More Government Hypocrisy

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I never said anything about the MTA not having much expertise in the construction area. I don't have any experience in that area so I wouldn't know one way or the other. You must be confusing me with someone else. As far as the phone calls, I wasn't calling just to make sure they are there. They were asked specifics about what they were finding regarding the contractors' work, asked to investigate problems the contractor's were alleging, etc. This happened a little under 30 years ago, so excuse me if I don't remember what all the calls entailed. But it certainly was more than just taking attendance. I belieive they also completed daily status reports describing all they were doing that day and what they were finding. There is a lot more oversight than you would expect. But it still doesnt't mean problems don't occur. How they are remedied and prevented from reoccurring are most important.

I could be confusing you with someone else... Maybe bobtehpanda said that... Anywho, we've seen how workers can still get around all of that so there still needs to be more oversight.

[bobtehpanda]

Yeah I could imagine the size of those change orders... 

 

I don't see what phone calls would do though.  All they had to do was answer the phone when you called and after that who knows where they were. LOL

 

I'm curious as to why they wouldn't hire GC's as consultants?  You've mentioned numerous times now that the doesn't have that much expertise in the construction area, but when you hire a GC as a consultant, you use them to advise you on the budget and other issues with the project that ideally should save money down the road.  I would think that could perhaps help them from going overbudget so often.

 

The MTA does hire consultants, but the issue with using GCs as consultants is that, well, there simply aren't a lot of GCs capable of doing the work the MTA requires in the first place, and then there are things like conflicts of interest; State law doesn't prevent consultants from also bidding on the work that they create, so a reduction in cost scope might not be in the best interest.

 

I said that they didn't have a lot of experience. MTA Capital Construction as an agency has only existed since 2003, after the big push from Pataki, Giuliani, and Bloomberg to build new projects (the SAS FEIS finished in 2004, and most of the current projects also finished around that timeframe). From an article about the pitfalls of the MTA's current authority model:

 

“They’ve screwed it up,” David Gunn, former Transit Authority chief and all-around American railroad veteran, said of Capital Construction during a phone interview in 2012. “They had a really good construction department at the Transit Authority. For whatever reason they centralized it at the MTA. They drove off or retired some key people at the Transit Authority, and that was a terrible mistake.”

 

 

Source: http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/should-chicago-adopt-the-new-york-transit-authority-model

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The MTA does hire consultants, but the issue with using GCs as consultants is that, well, there simply aren't a lot of GCs capable of doing the work the MTA requires in the first place, and then there are things like conflicts of interest; State law doesn't prevent consultants from also bidding on the work that they create, so a reduction in cost scope might not be in the best interest.

 

I said that they didn't have a lot of experience. MTA Capital Construction as an agency has only existed since 2003, after the big push from Pataki, Giuliani, and Bloomberg to build new projects (the SAS FEIS finished in 2004, and most of the current projects also finished around that timeframe). From an article about the pitfalls of the MTA's current authority model:

 

 

Source: http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/should-chicago-adopt-the-new-york-transit-authority-model

I see... Well for what it's worth 2003 - 2014 is still 11 years. Centralizing it probably wasn't the issue, but rather contracting operations and letting folks with experience go.  There's a guy I know who works for the as an engineer.  He was working on a project not too far from 347 Madison.  Used to take the express bus home with me...  That guy probably has more experience in that field than I do in terms of my time on earth.  Getting those types of guys isn't easy nor cheap, but the expertise that they provide is priceless.

[Lance]

Nobody is putting words in your mouth, but you and I know that you have a pro-subway stance, and I can quote you in that Bay Ridge thread where you vehemently spoke out against ferry service and express bus service as well to some extent, pointing to the train as if all residents live near the 95th, 86th, 77th or Bay Ridge Avenue stations.  It's cute however that you display this air that unless you say something directly that your stance isn't clear.  

 

I would also be curious in seeing how much money exactly is earmarked for artwork?  I would like to see some stats on it.  There are 468 total stations and depending on how much money is spent on artwork, that money could add up and be used for small rehabs here and there (i.e. new platforms, etc.). Given how many partial rehabs the is doing these days instead of the standard full rehabs, I think it would be worth exploring.

When have I ever said anything about, much less against, express bus service? I think you're confusing me with someone else on this forum, but I don't make a lot of comments on express buses, mostly because that's not my area of expertise and I don't comment about things I don't know.

