7 ms·

New York doesn't have enough money to get it done. The politicians are too busy paying for all the election promises they've made over the last 50 years. And t

New York doesn't have enough money to get it done. The politicians are too busy paying for all the election promises they've made over the last 50 years. And they absolutely need to cut the bureaucracy (code word for 'unions' and 'government agencies') that are deeply entrenched in the government. I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out. BTW: If you disagree please talk out your points.

zeep 9y ago
Are you saying that if the subway was bad enough, it would have been an election promise to fix it?
Nelkins 9y ago
We have enough money, if we get our costs under control. Our capital costs (and operating costs...actually everything) are much higher than most other cities/countries. Some good analysis here[1], in addition to this series the NY Times is running. [1] https://pedestrianobservations.com/construction-costs/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/construction-costs/
- closeparen 9y ago
  New York isn’t a greenfield project. There’s a massive legacy system with decades of maintenance debt. Of course it’s going to be more expensive to fix than to maintain an already-maintained system.
  - Nelkins 9y ago
    That may be technically true, but we should be comparing ourselves to other countries that have had to tackle the same problems. Consider the Paris Métro[1], which is even older than the NYC subway system (1900 vs 1904). They have much better service, lower capital and operating costs, automated trains, etc. We need to take a hard look at ourselves and stop using NYC exceptionalism as an excuse. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Métro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Métro
    - lordCarbonFiber 9y ago
      It also doesn't run 24/7. That's the triumph (and huge complexity multiplier) of the nyc subway system. Having a always on (for some value of always) transit system is a big draw but also a maintenance nightmare.
      - Retric 9y ago
        Being 24/7 just takes redundancy. If you have 2+ lines from A <> B, you can single track them during low demand times and with care take any part of the system offline without shutting down. NYC density increases costs in some ways, but it also makes means they can spend far less to maintain roads / street lights / etc. On top of that the high average and median earnings means NYC has an enviable tax base.
        chimeracoder 9y ago
        > Being 24/7 just takes redundancy. If you have 2+ lines from A <> B, you can single track them during low demand times and with care take any part of the system offline without shutting down. Not all lines have four tracks (some only have two), and even for the ones that do, running trains while work is going on means incredibly slow and delayed service.
        bdhess 9y ago
        I don’t think you understood what parent meant by “single track”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working
        chimeracoder 9y ago
        > I don’t think you understood what parent meant by “single track”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working I understand what they meant; I'm explaining that even when running trains on dedicated tracks (e.g. the local line is shut down for maintenance, but the express line still runs), it causes delays that many find unbearable. Running trains in both directions on a single track would degrade service even further. At that point, it may very well just be better to shut the entire line down temporarily, which is what they generally do.
  - rayiner 9y ago
    So is London’s, and they manage to move almost as many people each day for half the money.
perfectstorm 9y ago
I'm curious how much money is needed. Why is it that Japan, Hong Kong and most developed European cities have much better rail transportation ? I don't think money is the only issue. NYC is probably one of the richest cities in the world and yet you say they don't have the money to fix this ? I know construction in US is expensive but it can't be that bad.
- sandworm101 9y ago
  NYC is rich but has very different priorities than other cities. It even operates its own forgien intel service. It is a city dedicated to servicing luxury real estate and the people who own it, neither of which care one iota about subways.
  - bobthechef 9y ago
    Sounds to me like it needs to shift around some of those priorities.
  - betterunix2 9y ago
    You are wrong. Luxury real estate in NYC is dependent on the transit system, and gentrification tends to follow subway lines. The value of a NYC apartment is related to the proximity to a subway stop. This is why, for example, the new 2nd Ave. subway line ends where it ends -- the next planned stop is in a neighborhood that has not been gentrified, while the existing stops serve several luxury developments.
    - majormajor 9y ago
      I think you and the person you're replying to are using vastly different definitions of luxury real estate. Add a few zeros. :)
      - sandworm101 9y ago
        Yes. Most of NYC real estate only exists to support the real luxury units, the top 1-5% with massive profit margins. A great many units are actually built at a loss to support the construction of the penthouses. Such not-luxury units only exist as a result of zoning. Google "poor door" to see the extreme physical manifestation.
