Announcement on the NICE bus

Bus riders on Nassau County’s new Nassau Inter-County Express (NICE) bus system gave advocates a heads up that the new operator is planning on holding a public meeting to discuss “NICE Bus Service and Proposed Service Changes.”

Despite a bus announcement urging riders to find [...]]]>  

Announcement on the NICE bus

Bus riders on Nassau County’s new Nassau Inter-County Express (NICE) bus system gave advocates a heads up that the new operator is planning on holding a public meeting to discuss “NICE Bus Service and Proposed Service Changes.”

Despite a bus announcement urging riders to find more information at NICE’s website, as of this writing, no information about the meeting is posted there.

According to sources, however, the meetings will take place on February 22nd at the Marriott Hotel and Conference Center in Uniondale and February 23rd at the Great Neck Library. Both meetings will run from 5pm-8pm.

In related news, TSTC sent a letter to NICE CEO Michael Setzer over a week ago that raised several questions about service levels on the newly privatized bus system. It also highlighted concerns about missed transparency deadlines and communication issues, such as the one that has arisen around this meeting.

The letter encouraged Setzer to continue to find innovative ways to improve service, such as pre-board fare collection and working with local municipalities and the New York State Department of Transportation to explore installation of dedicated bus lanes on certain routes.

However, the letter also called attention to the fact that the Customer Advisory Committee (CAC) has not yet convened, despite a promise that it would begin meeting in January.  This failure to form the CAC in the expected time frame appears to have affected the quality of public outreach for the upcoming meetings.  In addition, concerns about communication—questions about the lack of Spanish language information about service changes and the need for clarity about whether recent “minor adjustments“ to routes actually constituted service reductions—are raised in the letter.

It remains to be seen if NICE will deliver on its promises of better service, efficiency, and greater transparency. Finding solutions to the questions identified here, and more broadly advertising opportunities for riders and stakeholders to participate in shaping their bus system, would be good first steps.

The New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) and New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA)  recently released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement. Despite popular demand for better public transit in the I-287 corridor, the project’s draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) makes few provisions [...]]]>  

The New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) and New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA)  recently released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement. Despite popular demand for better public transit in the I-287 corridor, the project’s draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) makes few provisions for public transportation in the Lower Hudson Valley. Many residents want a bus rapid transit (BRT) system, and Tri-State has set up a website to advocate for BRT’s place in the project.

Over the next two weeks, a series of Mobilizing the Region posts will explain why the state is wrong to conclude that the Tappan Zee should be built without bus rapid transit. Today, we examine the DEIS’ faulty assessment of the cost of putting transit on the Tappan Zee.

In the DEIS, the state argues that including transit on the Tappan Zee would be too expensive. This conclusion rests on two problematic arguments.

• First, the state asserts that an anticipated $16 billion funding shortfall means there is not enough money to include transit in the project, but it nonetheless manages to find billions of dollars for a multiple span bridge.
• Second, the state’s cost estimates for BRT and commuter rail conflict with previous projections, but this change is not adequately explained.

1. If New York can find money for a bridge, it can find money for a bridge with transit

One justification in the DEIS for excluding mass transit appears to be an anticipated shortfall in funds for state of good repair and normal replacement work (SOGR/NR) over the next 25 years. That is, the cost of necessary infrastructure maintenance work in the Lower Hudson region and New York City exceeds the projected funds available for that work, even before adding in the cost of replacing the Tappan Zee. The exact calculation is as follows:

Somehow, this funding shortfall leads the state to believe that the bridge is affordable, while transit is not: “Based upon the information in the recent cost estimates and the current funding levels both from federal and state sources and systematic review of the financial analysis in the various transportation plans, it was determined that funding for the Tappan Zee Bridge/I‐287 Corridor Project (components including bridge replacement, highway improvements, and new transit service) was not financially feasible at this time” (Appendix A-1, p. 5-7).

But the above calculation suggests that no Tappan Zee Bridge work is financially feasible at this time. The state does not say why it can locate money for a bridge but cannot locate money for transit. If funds can be found to rebuild the bridge, one can reasonably assume that transit funds can be found as well.