 

Regarding my stance on ferry service, the question remains, how many proposed ferry riders are just commuting between the Brooklyn and Manhattan waterfronts and how many would have to transfer to either a bus or a nearby subway line or have to take a taxi to their final destinations? What you call "vehemently against", I call legitimate concerns and criticisms. If the city was mainly situated around the water, then this ferry idea would be better. However, since most of the city is landlocked away from the coasts and waterfronts, ferries aren't a good option for most commuters.

[BrooklynBus]

 

Regarding my stance on ferry service, the question remains, how many proposed ferry riders are just commuting between the Brooklyn and Manhattan waterfronts and how many would have to transfer to either a bus or a nearby subway line or have to take a taxi to their final destinations? What you call "vehemently against", I call legitimate concerns and criticisms. If the city was mainly situated around the water, then this ferry idea would be better. However, since most of the city is landlocked away from the coasts and waterfronts, ferries aren't a good option for most commuters.

Past studies have shown that ferry services require heavy subsidies. That's why after federal grants expire, they are usually discontinued. You are correct that the city is not mainly situated around water. One must usually take a bus to the ferry and from the ferry which is automatically an inconvenient two transfer trip, usually requiring multiple fares. The only reason why NY Waterways is successful is ecause they run their own free buses and are coordinated with ferry departures.

 

When the city starts ferry service they do it in isolation so that is inconvenient and doomed to failure. For example no bus lines were extended or modified to serve the just discontinued Rockaway ferry. A low fare was just not enough to attract customers because many had to pay other fares as well. Ferries can be successful if planned right. There used to be a ferry between Rockaway and Sheepshead Bay. If parking and buses were provided on the Rockaway side, commuters could walk or ride to the Brighton Line and get to Manhattan quicker than the A train. It is also a very short ferry ride of five or ten minutes, not 30. But no one would use it if they have to pay three fares.

 

Ferries are not a solution for most transportation problems, but it has it's place just like express buses if it is done right. They need coordination with other modes, sonething we don't usually do.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Ferries are not a solution for most transportation problems, but it has it's place just like express buses if it is done right. They need coordination with other modes, sonething we don't usually do.

Correct... And where they work they should be implemented.  The Rockaways wanted and should have ferry service.

 

When have I ever said anything about, much less against, express bus service? I think you're confusing me with someone else on this forum, but I don't make a lot of comments on express buses, mostly because that's not my area of expertise and I don't comment about things I don't know.

 

Regarding my stance on ferry service, the question remains, how many proposed ferry riders are just commuting between the Brooklyn and Manhattan waterfronts and how many would have to transfer to either a bus or a nearby subway line or have to take a taxi to their final destinations? What you call "vehemently against", I call legitimate concerns and criticisms. If the city was mainly situated around the water, then this ferry idea would be better. However, since most of the city is landlocked away from the coasts and waterfronts, ferries aren't a good option for most commuters.

What does that have to do with whether or not the service will be successful?  Ferry service in Williamsburg and other parts of North Brooklyn has done very well, and I'm sure they have other transfers, just like Metro-North and LIRR riders. I recall your arguing against more express bus service for Bay Ridge because of the situation, and also arguing against ferry service.  The X27/X37 has good ridership and there are enough residents in Bay Ridge to have express bus service and ferry service.

[Lance]

I knew there was a reason I didn't bother addressing this until now. I really don't have the patience to deal with someone who goes out of their way to completely miss the point I was making. BrooklynBus got my point and while your cherry-picked quote out of its original context seems to agree with your argument, his post in its entirety really doesn't. Ferries, like every other mode of transportation, needs a significant amount of riders to offset its costs. If there aren't that many riders to use said ferry service, mainly because they're too far away for them to be useful, that service will have to be subsidized by the city and/or state. For someone who's so against wasteful spending, you sure do like to push something that will require a lot of unnecessary spending.

 

Also, I'd like some evidence of my arguments against more express bus service. All I'm getting is word-of-mouth.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I knew there was a reason I didn't bother addressing this until now. I really don't have the patience to deal with someone who goes out of their way to completely miss the point I was making. BrooklynBus got my point and while your cherry-picked quote out of its original context seems to agree with your argument, his post in its entirety really doesn't. Ferries, like every other mode of transportation, needs a significant amount of riders to offset its costs. If there aren't that many riders to use said ferry service, mainly because they're too far away for them to be useful, that service will have to be subsidized by the city and/or state. For someone who's so against wasteful spending, you sure do like to push something that will require a lot of unnecessary spending.

