Jump to content

MTA goes forward with 4% fare and toll hikes for 2015


Harry

Recommended Posts

 

post-5097-0-44169200-1406636880_thumb.jpg
Updated budget plans unveiled by the MTA on Monday show that a previously planned 2015 fare and toll hike of 4% will not be increased, despite rising labor costs. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s labor expenses will grow by roughly $260 million a year, on average, through 2018, as a result of recent contract settlements, including a pact for subway and bus workers and the tentative deal that averted a Long Island Rail Road strike earlier this month, officials said. MTA officials will cover the added costs through several moves, including dipping into reserves established to pay for future retirees’ health care and to fund future capital construction projects, Chief Financial Officer Robert Foran said.

Read more: Source

post-5097-0-44169200-1406636880_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites


So the fare will only up a dime next year? At least it won't be $3...

We don't know yet, since the (MTA) hasn't decided how the increases will be distributed. I would expect them to try to keep the base fare low, but pass on the costs to those of us who purchase passes, which isn't necessarily the way to go about it either.  I would expect my pass to be about $60.00 a week for the express bus, so I'd be looking at $240.00 - 300.00 a month.  And to think not that long ago my pass was $41.00 a week ($164 - 205.00) a month... Pretty big jump... At some point, I'm not sure that it's that "advantageous" to use public transit for some folks.  Then you'll have another increase in 2017... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO they should shove most of the cost onto the commuter railroads, since this is mostly their fault, they make less of their budget from farebox, and every other fare hike has hit the city with a sledgehammer.

That doesn't seem like a wise move.  There are plenty of people that suffered tremendously from the previous fare hikes.  Yes, most of the riders on Metro-North and LIRR are upper middle class types, but you have the college students and folks that need the service that can barely afford to ride it now.  For someone like myself who rides regularly but not every day, you may turn them off.  One ride during peak with the Rail Link bus is $10.50 one way from Riverdale to GCT, which is almost the cost of a round trip on the express bus.  I generally don't think about it that way but you can do quite a bit with $10.50.  That's 4 rides on the subway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO they should shove most of the cost onto the commuter railroads, since this is mostly their fault, they make less of their budget from farebox, and every other fare hike has hit the city with a sledgehammer.

Holy smokes! A one way peak ticket, traveling to one zone, is $10 bucks. Easy there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah its minuscule per fare but this can add up with the 7 day unlimiteds and up which is what I buy out of necessity to commute by subway.

Well after doing the math:

30*0.04=1.2.

112*0.04=4.48

 

2.5*0.04=0.1

 

It's a lot better than 7%...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO they should shove most of the cost onto the commuter railroads, since this is mostly their fault, they make less of their budget from farebox, and every other fare hike has hit the city with a sledgehammer.

At least their fares are going up. The MTA can't do it solely on the shoulders of city riders and drivers. But I still think the City and the MTA should extend the City Ticket fare to seven days a week so City residents who live far from the subway, but close to LIRR or Metro-North can use them, instead of having to take crowded buses to overcrowded subways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least their fares are going up. The MTA can't do it solely on the shoulders of city riders and drivers. But I still think the City and the MTA should extend the City Ticket fare to seven days a week so City residents who live far from the subway, but close to LIRR or Metro-North can use them, instead of having to take crowded buses to overcrowded subways.

That will NEVER happen. The LIRR and Metro-North is there to serve those in Westchester and Long Island first and foremost.  Their core riders are from those areas, and therefore they take priority.  Since off-peak is light, the thinking is to bring in extra revenue and encourage folks in the city to use it by enticing them with a faster ride for a slightly higher fare than the subway, but peak they do not want tons of city riders packing the trains and creating more overcrowding issues.  They already have crowding issues on the trains as it is during peak hours, so they would not do anything to encourage that situation to become worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least their fares are going up. The MTA can't do it solely on the shoulders of city riders and drivers. But I still think the City and the MTA should extend the City Ticket fare to seven days a week so City residents who live far from the subway, but close to LIRR or Metro-North can use them, instead of having to take crowded buses to overcrowded subways.

 

I don't even think it even has to do with what customer they want to serve first. Isn't the whole idea to behind city ticket is to make travel in the city easier when surface transit can't foot the bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even think it even has to do with what customer they want to serve first. Isn't the whole idea to behind city ticket is to make travel in the city easier when surface transit can't foot the bill.

