest updates to the Metro North derailment and the MTA’s track record for excelling in the face of emergencies. We end with a brief talk on the Superbowl transit situation.

This week’s recording again runs close to 22 minutes, and as always, it’s the perfect length for your subway ride home this evening. You can grab the podcast right here on iTunes or pull the raw MP3 file. If you enjoy what you hear, subscribe to updates on iTunes as well and consider leaving us a review.

I’m looking forward to another year of episodes, and we’re always happy to hear from you. So if you have a topic you’d like me to cover, leave a comment, drop me a note or find me on Twitter or Facebook.

http://media.blubrry.com/secondavesagas/www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/56173357/The%20Next%20Stop%20Is/the_next_stop_is_010.mp3

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

December 18, 2013 0 comment
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