2. The cost projections for transit in the DEIS are not well-grounded

It is also unclear how the state arrived at its cost estimates for bus rapid transit and commuter rail. According to the DEIS, the bus rapid transit system’s cost “ranges from $4.5 to $5.3 billion” and “$4.4B to $4.6B for the [commuter rail] infrastructure, plus an additional $340M to $620M for modifications to the bridge, or approximately $5.0B for the operable [commuter rail].” These estimates are significantly higher for bus rapid transit and significantly lower for commuter rail than previously projected, but a detailed explanation for the change is not given. Rather, the state says that it has studies but will not publish them. They do provide the following chart:

The DEIS' explanation of the rise in BRT and commuter rail costs

This is not enough information to understand the changes to the projected costs. Moreover, the transit alternatives analysis ignores the tremendous flexibility and variability of bus systems. There are many ways to add bus service to the I-287 corridor, and it’s highly unlikely that any of them would cost $5 billion—the original $1 billion BRT cost estimate was inflated, and a 2003 GAO report found that a dedicated busway (which is significantly more expensive than a highway bus lane) would cost $13.5 million/mile.

TSTC calls on the state to explain 1) why money can be found for a bridge but not transit, given the $16 billion shortfall, 2) how the project will be funded and 3) the change in cost for bus rapid transit and commuter rail.

Last night, TSTC received notice that an invitation to the February 16th Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing Project stakeholders meeting “was sent in error.” A follow-up call to the New York State Department of Transportation revealed that the meeting has been canceled. Invitations to the stakeholder meeting were sent on January [...]]]>

Last night, TSTC received notice that an invitation to the February 16th Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing Project stakeholders meeting “was sent in error.” A follow-up call to the New York State Department of Transportation revealed that the meeting has been canceled. Invitations to the stakeholder meeting were sent on January 24th. It’s unclear why it took the state two weeks to realize its mistake.

The letter clarified that the state had intended to invite us to the public hearings for the project, which are scheduled for February 28 and March 1.

Throughout the Tappan Zee Bridge project’s history, stakeholder meetings have been held prior to public meetings for those with more detailed questions and concerns about the project. For example, advocates want to know why bus rapid transit cost estimates increased so dramatically in the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), why the state did not evaluate a range of alternatives (as required by NEPA), and how the state plans to follow through on its promise to build transit at a later date. None of these questions are likely to be answered at a public hearing.

State officials insist that this was an honest mistake, but the cancellation certainly does not instill confidence in the agencies in charge of this $5 billion project.

For more information on the Tappan Zee project, visit www.brtonthebridge.org.

Each year, the environmental agency’s Building Blocks for Sustainable Communities program brings development professionals to improvement-minded municipalities across the country, where they advise officials, conduct day-long seminars, and assemble [...]]]> Towns in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are planning for safer, more walkable streets, and now the Environmental Protection Agency is lending a hand.

Each year, the environmental agency’s Building Blocks for Sustainable Communities program brings development professionals to improvement-minded municipalities across the country, where they advise officials, conduct day-long seminars, and assemble “next steps” documents.

In the coming months, experts will visit Binghamton, NY to study complete streets, Onondaga County, NY to study zoning codes, Stony Point, NY to study smart growth economics, Simsbury, CT to audit the parking system, Passaic County, NJ to study green streets, and Jersey City to conduct walking audits.

The rally on the 13th, which will take place at [...]]]>
Love transit? This Valentine’s Day, join Tri-State Transportation Campaign as we lobby in Albany. On February 13th, we’ll be rallying at Transit Awareness Day, and the New York State Transportation Equity Alliance’s first annual conference will be held on the 13th and 14th.

The rally on the 13th, which will take place at noon in the “well” of the Legislative Office Building, will urge Albany to invest in transit and keep New York moving. Co-sponsored by the New York Public Transit Association (NYPTA) and NYSTEA, the event will bring transit riders and operators together. By joining voices, we can deliver our message loud and clear: public transportation needs funding! NYSTEA’s conference will focus on transit funding and rider representation at transit authorities. Breakout sessions will address fundraising, communications, and organizing. To register, click here.

Why show up? Because when Albany short-changes transit, New Yorkers can’t get to work. Increased state operating assistance in Governor Cuomo’s proposed budget could mitigate upstate service cuts, but the legislature must address long-term transit funding before it’s too late.

MTA Chief Joe Lhota has been very busy of late, and there will be no rest for the weary.