bogomipz 9y ago
Sadly I agree with most of what you said. Unfortunately I think the cards are stacked against progress here. People like to site the deplorable state of the NYC Subway in the 1970s as evidence that the current situation can be fixed. However investment was made in the system back then before it reached a tipping point and it took over a decade of investing to get out of that. Now after 20 years of underinvesting this needs to be done against the backdrop of a population boom and ridership explosion. >"I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out." Unfortunately this is even harder to fix than the MTA. Its not just the long-standing culture of corruption in Albany, but its the culture of corruption from City Hall, the MTA's contractors and MTA's Union. Of course just fixing the governance structure of the MTA would be a great start but when you look at how this structure actually works you might be forgiven being cynical: https://www.city-journal.org/html/who-runs-mta-15281.html https://www.city-journal.org/html/who-runs-mta-15281.html
lr4444lr 9y ago
Not necessarily disagreeing, but it's important to point out that fixing/upgrading the system comes from the capital budget, and the promises you're describing are paid out of the operating budget. The debt service for the former, is earmarked, by law, from the latter, which clocks in at 16% according to recent figures[0]. And we might have larger capital allocations if there weren't the ongoing and very generous salary scales, heavy use of overtime, and pension obligations. The question I have is, why were things like the Hudson Yards station, work on the perpetually delayed 2nd Avenue subway, Fulton St. station renovation prioritized over the core signal and preexisting aging track infrastructure? [0]http://web.mta.info/mta/budget/pdf/MTA%202017%20Adopted%20Budget%20February%20Financial%20Plan%202017-2020.pdf http://web.mta.info/mta/budget/pdf/MTA%202017%20Adopted%20Bu... (page II-1)
- gsnedders 9y ago
  > The question I have is, why were things like the Hudson Yards station, work on the perpetually delayed 2nd Avenue subway, Fulton St. station renovation prioritized over the core signal and preexisting aging track infrastructure? Which gets votes? Renewing existing infrastructure is something nobody understands.
  - nine_k 9y ago
    "Renewing existing infrastructure" as in "not canceling L train", or "R trains running without problems", etc? That could get some votes. BTW 2nd avenue subway should be seen as "less crowded green line trains", which matched popular demand rather well, and it did work, to my mind.
    - gsnedders 9y ago
      > "Renewing existing infrastructure" as in "not canceling L train", or "R trains running without problems", etc? That could get some votes. But people expect it to keep working as it does today, as far as I can tell. It's about expectations, not realism.
    - betterunix2 9y ago
chimeracoder 9y ago
> I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out. We're tired of it, but New York government is not a democracy. The two ruling parties have passed an complex network of laws which, in effect, mean that officials are accountable only to the political party, not to their constituents. Case in point: one of the largest advocates of eliminating business service was Silver (a Democrat), despite the fact that his constituents were almost entirely dependent on bus service. When he was finally convicted of corruption, people were shocked - not shocked that he was corrupt (everyone knew - it was completely conducted in the open), but shocked that he was actually going to be held accountable to it. Unfortunately, the conviction was overturned on appeal due to a technicality - a law had been passed which narrowed the definition of corruption, meaning that the things he was convicted for were no longer criminal offenses. We can't vote them out when there's literally no one to vote in, and both the Democrats and the Republicans have a gentleman's agreement not to compete with each other seriously, the same way Comcast and Time Warner Cable do. New York is literally the most corrupt state government in the country[0]. Nothing short of a series of multiple federal court rulings will change that, because both parties benefit from it, and neither has the incentive to change it. [0] http://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/sep/19/elaine-phillips/new-york-has-been-most-corrupt-state-decades/ http://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/sep/19/el...
- Danihan 9y ago
  >We can't vote them out when there's literally no one to vote in, and both the Democrats and the Republicans have a gentleman's agreement not to compete with each other seriously, the same way Comcast and Time Warner Cable do. And people wonder why Trump got elected. Pervasive desperation for anyone who might actually shake up the system.
  - jsjohnst 9y ago
    > And people wonder why Trump got elected. Except he lost by something like 8:1 in NYC. Why? Because the folks in NYC knew he was as crooked or worse as the swamp he claimed he would drain.
- 9y ago

zeep 9y ago

Are you saying that if the subway was bad enough, it would have been an election promise to fix it?

