(Credit: Marc A. Hermann / MTA New York City Transit)
In the Big Apple's transit circles, Andy Byford has quickly become the hottest London import since the Beatles. New York City Transit's new president, brought in this winter from his job as the head of the Toronto Transit Commission, faces the unenviable task of fixing the city's ailing subway system and restoring faith in its vital transit network. Just three months into the job, Byford is moving at a breakneck pace, and on Monday, he unveiled an ambitious plan to speed up New York City's snail-like local buses and fight the tide of declining ridership.
The plan sets the bus system on the right road toward improvement but will require city and state cooperation and a change in NYPD culture, two elements in short supply these days that could torpedo Byford’s best efforts. It is also likely to require more money, which is also in short supply.
The New York City bus system is a curious thing. It is notorious unreliable with buses that crawl through city streets stopping every two or three blocks and with average speeds that barely exceed eight miles an hour. With infrequent and unreliable service, ridership has declined by nearly 10 percent since 2012 and 15 percent since 2002. Still, over 2 million riders a day rely on the city's buses, and the bus system needs to be fixed.
Byford's bus plan comes after nearly two years of heavy lobbying from the Bus Turnaround Coalition, a joint effort by the Transit Center, Riders Alliance, Straphangers Campaign, and Tri-State Transportation Campaign. In 2016, this group called for an overhaul of the way buses work in New York City, and in 2018, Byford acknowledged its work in unveiling his plan. "We’ve listened to our riders’ concerns," he said, "and are working tirelessly to create a world-class bus system that New Yorkers deserve."
So what exactly is the plan? For now, it is an aspirational approach to better bus service with a 28-point agenda.
Byford wants to redesign the network by optimizing routes based on ridership needs while eliminating some stops to speed up service and expand off-peak bus frequency. He wants to implement infrastructure upgrades that prioritize buses over other vehicles, including dedicated lanes and a signal prioritization system that allows buses to hold green lights or shorten reds. He calls for NYPD cooperation and effective traffic enforcement, and he proposes a faster boarding process, currently a main source of delays.
To reduce bus dwell time -- the minutes a bus spends sitting at a stop while riders dip their Metrocards or scrounge around for $2.75 in nickles, quarters, and dimes -- Byford suggests all-door border, similar to London's bus system; a tap fare payment card; and cashless bus fares. The final parts of the plan involve customer-focused improvements including more real-time bus countdown clocks, redesigned system maps, and more bus shelters along with some clean-tech buses to replace New York's current gas-guzzlers.
On its surface, the plan is exactly what New York needs. Byford has shown that he understands the problems and drawbacks with the current bus network and is willing to propose a multi-part solution that involves every stakeholder and seemingly transcends the dysfunctional politics of the relationship between the city and state. But unfortunately with such an aggressive plan in play, each of these stakeholders are going to have to work together for this bus revitalization effort to succeed.
And to that end, except with respect to the all-door boarding and other technological upgrades to the buses themselves, Byford is now almost a bystander as he has shifted the onus to the city Department of Transportation, the NYPD, and Albany lawmakers to work together to realize his vision of a better bus network.
Let's start with the city's Department of Transportation. Since DOT controls the city's streets, any changes to the way street space is allocated will have to start with DOT. Thus, additional bus lanes, dedicated bus corridors and the queue-jumping benefits of signal prioritization require DOT buy-in and support, and so will reducing the number of bus stops and changing street design to better support bus infrastructure. NYC DOT Commissioner and MTA Board member Polly Trottenberg voiced support for the plan during Monday's meetings, but her boss, the mayor, a reluctant and infrequent transit rider who virtually never takes the bus, will have to be a forceful ally supporting these changes.
And then we have the NYPD. Currently, the NYPD seems to view the city's bus lanes as, well, parking spots. Take a ride down the East Side's avenues, and bus lanes will inevitably be filled with cops who have decided to park in curbside bus lanes, thus negating their intended purposes. The MTA, on the other hand, expects cops to be willing partners in enforcing bus lane restrictions and generally helping to ensure that other vehicles are not in the way of buses, impeding speeds and progress through congested city streets.