Straphangers just released their “State of the Station Platforms” report, which surveys the appearance and maintenance of 120 MTA subway stations, and the [...]]]>

Straphangers' report assessed platform repairs in MTA stations Photo: Heath Brandon

MTA Chief Joe Lhota has been very busy of late, and there will be no rest for the weary.

Straphangers just released their “State of the Station Platforms” report, which surveys the appearance and maintenance of 120 MTA subway stations, and the advocacy organization has found room for improvement.

Lhota’s pet peeve, peeling paint, marred 79% of the surveyed stations, and 50% of them had broken lighting fixtures. 53% had water damage.

There was some good news, though: trash cans were present at all but one stop, and none of them were overflowing. Garbage bags sat on the platform only 6% of the time.

The MTA has removed trash cans from some stations as part of a pilot program that aims to reduce the subways’ rat population, but the problem remains—rats were seen at 11% of stations.

Some other findings from the study:

• 15% of staircases/handrails were in disrepair
• 15% of stations had substantial areas of missing tile
• 20% of stations had substantial graffiti
• 28% of stations had exposed wiring
• 33% of stations had substantial floor cracks

The string of service disruptions demonstrates that the New York State Senate must quickly adopt the MTA’s Capital Program proposal, which would fill the MTA Capital [...]]]> The Long Island Rail Road has been plagued by switch problems, signal issues, and track breaks over the past few months, which has caused headaches for commuters and businesses.

The string of service disruptions demonstrates that the New York State Senate must quickly adopt the MTA’s Capital Program proposal, which would fill the MTA Capital Program’s remaining $7 billion deficit. In addition to financing high-profile expansions like East Side Access, the Capital Program keeps the LIRR in a state of good repair. It pays for things like track work and signal maintenance, which are vital to the system’s continued, reliable operation.

Transit advocates have been in Albany urging adoption of the Capital Program and the passage of Governor Cuomo’s budget, which provides $770 million to the MTA’s Capital Program and compensates the MTA for the $310 million it lost in last year’s payroll mobility tax deal.

Legislators grew frustrated with New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Commissioner Joan McDonald at a hearing last week, bristling at what Senator Diane Savino (D-Staten Island/Brooklyn) called her “almost deliberate opaqueness” during a session about the department’s proposed 2012-13 budget.

Governor Cuomo’s budget makes significant [...]]]>

The Capitol | Photo: Matt H. Wade

Legislators grew frustrated with New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Commissioner Joan McDonald at a hearing last week, bristling at what Senator Diane Savino (D-Staten Island/Brooklyn) called her “almost deliberate opaqueness” during a session about the department’s proposed 2012-13 budget.

Governor Cuomo’s budget makes significant infrastructure investments, and the public is eager for details about its spending targets and financing. When legislators inquired, though, Commissioner McDonald was short on information.

Senator Fuschillo (R-Merrick) asked for a list of bridges and roads that would be repaired with the $4.5 billion allocated to the NY Works plan.

“We’re working on the list,” replied McDonald.

Fuschillo also asked for more information on the plan to consolidate NYSDOT’s regional offices.

“We’re studying that now,” said McDonald.

Senator Golden (R-Brooklyn) asked about funding the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement.

“We’re looking at all the options,” McDonald said.

In a moment of frustration, Senator Golden rhetorically asked, “how are we supposed to make an informed decision when your responses are uniformly ‘we’re studying that’?” (The Senate and Assembly evaluate the Governor’s budget every year).

Information-hungry legislators emphasized the need for a Memorandum of Understanding between the agency and the Legislature on the NYSDOT Capital Program’s targets. They also reminded McDonald that the Western New York NYSDOT region was shorted $167 million in 2008 and asked for a regional breakdown of NYSDOT’s spending.

Commissioner McDonald had a firmer answer for Senator Liz Krueger (D-New York), who asked if any of the projects in the NY Works plan were for public transportation, as opposed to just roads and bridges. McDonald answered in the negative, but said that that NYSDOT was “working with the federal government to assist upstate [transit] systems.”

