ReCoNECT

The Official Blog of the Regional Coalition for NorthEast Corridor Transit

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

What does New York want for Hanukkah?

I know what the MTA wants for Hanukkah: a check from Bubbie and Zada for $1.2 billion. However, since Bubbie and Zada no longer have any money for their retirement, they're being a little careful about showering gifts on their grandchildren this year, especially ones with a history of financial mismanagement. So instead, the MTA is asking for $3 fares and $105 monthly metrocards, and they're re-gifting the W and Z trains.

NYTimes.com's City Room blog just referenced the latest in a series of extreme proposals from the MTA--you can read my comment here.

UPDATE: The comment linked has been quoted in the December 24 print edition of The New York Times, page A19, below the fold, next to the photo of the Cuomos.

Thursday, December 04, 2008

"A New Future for North American Rail Transportation"

In the intervening months since the last post on this blog, I have joined the team at OnTrackAmerica, a Philadelphia-based nonprofit advocating the institution of a forum for all rail industry stakeholders to collaboratively develop a continental rail system growth plan.

Who's behind all this? Entrepreneur Michael Sussman, president of the for-profit Strategic Rail Finance consultancy. 15 years of experience advising private railroad companies and government agencies has given Sussman a unique perspective into the shortcomings of current rail policy. For more on Michael's plan to unify the rail universe, check out the OTA blog.

Oh, the kicker to this story is that OTA was one of two organizations I'd been invited to join this fall. The other, the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority, now faces a $1.2 billion (with a "b") budget deficit for 2009.

Monday, April 07, 2008

Congestion Pricing Dead on the Table

Oh, it is indeed a sad day for New York. State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver has officially pronounced the death of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's vaunted plan to charge drivers $8 to enter Manhattan south of 60th street, which the city council had just recently voted 30-20 to endorse.

The only legitimate complaint against the plan, as I see it, was Governor Jon Corzine's (D-NJ), who is right to be steamed when New Jerseyans are already getting charged ever-increasing tolls to come into Manhattan at any point. But he certainly doesn't have a vote in the New York State Assembly, so what gives? Transit access for the outer boroughs is only getting worse, especially as those areas untouched by New York City Transit grow ever denser. With higher federal subsidies a far-fetched fantasy and congestion pricing now deceased, city, state and federal officials ought to be scrambling for alternate sources of funding for an essential aspect of intra-urban infrastructure.

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Dep: NYP, Arr: BNG?

According to this unfinished but fascinating pdf, Amtrak is considering the feasability of passenger service from New York to Bimghamton via Scranton, Stroudsburg, and Morristown? Very intriguing indeed. What's even more mysterious is the conspicuous absence of any date locating this excerpt chronologically. I hope whoever started this project still remembers it--I'd love to see the "Amtrak Pocono Corridor Service" taking on passengers at New York Penn Station.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Safety Rail

First of all, the Presidential Platforms forum I mentioned a while ago is available as a free webcast from NYU's Rudin Center for Transportation Policy & Management webpage. Mr. Obama's surrogate was the only one to mention the word "Amtrak," though both he and Ms. Clinton have professed an interest in upping the funding. Which is generally a good thing, but if there's one entity that could really benefit from Mr. Obama's "power of change," it's Amtrak.

Speaking of changing Amtrak, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation announced on Tuesday that roving "mobile security teams" will enter service shortly on North East Corridor trains between Boston and Washington. These teams will be randomly searching commuters and their luggage as well as patrolling trains with bomb-sniffing dogs. This represents the first major shift in Amtrak's security policy since the elimination of unreserved service following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. I look forward to seeing the results of these new policies evaluated--could this be the first step to enlarging the Amtrak Police into a fully-capable law enforcement wing of the US Department of Transportation?