 

The idea is to fill up trains that need filling (because a partially paid seat is much better than an empty one). That's why it's done on weekends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That will NEVER happen. The LIRR and Metro-North is there to serve those in Westchester and Long Island first and foremost.  Their core riders are from those areas, and therefore they take priority.  Since off-peak is light, the thinking is to bring in extra revenue and encourage folks in the city to use it by enticing them with a faster ride for a slightly higher fare than the subway, but peak they do not want tons of city riders packing the trains and creating more overcrowding issues.  They already have crowding issues on the trains as it is during peak hours, so they would not do anything to encourage that situation to become worse.

 

Once East Side Access opens, things just might get better for Queens riders since the LIRR will have a lot of additional capacity in the city, and not enough capacity east of the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That will NEVER happen. The LIRR and Metro-North is there to serve those in Westchester and Long Island first and foremost.  Their core riders are from those areas, and therefore they take priority.  Since off-peak is light, the thinking is to bring in extra revenue and encourage folks in the city to use it by enticing them with a faster ride for a slightly higher fare than the subway, but peak they do not want tons of city riders packing the trains and creating more overcrowding issues.  They already have crowding issues on the trains as it is during peak hours, so they would not do anything to encourage that situation to become worse.

There ARE underutilized rush-hour commuter trains that make most of their stops within the Bronx or Queens and short-turn just outside of the city. I've taken such trains before on the LIRR Port Washington branch when I used to live in Bayside and during instances when the (7) experienced major meltdowns. These trains short-turned at Great Neck and they had plenty of seats available leaving Penn Station...during rush hour. Occasionally, when I lived in the Bronx, I rode Metro-North's Harlem Line to the Williamsbridge station and same thing, plenty of seats available. These were rush-hour runs that short-turned at Mount Vernon West. There is room on some of these trains to relieve overcrowding on subways and local buses that have to "fill-in" for the absence of subways (like the Q12, Q13 and Q28 in northeast Queens). It didn't have to be this way, but it is because Washington politicians would rather continue spending billions of tax dollars on wars in countries that hate our guts and Albany pols would rather blow millions of tax dollars on their own lavish lifestyles than properly fund our country and state's deteriorating infrastructure. If it hadn't been for all idiotic and corrupt use of taxpayer money, perhaps we could have had the additional subway lines we need to handle the still-growing population we have in this city that is straining the existing system. A full 2nd Ave Subway with extensions to the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens, a (7) extension to Bayside or Douglaston, an (E) extension to Laurelton, etc. But no, God forbid our elected officials actually do something that might benefit us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There ARE underutilized rush-hour commuter trains that make most of their stops within the Bronx or Queens and short-turn just outside of the city. I've taken such trains before on the LIRR Port Washington branch when I used to live in Bayside and during instances when the  (7) experienced major meltdowns. These trains short-turned at Great Neck and they had plenty of seats available leaving Penn Station...during rush hour. Occasionally, when I lived in the Bronx, I rode Metro-North's Harlem Line to the Williamsbridge station and same thing, plenty of seats available. These were rush-hour runs that short-turned at Mount Vernon West. There is room on some of these trains to relieve overcrowding on subways and local buses that have to "fill-in" for the absence of subways (like the Q12, Q13 and Q28 in northeast Queens). It didn't have to be this way, but it is because Washington politicians would rather continue spending billions of tax dollars on wars in countries that hate our guts and Albany pols would rather blow millions of tax dollars on their own lavish lifestyles than properly fund our country and state's deteriorating infrastructure. If it hadn't been for all idiotic and corrupt use of taxpayer money, perhaps we could have had the additional subway lines we need to handle the still-growing population we have in this city that is straining the existing system. A full 2nd Ave Subway with extensions to the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens, a  (7) extension to Bayside or Douglaston, an  (E) extension to Laurelton, etc. But no, God forbid our elected officials actually do something that might benefit us.