This week, the Alliance for Biking and Walking released its 2012 Benchmarking Report, and the timing is impeccable. As Streetsblog points out, the release coincides with the soon-to-appear national surface transportation bill, and in the tri-state region, it comes just after state legislatures have gotten into full [...]]]>

Graphic: Alliance for Biking and Walking

This week, the Alliance for Biking and Walking released its 2012 Benchmarking Report, and the timing is impeccable. As Streetsblog points out, the release coincides with the soon-to-appear national surface transportation bill, and in the tri-state region, it comes just after state legislatures have gotten into full swing. With statistics, case studies and loads of other resources, the Benchmarking Report shows legislators where the nation’s biking and walking infrastructure stands.

After the jump, TSTC presents some of the report’s most interesting figures.

The report’s snapshot of the tri-state region highlighted some remarkable facts:

• New York State has the third highest share of people who walk and bike to work, and the state ranks second (after Alaska) in the number of people who walk to work.

• Connecticut is the 22nd-safest state for walkers, and 12.8% of its traffic fatalities are pedestrians.

• New Jersey spent .86% of its federal transportation dollars on bicycle or pedestrian projects from 2006-2010, a figure that ranks them below the national average of 1.6%. To be fair, New Jersey does contribute state money, though we have argued that it’s not enough.

Nationwide, there have been some commendable advances in cyclist and pedestrian welfare:

• A growing number of city and state policies have promoted biking and walking. These include complete streets legislation, goals for increased biking and walking, and bike/ped master plans. 19 of the 51 cities surveyed have complete streets policies.

• In 2009-2010, states and cities spent more on bike/ped improvements than they did in 2007-2008 (but they’re still not spending as much as they did in 2005-2006). Over the same period, state per capita funding for bike/ped has increased from $1.29 to $2.17 per person, and city funding for bike/ped has increased from $1.49 to $1.80.

There are also some worrying trends in the report, though:

• Traffic fatalities have decreased, but pedestrian traffic fatalities have increased from 11.3% to 11.7%. This means that, although there are fewer car accidents, pedestrians make up a larger share of accident victims. TSTC saw this trend in an NHSTSA report as well.

• States are disproportionally giving back Transportation Enhancements (TE) funds when the federal government issues rescissions (the term refers to the annual process in which Washington asks states to return unallocated federal transit funds). The trend is troublesome because TE money is used to fund bike/ped projects. In 2009, the average state gave back 21.9% of TE funds to the federal government, while in 2010, the figure was 26.4% (each year TE made up 2.3% of federal apportionments).

The Report aggregates data from federal sources, state DOTs, MPOs and non-profits to assemble a detailed analysis of biking and walking in the United States. Spanning all 50 states and the 51 largest U.S. cities, it covers biking and walking levels, cyclist and pedestrian demographics, safety, policy, and federal funding. The document also details the economic and public health benefits of investing in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, linking these kinds of projects to job creation, increased property values, cleaner air, and better personal health.

To see the full report, click here.

The release is reproduced below, and there is also a .pdf available here.

TSTC’s preliminary review has found a number of issues with the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement project. Among them are:

The [...]]]> TSTC has released preliminary comments on the Tappan Zee replacement project’s draft environmental impact statement (DEIS).

The release is reproduced below, and there is also a .pdf available here.

TSTC’s preliminary review has found a number of issues with the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement project. Among them are:

The state has not fully examined all possible alternatives for the project. During the October scoping hearings, there was a clear call for public transit on the bridge, but the DEIS does not address it.

Despite a consensus among Lower Hudson residents that bus rapid transit (BRT) would solve the region’s congestion problems, the DEIS does not plan to include it.

The DEIS suggests that the bridge replacement will have no negative air quality impact. TSTC regards this projection with skepticism, since previous environmental documents have said that public transportation was necessary to address congestion and pollution in the Hudson Valley.

The DEIS claims that the new bridge is in compliance with New York’s Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Policy Act, a piece of legislation that requires infrastructure projectsto incorporate sustainability measures and plan for the future. In particular, projects must “encourage and allow for greater public transportation options with the goal of reducing automobile usage.” In the case of the Tappan Zee Bridge, this requirement is unmet.

The document ignores the economic benefits of building public transit. We maintain that a BRT system in the I-287 corridor would create jobs now and in the future.

There is still no financial plan for the project.

TSTC reminds New Yorkers that the public conversation is not over yet: there are public meetings on February 28 and March 1. We also invite people to visit our website, brtonthebridge.org, to learn more about the need for a 21st century bridge.

TSTC will release a more complete assessment of the DEIS next week.