Nelkins 9y ago

We have enough money, if we get our costs under control. Our capital costs (and operating costs...actually everything) are much higher than most other cities/countries. Some good analysis here[1], in addition to this series the NY Times is running. [1] https://pedestrianobservations.com/construction-costs/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/construction-costs/

closeparen 9y ago
New York isn’t a greenfield project. There’s a massive legacy system with decades of maintenance debt. Of course it’s going to be more expensive to fix than to maintain an already-maintained system.
- Nelkins 9y ago
  That may be technically true, but we should be comparing ourselves to other countries that have had to tackle the same problems. Consider the Paris Métro[1], which is even older than the NYC subway system (1900 vs 1904). They have much better service, lower capital and operating costs, automated trains, etc. We need to take a hard look at ourselves and stop using NYC exceptionalism as an excuse. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Métro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Métro
  - lordCarbonFiber 9y ago
    It also doesn't run 24/7. That's the triumph (and huge complexity multiplier) of the nyc subway system. Having a always on (for some value of always) transit system is a big draw but also a maintenance nightmare.
    - Retric 9y ago
      Being 24/7 just takes redundancy. If you have 2+ lines from A <> B, you can single track them during low demand times and with care take any part of the system offline without shutting down. NYC density increases costs in some ways, but it also makes means they can spend far less to maintain roads / street lights / etc. On top of that the high average and median earnings means NYC has an enviable tax base.
      - chimeracoder 9y ago
        > Being 24/7 just takes redundancy. If you have 2+ lines from A <> B, you can single track them during low demand times and with care take any part of the system offline without shutting down. Not all lines have four tracks (some only have two), and even for the ones that do, running trains while work is going on means incredibly slow and delayed service.
        bdhess 9y ago
        I don’t think you understood what parent meant by “single track”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working
        chimeracoder 9y ago
        > I don’t think you understood what parent meant by “single track”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working I understand what they meant; I'm explaining that even when running trains on dedicated tracks (e.g. the local line is shut down for maintenance, but the express line still runs), it causes delays that many find unbearable. Running trains in both directions on a single track would degrade service even further. At that point, it may very well just be better to shut the entire line down temporarily, which is what they generally do.
- rayiner 9y ago
  So is London’s, and they manage to move almost as many people each day for half the money.

perfectstorm 9y ago

I'm curious how much money is needed. Why is it that Japan, Hong Kong and most developed European cities have much better rail transportation ? I don't think money is the only issue. NYC is probably one of the richest cities in the world and yet you say they don't have the money to fix this ? I know construction in US is expensive but it can't be that bad.

sandworm101 9y ago
NYC is rich but has very different priorities than other cities. It even operates its own forgien intel service. It is a city dedicated to servicing luxury real estate and the people who own it, neither of which care one iota about subways.
- bobthechef 9y ago
  Sounds to me like it needs to shift around some of those priorities.
- betterunix2 9y ago
  You are wrong. Luxury real estate in NYC is dependent on the transit system, and gentrification tends to follow subway lines. The value of a NYC apartment is related to the proximity to a subway stop. This is why, for example, the new 2nd Ave. subway line ends where it ends -- the next planned stop is in a neighborhood that has not been gentrified, while the existing stops serve several luxury developments.
  - majormajor 9y ago
    I think you and the person you're replying to are using vastly different definitions of luxury real estate. Add a few zeros. :)
    - sandworm101 9y ago
      Yes. Most of NYC real estate only exists to support the real luxury units, the top 1-5% with massive profit margins. A great many units are actually built at a loss to support the construction of the penthouses. Such not-luxury units only exist as a result of zoning. Google "poor door" to see the extreme physical manifestation.