Just because you found open seats "occasionally" doesn't mean that there are always open seats.  Ridership fluctuates.  During the rush I rarely find a seat coming from Riverdale on Metro-North, and I have to stand going to Grand Central.  The trains that short turn are there to prevent overcrowding.  For the prices we pay, we should be able to have a seat.  Standing on the subway I get because the fare is cheap, and distances tend to be short for those riding, but commuter trains are for long distances and are more costly to run and aren't made for people to be standing, so a premium should and must be paid.  I don't support lowering the fares nor making them more "accessible" to subway riders.  If they want to use the service, they should be forced to pay a premium for it, otherwise they have the subway.  Commuter trains are not meant to be subways.  They are for commuters in the suburbs outside of NYC, and other suburban areas within New York City.  Urban areas like Williamsbridge really shouldn't have a Metro-North station.  They already have subway service with East and West Side access and the BxM11.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just because you found open seats "occasionally" doesn't mean that there are always open seats.  Ridership fluctuates.  During the rush I rarely find a seat coming from Riverdale on Metro-North, and I have to stand going to Grand Central.  The trains that short turn are there to prevent overcrowding.  For the prices we pay, we should be able to have a seat.  Standing on the subway I get because the fare is cheap, and distances tend to be short for those riding, but commuter trains are for long distances and are more costly to run and aren't made for people to be standing, so a premium should and must be paid.  I don't support lowering the fares nor making them more "accessible" to subway riders.  If they want to use the service, they should be forced to pay a premium for it, otherwise they have the subway.  Commuter trains are not meant to be subways.  They are for commuters in the suburbs outside of NYC, and other suburban areas within New York City.  Urban areas like Williamsbridge really shouldn't have a Metro-North station.  They already have subway service with East and West Side access and the BxM11.

 

 

That may be the case for Metro North, but LIRR runs in areas where there is no subway service at all, where concrete plans for expansion have been made in the past, and where some of the LIRR branches do not have particularly high ridership counts and aren't very long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case for Metro North, but LIRR runs in areas where there is no subway service at all, where concrete plans for expansion have been made in the past, and where some of the LIRR branches do not have particularly high ridership counts and aren't very long.

So what?  It's called LIRR for a reason... The primary ridership is folks on Long Island, and if folks in Queens want fast service to the city, they should pay a premium for it just the way that other neighborhoods in New York City do that don't have subway service.  We don't have a subway here in Riverdale either, so folks either take local buses over to 242nd for the (1) train or they use the express bus or Metro-North.  I'd much rather pay $10.75 one way and take the Hudson Rail Link to Metro-North than take the local bus to the local subway and schlepp and do all of those transfers.  It's all about which people prefer... Convenience and quickness vs. inconvenience.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just because you found open seats "occasionally" doesn't mean that there are always open seats.  Ridership fluctuates.  During the rush I rarely find a seat coming from Riverdale on Metro-North, and I have to stand going to Grand Central.  The trains that short turn are there to prevent overcrowding.  For the prices we pay, we should be able to have a seat.  Standing on the subway I get because the fare is cheap, and distances tend to be short for those riding, but commuter trains are for long distances and are more costly to run and aren't made for people to be standing, so a premium should and must be paid.  I don't support lowering the fares nor making them more "accessible" to subway riders.  If they want to use the service, they should be forced to pay a premium for it, otherwise they have the subway.  Commuter trains are not meant to be subways.  They are for commuters in the suburbs outside of NYC, and other suburban areas within New York City.  Urban areas like Williamsbridge really shouldn't have a Metro-North station.  They already have subway service with East and West Side access and the BxM11.

 

"Occasionally" is when I rode those various Harlem Line and Port Washington Branch trains. Every time I rode them they had seats available. I didn't say anything about lowering the fares of these trains to subway/local bus fares, only to extend the City Ticket fare (currently $4.00, but will probably go up next year along with the other fare hikes) to seven days per week. Or at the very least, charge the same fare as the express buses (currently $6.00, but again, will probably go up next year). A one-way peak trip from Bayside (LIRR Zone 3) to Penn Station is $9.50 and off-peak is $7.00. Neither fare includes a transfer to the subway or local bus, which needs to be done unless your final destination is Penn Station or within walking distance. That's overpriced, considering that the QM3 express bus runs only three inbound trips during AM rush and only three outbound trips during PM rush. This isn't at all like the White Plains Rd corridor, where they do have excellent BxM11 express bus service in addition to the (2) and rush hour <5> Thru Express trains. The Bronx express buses generally seem to run more full-time service than the Queens ones do, so you've got a point with Metro-North there. But LIRR in Queens is a very different story.

That may be the case for Metro North, but LIRR runs in areas where there is no subway service at all, where concrete plans for expansion have been made in the past, and where some of the LIRR branches do not have particularly high ridership counts and aren't very long.

This. This is exactly what I'm talking about. They made actual plans to extend the subway east from Flushing and Jamaica and there are under-utilized trains on those LIRR branches. If it wasn't for political stupidity in both Albany and Washington, we might have had them years, if not decades, ago. But we don't, so we've got to make better use of what we've got and the MTA can start by stopping the treatment of the LIRR, Metro-North and NYC Transit as three completely separate systems unto themselves. They brag about it being one big system. Well, start treating it that way, MTA. If they're going to raise fares, the least they can do is include free transfers to the subway at major transfer points like Grand Central, 125th St, Penn Station, Jamaica and Flatbush Ave. Most people who get off at these stations are continuing beyond them. The fares are going up next year. Why shouldn't you get something more for the extra money you'll have to shell out? It would be a whole lot cheaper (but not better) to do this than to extend the (E), (F), (J) and/or (7) to eastern Queens.