But cops alone are a poor and inadequate enforcement method, and NYPD culture is tough, if not impossible, to change. Thus, Albany takes center stage as bus lane enforcement should be automated and camera-based. Until now, the state Legislature has resisted giving the MTA carte blanche ability to install cameras that can assist in automated bus lane enforcement, but to truly tackle the problem of cars in bus lanes, Albany will have to act, and forcefully.
Finally, the elephant in the room is the cost. We do not yet know how much the bus plan will cost. It relies in part on moving pieces that are funded (such as a new fare payment system) and others that are not, and it will again be up to the governor to champion transit improvements in New York City so that they receive adequate funding. Facing the pressures and, more importantly, the headlines of a primary challenge, Andrew Cuomo has lately embraced certain positions he has rejected in the past, and mass transit support should be one of them. Perhaps, then, the time is right for the city and state to prioritize bus travel over car traffic.
Ultimately, the buses need fixing, but more importantly, the bus system needs to work efficiently so that New Yorkers have faith in it again. Buses can solve access problems in transit deserts and can be a part of the transit upgrades that a true congestion pricing plan would require. Byford has a vision that will improve bus service, but that is the easy part. Now he just has to convince everyone else to join him as well.
***
Benjamin Kabak is the editor of Second Ave. Sagas, on Twitter @2AvSagas.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
(photo: Cannabis Doctors of New York)
New York’s Compassionate Care Act went into effect in January 2016. As the CEO of Cannabis Doctors of New York, a group based in Manhattan, I’ve been at the forefront of treatment using cannabis and have seen the life-changing results its thoughtful and judicious use can provide. Prescription marijuana medication has helped my patients safely cope with a variety of serious ailments such as cancer, AIDS, chronic pain, and Inflammatory Bowel Disease. However our state’s marijuana policy is about to be quickly surpassed by the policies of our neighbors to the east, west, and north in ways that would hit the New York Metropolitan Area particularly hard.
I am urging lawmakers to consider the unfairness of this situation. All law-abiding New Yorkers should be able to have access to the analgesic and other therapeutic qualities of cannabis. Used responsibly, marijuana can be a powerful and important tool in a healthy lifestyle. And it is a vastly better alternative to the drug scourges eating away at our society. For thousands of years the many uses of cannabis have been woven into societies around the world. There has never been a documented overdose.
Meanwhile, a growing body of research proves that cannabis is an effective tool in safely treating ailments that are now being treated with opioids and in fact, it is being shown to help wean patients off narcotics. As a doctor, I’ve seen these results.
Some 9,000 New Yorkers overdosed on opioids last year. Tens of thousands of Americans lose their lives every year due to alcohol — a legal yet far more dangerous substance than marijuana. Enough is enough. It’s time for New York to join the 21st century and pass the pending legislation that would expand the current medical cannabis law and allow our responsible MDs to use their judgement in treating the many conditions that could be helped by cannabis (and that were originally included in the Compassionate Care Act). New York needs better patient access.
This is a social justice issue and an economic issue, in addition to being good medical policy, as is seen every day in New York and the 28 other states plus the District of Columbia where medical cannabis has been legalized. The high approval rating amongst Republicans, Democrats, and independents makes the issue politically safe for elected officials on both sides of the aisle.
Legalization of the recreational use of marijuana in the Empire State could bring $2.5 billion in tourism a year. Much of that money would be spent in the New York City Metropolitan Area (and has been shown in other states would help lower the high price patients are forced to pay now for medical cannabis). Tens of thousands of good jobs would be created, and hundreds of millions of dollars of tax revenue would be pumped back into the economy to be spent on schools and budget shortfalls. Does our state want to lose billions of dollars to neighboring states and then play catch-up?