Probably not. But consider this excerpt from the Philadelphia Inquirer article linked above: "Tim Connors, director of the Center for Policing Terrorism at the Manhattan Institute, said rail systems required a completely different approach to security from the one used in aviation. 'Rail moves a lot more people than air does,' he said. 'It's designed to be an open system that can move a lot of people fast.'" It seems to me that such a specialized mode of transportation will require a specialized kind of security, and a national intercity rail network would need to coordinate their security efforts on the same national level. Airplanes had their Air Marshals; could Rail Marshals be too far-fetched?

Thursday, January 31, 2008

I Lost That Bet

I mentioned a while back my prediction for the first cancellation in the MTA's current round of megaprojects (The 7 train's westward expansion). It appears I was wrong. The Fulton Street transit complex will likely never see the light of day--at least not through a giant domed glass roof.

Today is an auspicious day for urban transportation in New York for another reason, as in a mere two hours the findings of the Congestion Pricing Commission will be made public (3pm Eastern). Today also saw representatives from four Democratic presidential campaigns speak at an event hosted by the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy & Management at NYU. This was not a partisan event--the Republican candidates were invited with equal cordiality--but the "Republican Candidates" nameplate sat silently nonetheless in front of an empty panel chair while the four Democrats--representing Sen. Clinton, Sen. Obama, Sen. Gravel and Rep. Kucinich, who is still on the ballot in New York State--spoke at length about transportation and infrastructure issues that the coming administration must inevitably face.

More extensive reactions to the panelists will be posted soon, but I will say that the only campaign representative to mention the word "Amtrak" was speaking on behalf of Barack Obama.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

MTA Final Fare Hikes Approved

Nobody likes fare hikes. I went to a public hearing and listened as MTA board members heard hours upon hours of complaints that ranged from the very well-reasoned to the rambling and nonsensical. But we all knew that some kind of hike was coming. So here it is:

Pay-per-ride base fare: (now) $2, (Mar. 2) $2
Pay-per-ride bonus: (now) 20% with a >$10 purchase, (Mar. 2) 15% with a >$7 purchase
7-day card: (now) $24, (Mar. 2) $25
30-day card: (now) $76, (Mar. 2) $81

Changing the pay-per-ride bonus structure is just annoying. It slowly compiles loose change on cards--a $10 metrocard will now contain $11.50 worth of credit, so after 5 rides you'll have $1.50 leftover instead of a sixth full ride. The MTA claims this is to discourage people from throwing away metrocards, but it may also add up to potentially thousands of dollars of unclaimed fares going to the MTA if people routinely throw out cards with a dime or a quarter on them. Not altogether an unprecedented idea: the London "Oystercard" fare system, for example, is distance-based and so their heavier-duty farecards--which require a 3-pound deposit--routinely have insufficient amounts left on them and must be refilled. I refill my metrocards anyway. Besides, I think I'm also the only person in New York who actually uses the "tap-and-go" system on the 4/5/6 trains.

In any event, this raises the effective cost-per-ride from $1.67 after bonuses to $1.74. Here's a helpful table from the New York Times about the new fare structure.

























The Times also has said that whatever one's metrocard habits are (unlimited vs. pay-per-ride) before the hike, there is no mathematical reason to change them afterwards.

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Nostalgia Train

For those of you still in New York City who have some time to kill, here's from our friends at the MTA and www.nycsubway.org:

To celebrate the holiday season, New York City Transit's "Nostalgia Train" is running every Sunday in December! It is running on the 6th Avenue "V" line between Queens Plaza and Lower East Side-2 Av stations. With a little bit of luck and good timing, you can catch a ride on this classic subway train at stations along the line between Queens Plaza and 2 Av.

Schedule:

Departs Second Ave 10:01am, 11:31am, 1:01pm, 2:31pm, 4:01pm
Departs Queens Plaza 10:45am, 12:10pm, 1:45pm, 3:10pm, 4:45pm

More information at mta.info.