bogomipz 9y ago

Sadly I agree with most of what you said. Unfortunately I think the cards are stacked against progress here. People like to site the deplorable state of the NYC Subway in the 1970s as evidence that the current situation can be fixed. However investment was made in the system back then before it reached a tipping point and it took over a decade of investing to get out of that. Now after 20 years of underinvesting this needs to be done against the backdrop of a population boom and ridership explosion. >"I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out." Unfortunately this is even harder to fix than the MTA. Its not just the long-standing culture of corruption in Albany, but its the culture of corruption from City Hall, the MTA's contractors and MTA's Union. Of course just fixing the governance structure of the MTA would be a great start but when you look at how this structure actually works you might be forgiven being cynical: https://www.city-journal.org/html/who-runs-mta-15281.html https://www.city-journal.org/html/who-runs-mta-15281.html

lr4444lr 9y ago

Not necessarily disagreeing, but it's important to point out that fixing/upgrading the system comes from the capital budget, and the promises you're describing are paid out of the operating budget. The debt service for the former, is earmarked, by law, from the latter, which clocks in at 16% according to recent figures[0]. And we might have larger capital allocations if there weren't the ongoing and very generous salary scales, heavy use of overtime, and pension obligations. The question I have is, why were things like the Hudson Yards station, work on the perpetually delayed 2nd Avenue subway, Fulton St. station renovation prioritized over the core signal and preexisting aging track infrastructure? [0]http://web.mta.info/mta/budget/pdf/MTA%202017%20Adopted%20Budget%20February%20Financial%20Plan%202017-2020.pdf http://web.mta.info/mta/budget/pdf/MTA%202017%20Adopted%20Bu... (page II-1)

gsnedders 9y ago
> The question I have is, why were things like the Hudson Yards station, work on the perpetually delayed 2nd Avenue subway, Fulton St. station renovation prioritized over the core signal and preexisting aging track infrastructure? Which gets votes? Renewing existing infrastructure is something nobody understands.
- nine_k 9y ago
  "Renewing existing infrastructure" as in "not canceling L train", or "R trains running without problems", etc? That could get some votes. BTW 2nd avenue subway should be seen as "less crowded green line trains", which matched popular demand rather well, and it did work, to my mind.
  - gsnedders 9y ago
    > "Renewing existing infrastructure" as in "not canceling L train", or "R trains running without problems", etc? That could get some votes. But people expect it to keep working as it does today, as far as I can tell. It's about expectations, not realism.
  - betterunix2 9y ago

chimeracoder 9y ago

> I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out. We're tired of it, but New York government is not a democracy. The two ruling parties have passed an complex network of laws which, in effect, mean that officials are accountable only to the political party, not to their constituents. Case in point: one of the largest advocates of eliminating business service was Silver (a Democrat), despite the fact that his constituents were almost entirely dependent on bus service. When he was finally convicted of corruption, people were shocked - not shocked that he was corrupt (everyone knew - it was completely conducted in the open), but shocked that he was actually going to be held accountable to it. Unfortunately, the conviction was overturned on appeal due to a technicality - a law had been passed which narrowed the definition of corruption, meaning that the things he was convicted for were no longer criminal offenses. We can't vote them out when there's literally no one to vote in, and both the Democrats and the Republicans have a gentleman's agreement not to compete with each other seriously, the same way Comcast and Time Warner Cable do. New York is literally the most corrupt state government in the country[0]. Nothing short of a series of multiple federal court rulings will change that, because both parties benefit from it, and neither has the incentive to change it. [0] http://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/sep/19/elaine-phillips/new-york-has-been-most-corrupt-state-decades/ http://www.politifact.com/new-york/statements/2016/sep/19/el...

Danihan 9y ago
>We can't vote them out when there's literally no one to vote in, and both the Democrats and the Republicans have a gentleman's agreement not to compete with each other seriously, the same way Comcast and Time Warner Cable do. And people wonder why Trump got elected. Pervasive desperation for anyone who might actually shake up the system.
- jsjohnst 9y ago
  > And people wonder why Trump got elected. Except he lost by something like 8:1 in NYC. Why? Because the folks in NYC knew he was as crooked or worse as the swamp he claimed he would drain.
9y ago