6 ms·

NYC is closing down the L train next year for a year at the very least. So far, the city has proposed more water taxis as the primary solution to handle rerouti

NYC is closing down the L train next year for a year at the very least. So far, the city has proposed more water taxis as the primary solution to handle rerouting the 300k daily riders. Right now, the water taxi ridership is 1370 people per day. Secondarily, the city has indicated it might make some of the bridges carpool or ride-share only. Either way, all signs point to the shutdown heading towards a painful if not disastrous scenario. Hopefully, voters will point to this type of cronyism and corruption next mayoral election.

pavel_lishin 8y ago
I thought their big solution was a bunch of shitty, slow buses with a vaguely reserved lane across a bridge: http://gothamist.com/2018/08/06/l_train_pre-apocalypse.php http://gothamist.com/2018/08/06/l_train_pre-apocalypse.php
djsumdog 8y ago
This is sad. NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system and it's rotted into disrepair. I'm all for limiting rid share vehicles and better wages for drivers, but they need to dump a shit ton of time and money into the rail system, both the subway and intercity. Fix Penn Station, and get the tracks up to spec! That should be the #1 priority for city transport infrastructure.
- lqdc13 8y ago
  There is lots of corruption and bureaucracy and lawsuit-avoidance driven construction. Right now the cost of constructing subway stations in NYC is the highest in the world. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-...
- moorhosj 8y ago
  ==NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system== Interested to hear what the other cities are. Chicago? San Fran?
  - djstein 8y ago
    Chicago and DC
    - rhino369 8y ago
      DC Metro is having issues on par with NYC's. The cause is likely the same; improper maintenance.
      - stevehawk 8y ago
        But they are also heavily investing in expanding it (recently opened silver line) . Dc is banking heavily on the future of that rail where NYC seems to have quit caring entirely.
  - gamegoblin 8y ago
    Boston's system is pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      It's cleaner than anything in Silicon Valley and less crowded than NYC. Timeliness and reliability are quite lacking though. It desperately needs rolling stock that wasn't due to be EoL'd a decade ago and it needs proper management which the thinly veiled jobs program known as the MBTA doesn't seem to be able to provide. edit: apparently SF is not representative of public transit in other cities in California.
      - tomjakubowski 8y ago
        Assuming you mean California, LA's Metro rail is no dirtier than Boston's MBTA rail. Sometimes it smells a little funky, but so do the streets -- Boston doesn't have quite the homeless population of Los Angeles.
        8y ago
- tribune 8y ago
  I don't disagree with you but the reason for this shutdown is a much-needed reconstruction of the tunnel under the East River (it was damaged during Hurricane Sandy) along with station upgrades at all the Manhattan stops. This is investment in the city's rail infrastructure. Sure, it will suck for 2019-2020 but come 2025 New Yorkers will be glad it happened.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    That's what they said about the big dig. Now that it's all said and done it's still the go to example of a boondoggle public works project that turned into a money fountain for anyone who knew a guy who knew a guy who knew a guy in government. (In the project's defense, it did increase throughput and alleviate some traffic problems on surface streets which was the goal.) The north/south station rail connector that was supposed to be thrown in never even happened which the city has been kicking itself over for years. Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Of course when they do hatch you'll wish you had twice as many eggs to start with. Boston sure wishes it has the inner belt along with all the various rail projects it's forgone over the years.
- hansthehorse 8y ago
  Born and raised in Manhattan back when normal people could actually live there. I don't see how the NYC subway system could be other than a complete wreck given their insistence on running a 24/7 service. Shut down the system from midnight to 5am with a corresponding increase in bus service during that time.
  - bunderbunder 8y ago
    In Manhattan they're mostly running a 4-track system, so they can easily shut down half the tracks for maintenance while maintaining 24/7 service. I think they've got other problems. For alternative examples: BART is not 24/7, and possibly sucks even more than MTA. CTA's 2 main lines are 24/7, but it's nearly 100% a 2-track system, and its biggest problem (IMO, anyway) is that the arrangement of seats inside the cars is so very desperately bonehaded.