Thursday, December 06, 2007

A New Separation of Powers

William Neuman's article from today's New York Times announced New York City Transit's intention to start delegating some supervisory powers to relatively autonomous authorities for two of the city's twenty-four major subway lines. The 7 and L trains, which do not share their track with any other lines and do not have any spur lines of their own, will serve as pilot programs for this new experiment in the MTA's organizational structure. The 7 and L have served as guinea pigs before: the 7 is still the only line running 11-car trains, and the L is the first line to benefit from systems for One-Person Train Operation, Communications-Based Train Control, and improved in-station communications displaying train arrival times and other useful information.

Pros: It may be quite possible to be in a station on the L and, if you see something especially hideous--like a radioactive mutant rat or a recent NYU graduate trying to find cheaper real estate in the trendier parts of Brooklyn--you would have the option of knocking on the station manager's door, telling him or her about it, and then watch them eliminate your nuisance before the train arrives. This is of course under the best possible circumstances, but the fact of the matter is that station condition issues that used to have to trickle through the entire MTA before getting into the hands of City Transit's station maintenance staff will now be handled by much smaller and ideally more efficient authorities.

Cons: It is the intention of City Transit President Howard Roberts, Jr. to eventually group all lines into semi-autonomous railroads. This seems like a regression back to the days of the IRT, BMT and IND networks competing against one another for the same riders, all ultimately failing financially before being lumped into the first direct forerunner of the MTA in 1940. Somehow, I feel that too much division within the lines would work to undo some of the progress made in the last 67 years (much of which has come in the last 20 when ridership started to surge). However, if Roberts and MTA CEO Lee Sander get what they want out of this--increased efficiency and better Route Report Cards--New York may stand as a model for a multi-level transit network for other cities or regions to follow.

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

The Empire (Corridor) Strikes Back

I had the opportunity this past weekend to take my very first journey along the Empire Corridor, northwards from New York City to Albany, then west as far as Utica. It was a truly enlightening experience in a variety of ways. My westbound train, #49, the Lake Shore Limited, departed 15 minutes behind schedule because an Empire Service train scheduled to depart an hour earlier had broken down inside Penn Station, and we took on their passengers. The Lake Shore Limited, with its consist of Viewliner sleepers and Amfleet II coaches, was not able to accommodate all these passengers comfortably, and was obliged to make local stops to Albany in order to let them off at their destinations. We arrived in Utica exactly one hour behind schedule.

Scheduled to return to New York City once again aboard the Lake Shore Limited train #48, I discovered inside Utica Station that Empire Service train #284 was over an hour late and had not yet even arrived at 1:00pm (scheduled for a 12:04 departure), and my own train was similarly delayed. When they announced that #284 was expected to depart at 2:00 and that #48 was running 90 minutes late, I was rebooked (at no extra cost!) to #284.

For trains to be so reliably unreliable is too significant a blemish on the American transportation network to have been ignored for so long. The problem, as I remarked with sympathetic passengers waiting at Utica, is that there is simply no accountability for these lapses in service. The delays, I am sure, are due to the fact that Amtrak must run its train along privately-owned, one- or two-tracked rail lines shared by freight trains with irregular schedules and higher priority on the right-of-way. That CSX and other private carriers have merely allowed passenger travel on their trackage seems to preclude them from adhering to any standards of passenger rail service, and Amtrak, at the mercy of its far more lucrative landlords and lacking any political authority, is powerless to change that. Can no one answer for this embarrassing service record?

I see two (highly unlikely) solutions to service problems along the Empire Corridor. First, the construction of a dedicated passenger rail line, or enlargement of the right-of-way to three tracks, along much of the Corridor, would allow freight and passenger trains to coexist without getting in each other’s way. The other option, of course, is to put both CSX and Amtrak under a single public directory power charged with coordinating—and enforcing—their schedules. The former would be prohibitively expensive; the latter would be tantamount to regulating the nation’s private railways at the state or federal level and would meet insurmountable opposition at all levels of government. Clearly, for service to improve, a significant change in mindset must be effectuated in the private and public sectors, and at the local, state, and federal levels, all along the Corridor. We must either be willing to invest in an enlarged and capable infrastructure, or to reorganize much of the nation’s rail system from the top down.