 

For what it's worth, my favorite plan for improving rail service in eastern Queens has to be the RPA's 1996 Rx plan, which called for connecting the Port Washington branch to the upper level of the 63rd St tunnel in addition to connecting the LIRR to GCT via the tunnel's lower level. Port Washington Rx trains would have operated via the Broadway Express tracks to City Hall lower level (in 1996, the 63rd tunnel was served by the Q on weekdays and the (B) on weekends and the Broadway express tracks were unused).  The idea was that it would go even further in freeing up space at congested Penn Station. The biggest problems with that proposal were Rx trains would have had to switch to the local tracks at Prince St interlocking to get to City Hall, which would have delayed (N) and (R) service, as well as the (Q) which returned to the express tracks in 2001, along with the (W) and were traveling over the reopened south tracks of the Manhattan Bridge. Not to mention issues with third-rail voltage, FRA crash/inspection standards and of course, North Shore politicians and residents angry at the mere mention of connecting their LIRR branch to the New York City subway. But hey, the RPA was thinking outside the box here. Be nice if the powers that be could do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what?  It's called LIRR for a reason... The primary ridership is folks on Long Island, and if folks in Queens want fast service to the city, they should pay a premium for it just the way that other neighborhoods in New York City do that don't have subway service.  We don't have a subway here in Riverdale either, so folks either take local buses over to 242nd for the (1) train or they use the express bus or Metro-North.  I'd much rather pay $10.75 one way and take the Hudson Rail Link to Metro-North than take the local bus to the local subway and schlepp and do all of those transfers.  It's all about which people prefer... Convenience and quickness vs. inconvenience.  

The difference in price between "convenience and quickness" vs "inconvenience" in this city is huge. It should not be this huge. $2.50 vs $10.75 (from Riverdale) or $9.50 (from Bayside), plus a subway fare from GCT or Penn for most riders. It's madness and it's not worth it, especially if you have to stand on an LIRR or Metro-North train, like you said upthread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference in price between "convenience and quickness" vs "inconvenience" in this city is huge. It should not be this huge. $2.50 vs $10.75 (from Riverdale) or $9.50 (from Bayside), plus a subway fare from GCT or Penn for most riders. It's madness and it's not worth it, especially if you have to stand on an LIRR or Metro-North train, like you said upthread.

Hey listen, when you move to a neighborhood, you have to factor in the transportation options. Now when I lived on Staten Island, it wasn't planned but rather due to a situation out of my control, but when I finally did move where I had the chance to plan, I did my research.  I knew that moving to Riverdale I would be using the express bus or Metro-North to commute, though I did try the subway just to see what it was like, but I knew what the cost would be commuting to and from here for work, etc.  Anyone moving to Queens without subway service should do the same.  That has to be factored into to your living expenses.  That's one of the draw backs for living here is that while there are several convenient transportation options, they are expensive, and there is no subway, which makes it isolated and hard to reach for the masses, which is why some like myself live here for that precise reason.   B-)

 

 

"Occasionally" is when I rode those various Harlem Line and Port Washington Branch trains. Every time I rode them they had seats available. I didn't say anything about lowering the fares of these trains to subway/local bus fares, only to extend the City Ticket fare (currently $4.00, but will probably go up next year along with the other fare hikes) to seven days per week. Or at the very least, charge the same fare as the express buses (currently $6.00, but again, will probably go up next year). A one-way peak trip from Bayside (LIRR Zone 3) to Penn Station is $9.50 and off-peak is $7.00. Neither fare includes a transfer to the subway or local bus, which needs to be done unless your final destination is Penn Station or within walking distance. That's overpriced, considering that the QM3 express bus runs only three inbound trips during AM rush and only three outbound trips during PM rush. This isn't at all like the White Plains Rd corridor, where they do have excellent BxM11 express bus service in addition to the  (2) and rush hour  <5> Thru Express trains. The Bronx express buses generally seem to run more full-time service than the Queens ones do, so you've got a point with Metro-North there. But LIRR in Queens is a very different story.

The problem with Queens is that the LIRR tends to go in areas that can be accessible, so it's hard for the express bus to compete unless it runs in areas where there is no LIRR or where the LIRR is far enough to be less of an option.  It tends to be the reverse with the Bronx and Metro-North.  Same set with Riverdale too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.