- cryptonector 8y ago
  Did you know that the NYC subway system was originally built and operated by two private companies that competed with each other? Guess how that came to no longer be the case. (The city froze their rates until they were no longer able to improve services, then the city took them over.)
  - kalleboo 8y ago
    And for comparison, in the greater Tokyo area there are like 10 different competing train companies (although of the largest 3, one was privatized out of the government, one is privatized but government-owned, and one is government-run) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Tokyo_transit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Tokyo_transit
  - etiennemarcel 8y ago
    It was the same in Paris (CMP and Nord-Sud), until the subway was nationalized after the war. And yet there are still major investments... You could say the same for the national railway network, it's a state company and it didn't prevent investments and improvements (high speed trains).
    - cryptonector 8y ago
      The second avenue line was a "major investment". It was also probably [many] decades after any private company might have done it. When one have lived for decades with the same nationalized system, one can't imagine what the alternative might be like. But we know from other industries. E.g., telecoms. The UK nationalized its telephone industry in 1912(!). The rest of the world basically followed suit (the U.S. didn't, but we gave AT&T a monopoly that tended to limit innovation in the same sort of way), then in the 90s the whole world privatized and/or deregulated telecoms and... wow, what a boom resulted! And yet very few people who are aware of that case will even think of applying the same approach to other typically-nationalized industries. It's always interesting to see what gets nationalized. It seems to be the biggest, most notable, locally culturally valued industry that the relevant politicians have the power to nationalize. National governments tend nationalize big things, like telecoms, utilities, steel manufacturing, etc. In the U.S. the Federal government has not had the ability / constitutional power to do this (see the Steel Cases from 1947), the States have and have had the constitutional power, but by dint of having so many of them in competition with each other, they've mostly been unable to use it, which leaves: the cities. In the U.S. every city has a "nationalized" public transit system. But in many parts of the world things like city buses are entirely private sector industries (e.g., in Buenos Aires, which has an incredibly vast private bus network). That might be surprising, since in Argentina just about everything of note has been nationalized at times. It makes sense though: Argentina has a strong central government, and weak local governments, so the central government nationalizes things of national importance, and the local governments not so much.
lnrdgmz 8y ago
Who are the cronies that are benefiting from the L-train shutdown?
- pmart123 8y ago
  I'm referring to the taxi medallion owners are benefiting from passing legislation that limits rideshare licenses going forward at the potential expense of residences, particularly those affected by the shutdown.
tomjakubowski 8y ago
> So far, the city has proposed more water taxis as the primary solution to handle rerouting the 300k daily riders. I don't understand what your complaint is. Not every L train ride crosses the river (I'll concede at least half probably do, though). MTA is also adding supplemental bus and train service. Do you think they should instead allow ride share to fill the gap? If so, I have doubts the city's geometry (particularly on the Manhattan end) would permit enough cars on the streets to support 300k additional trips, especially since they are likely concentrated around morning/evening rush hours.
- pmart123 8y ago
  https://technical.ly/brooklyn/2018/02/19/mta-announces-will-add-ferry-line-l-train-shutdown/ https://technical.ly/brooklyn/2018/02/19/mta-announces-will-... It's less of a complaint, but rather my belief that the water ferry system currently transports so few passengers that I do not believe it will absorb much of the excess spillover. I don't know if more rideshare permits are the optimal solution, but I won't pass legislation that limits licenses a half a year away from a major public transportation shutdown. I have my doubts it would support 300k trips as well, but if it can support 25k through rideshare services or carpool services like Via, it at least helps solve the problem.