It’s disturbing that our leaders in Albany have fallen so out of touch with the times. Right now 20% of Americans live in a state with legal marijuana; 64% of Americans approve of legalized marijuana, and this issue crosses party lines. New York prides itself on being a liberal standard bearer, but on this issue it is sorely lacking leadership. Progressive attitudes just a few miles away are creating jobs and peace of mind and safety for millions of marijuana users. It’s time for us to get with the program. An economic boost, thousands of good jobs, and a more compassionate public health policy is just a bill away.
***
Dr. Kenneth Weinberg is CEO of Cannabis Doctors of New York.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
(Credit: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)
Nearly every day it seems, a new record is broken for a tallest new residential structure in our city. Whether it is Downtown Brooklyn’s first 1,000+ foot tall tower, Queens’ tallest tower in Long Island City, or the 1,550 foot tall West 57 Street residential tower that will soon rise higher than the top floor of One World Trade Center, residential building in New York City is reaching new heights.
But for Mayor de Blasio and the real estate industry, even these record-breaking heights are not enough. They are advocating for repealing a 60-year-old state law, which, while capping the size of residential developments in New York City, is still so generous as to allow the unprecedented giants going up now.
If the mayor and the real estate industry have their way, the sky could literally be the limit for residential high-rises in New York City. And not just in Midtown or the Financial District, but residential neighborhoods like the Upper East Side and Upper West Side, Greenwich Village, and various parts of Brooklyn and Queens, where current rules limit new residential development to at or near the cap imposed by state law.
The possibility is more than theoretical. Two years ago proponents of lifting the cap came close to getting the State Legislature to do so. This year the State Senate pushed for the measure to be included in the state budget, but the Assembly ultimately did not go along with it (though the cap removal definitely has its proponents in the Assembly majority). Most observers expect the supporters of lifting the cap to push the measure again before the state legislative session ends in June, possibly as part of the “big ugly” – the annual package of often unrelated and controversial measures passed in the final hours of legislative session, with little public notice or input.
With all the problems facing New York City right now, from dysfunctional subways to crumbling public housing to crippling congestion, why is this an issue the mayor has chosen to take on?
Mayor de Blasio and some of the proponents of lifting the cap claim it’s necessary to build affordable housing. But not because they want affordable housing developments that exceed the current record-breaking heights. Because they want to allow real estate developers to build vastly larger for-profit, luxury housing developments. In return, they will require them to attach a comparatively small amount of affordable housing to the development.
This is a false dichotomy that the real estate industry has promulgated and the mayor has endorsed – that the best and, in many cases, only way to get new affordable housing out of for-profit developers across the city is by supersizing the amount of luxury, market-rate housing they can build, and then attaching these smaller amounts of affordable housing to it.
It’s due to this approach that communities throughout New York City have opposed the mayor’s rezoning plans – both because they would destroy the scale and character of their neighborhoods, and because under the guise of introducing “affordable housing” (which in many cases is unaffordable to the residents of the neighborhood), vastly increased quantities of very expensive housing is built, which more than counteracts any good done by the relatively small amount of affordable housing created.
Take Greenwich Village and the East Village. These increasingly wealthy neighborhoods with decreasing affordable housing have been begging the mayor to support a zoning plan we have proposed that would allow modest increases in the allowable size of developments as a condition for creating or preserving affordable housing. The mayor has adamantly opposed the plan, saying he would only be willing to consider the kind of massive increases in the allowable size of residential development that would bump up against the current state cap, to say nothing of destroying the character of these human-scaled neighborhoods.
Don’t let the mayor or Big Real Estate fool you. The state cap on the size of New York City residential buildings is not limiting anything New Yorkers should be worried about. The only thing it’s limiting is the already astronomical profits of developers, and the ambitions of some politicians to increase them even further.
***
Andrew Berman is Executive Director of Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation. On Twitter @GVSHP.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.