pavel_lishin 8y ago

I thought their big solution was a bunch of shitty, slow buses with a vaguely reserved lane across a bridge: http://gothamist.com/2018/08/06/l_train_pre-apocalypse.php http://gothamist.com/2018/08/06/l_train_pre-apocalypse.php

djsumdog 8y ago

This is sad. NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system and it's rotted into disrepair. I'm all for limiting rid share vehicles and better wages for drivers, but they need to dump a shit ton of time and money into the rail system, both the subway and intercity. Fix Penn Station, and get the tracks up to spec! That should be the #1 priority for city transport infrastructure.

lqdc13 8y ago
There is lots of corruption and bureaucracy and lawsuit-avoidance driven construction. Right now the cost of constructing subway stations in NYC is the highest in the world. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-...
moorhosj 8y ago
==NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system== Interested to hear what the other cities are. Chicago? San Fran?
- djstein 8y ago
  Chicago and DC
  - rhino369 8y ago
    DC Metro is having issues on par with NYC's. The cause is likely the same; improper maintenance.
    - stevehawk 8y ago
      But they are also heavily investing in expanding it (recently opened silver line) . Dc is banking heavily on the future of that rail where NYC seems to have quit caring entirely.
- gamegoblin 8y ago
  Boston's system is pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    It's cleaner than anything in Silicon Valley and less crowded than NYC. Timeliness and reliability are quite lacking though. It desperately needs rolling stock that wasn't due to be EoL'd a decade ago and it needs proper management which the thinly veiled jobs program known as the MBTA doesn't seem to be able to provide. edit: apparently SF is not representative of public transit in other cities in California.
    - tomjakubowski 8y ago
      Assuming you mean California, LA's Metro rail is no dirtier than Boston's MBTA rail. Sometimes it smells a little funky, but so do the streets -- Boston doesn't have quite the homeless population of Los Angeles.
      - 8y ago
tribune 8y ago
I don't disagree with you but the reason for this shutdown is a much-needed reconstruction of the tunnel under the East River (it was damaged during Hurricane Sandy) along with station upgrades at all the Manhattan stops. This is investment in the city's rail infrastructure. Sure, it will suck for 2019-2020 but come 2025 New Yorkers will be glad it happened.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  That's what they said about the big dig. Now that it's all said and done it's still the go to example of a boondoggle public works project that turned into a money fountain for anyone who knew a guy who knew a guy who knew a guy in government. (In the project's defense, it did increase throughput and alleviate some traffic problems on surface streets which was the goal.) The north/south station rail connector that was supposed to be thrown in never even happened which the city has been kicking itself over for years. Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Of course when they do hatch you'll wish you had twice as many eggs to start with. Boston sure wishes it has the inner belt along with all the various rail projects it's forgone over the years.
hansthehorse 8y ago
Born and raised in Manhattan back when normal people could actually live there. I don't see how the NYC subway system could be other than a complete wreck given their insistence on running a 24/7 service. Shut down the system from midnight to 5am with a corresponding increase in bus service during that time.
- bunderbunder 8y ago
  In Manhattan they're mostly running a 4-track system, so they can easily shut down half the tracks for maintenance while maintaining 24/7 service. I think they've got other problems. For alternative examples: BART is not 24/7, and possibly sucks even more than MTA. CTA's 2 main lines are 24/7, but it's nearly 100% a 2-track system, and its biggest problem (IMO, anyway) is that the arrangement of seats inside the cars is so very desperately bonehaded.
cryptonector 8y ago
Did you know that the NYC subway system was originally built and operated by two private companies that competed with each other? Guess how that came to no longer be the case. (The city froze their rates until they were no longer able to improve services, then the city took them over.)
- kalleboo 8y ago
  And for comparison, in the greater Tokyo area there are like 10 different competing train companies (although of the largest 3, one was privatized out of the government, one is privatized but government-owned, and one is government-run) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Tokyo_transit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Tokyo_transit
- etiennemarcel 8y ago
  It was the same in Paris (CMP and Nord-Sud), until the subway was nationalized after the war. And yet there are still major investments... You could say the same for the national railway network, it's a state company and it didn't prevent investments and improvements (high speed trains).
  - cryptonector 8y ago
    The second avenue line was a "major investment". It was also probably [many] decades after any private company might have done it. When one have lived for decades with the same nationalized system, one can't imagine what the alternative might be like. But we know from other industries. E.g., telecoms. The UK nationalized its telephone industry in 1912(!). The rest of the world basically followed suit (the U.S. didn't, but we gave AT&T a monopoly that tended to limit innovation in the same sort of way), then in the 90s the whole world privatized and/or deregulated telecoms and... wow, what a boom resulted! And yet very few people who are aware of that case will even think of applying the same approach to other typically-nationalized industries. It's always interesting to see what gets nationalized. It seems to be the biggest, most notable, locally culturally valued industry that the relevant politicians have the power to nationalize. National governments tend nationalize big things, like telecoms, utilities, steel manufacturing, etc. In the U.S. the Federal government has not had the ability / constitutional power to do this (see the Steel Cases from 1947), the States have and have had the constitutional power, but by dint of having so many of them in competition with each other, they've mostly been unable to use it, which leaves: the cities. In the U.S. every city has a "nationalized" public transit system. But in many parts of the world things like city buses are entirely private sector industries (e.g., in Buenos Aires, which has an incredibly vast private bus network). That might be surprising, since in Argentina just about everything of note has been nationalized at times. It makes sense though: Argentina has a strong central government, and weak local governments, so the central government nationalizes things of national importance, and the local governments not so much.

lnrdgmz 8y ago

Who are the cronies that are benefiting from the L-train shutdown?

pmart123 8y ago
I'm referring to the taxi medallion owners are benefiting from passing legislation that limits rideshare licenses going forward at the potential expense of residences, particularly those affected by the shutdown.

tomjakubowski 8y ago

> So far, the city has proposed more water taxis as the primary solution to handle rerouting the 300k daily riders. I don't understand what your complaint is. Not every L train ride crosses the river (I'll concede at least half probably do, though). MTA is also adding supplemental bus and train service. Do you think they should instead allow ride share to fill the gap? If so, I have doubts the city's geometry (particularly on the Manhattan end) would permit enough cars on the streets to support 300k additional trips, especially since they are likely concentrated around morning/evening rush hours.

pmart123 8y ago
https://technical.ly/brooklyn/2018/02/19/mta-announces-will-add-ferry-line-l-train-shutdown/ https://technical.ly/brooklyn/2018/02/19/mta-announces-will-... It's less of a complaint, but rather my belief that the water ferry system currently transports so few passengers that I do not believe it will absorb much of the excess spillover. I don't know if more rideshare permits are the optimal solution, but I won't pass legislation that limits licenses a half a year away from a major public transportation shutdown. I have my doubts it would support 300k trips as well, but if it can support 25k through rideshare services or carpool services like Via, it at least helps solve the problem.