 

Also, I'd like some evidence of my arguments against more express bus service. All I'm getting is word-of-mouth.

I asked you to clarify what additional transfers had to do with potential ridership on ferries, which you still haven't done.  The service would only be wasteful if people aren't using it.  If people need the service and are using it, then the subsidies are worth it in my mind because I don't believe that the subway should be the solution for our transportation problems even if it is supposedly cheaper per customer.  I say supposedly because I'm excluding the costs related to developing additional subway lines necessary when expanding.  The billions needed to construct new subway lines are far more expensive than the monies needed to start and maintain ferry service.

 

Also, you didn't get word of mouth.  I specifically mentioned the thread in question when you spoke out against express bus service, and that was the Bay Ridge thread pertaining to the train being knocked out due to tunnel work repairs from Hurricane Sandy, and Senator Golden asking for more X27/X37 express bus service for his constituents. 

 

BrooklynBus's point is that ferry service has it's place in our transportation system and should be used where applicable, which you don't seem to agree with based on your constant yelling about costs and subsidies for ferry service vs. subway service.

[bobtehpanda]

I asked you to clarify what additional transfers had to do with potential ridership on ferries, which you still haven't done.  The service would only be wasteful if people aren't using it.  If people need the service and are using it, then the subsidies are worth it in my mind because I don't believe that the subway should be the solution for our transportation problems even if it is supposedly cheaper per customer.  I say supposedly because I'm excluding the costs related to developing additional subway lines necessary when expanding.  The billions needed to construct new subway lines are far more expensive than the monies needed to start and maintain ferry service.

 

Also, you didn't get word of mouth.  I specifically mentioned the thread in question when you spoke out against express bus service, and that was the Bay Ridge thread pertaining to the train being knocked out due to tunnel work repairs from Hurricane Sandy, and Senator Golden asking for more X27/X37 express bus service for his constituents. 

 

BrooklynBus's point is that ferry service has it's place in our transportation system and should be used where applicable, which you don't seem to agree with based on your constant yelling about costs and subsidies for ferry service vs. subway service.

 

Transfers do impact ridership on ferries; without convenient, free transfers, the ridership of a ferry is basically just going to be whatever is a convenient walk from the ferry.

 

Subway service, or at least rail service, is in the end the ultimate solution, since it is the best at moving large amounts of people around in a short enough time and small enough space, and we are way past the era of building new, river or harbor-spanning bridges around this city. Ferries are a band-aid solution until we can actually muster the political will to build more capacity into the train network, and the greater transportation network, since basically everything in the region is at capacity at this point.

[BrooklynBus]

Transfers do impact ridership on ferries; without convenient, free transfers, the ridership of a ferry is basically just going to be whatever is a convenient walk from the ferry.

 

Subway service, or at least rail service, is in the end the ultimate solution, since it is the best at moving large amounts of people around in a short enough time and small enough space, and we are way past the era of building new, river or harbor-spanning bridges around this city. Ferries are a band-aid solution until we can actually muster the political will to build more capacity into the train network, and the greater transportation network, since basically everything in the region is at capacity at this point.

Agreed. In addition to free transfers. The buses schedule would also have to be timed to meet the ferries like NY Waterways does. The MTA has no interest in helping any other modes it's not responsible for. Hence the low ridership on the recently discontinued Rockaway service. Before the addition ofthe Brookyn stop. The entire trip took 35 minutes I believe, but few could get to the ferry. No bus routes were modified to serve the ferry and I am not sure how much parking if any was provided or if you had to pay or the parking. Successful ferry service requires cooperation on everyone's part and a real will to make it work.

 

What we do here is some politician gets brownie points by getting a federal grant for a trial service which is just discontinued when the money runs out. That's why ferry service has not been working. That doesn't mean it coudn't work with routes that make sense, free parking at one end and buses that are coordinated with the ferries, and a reasonable total cost for the entire trip.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Agreed. In addition to free transfers. The buses schedule would also have to be timed to meet the ferries like NY Waterways does. The MTA has no interest in helping any other modes it's not responsible for. Hence the low ridership on the recently discontinued Rockaway service. Before the addition ofthe Brookyn stop. The entire trip took 35 minutes I believe, but few could get to the ferry. No bus routes were modified to serve the ferry and I am not sure how much parking if any was provided or if you had to pay or the parking. Successful ferry service requires cooperation on everyone's part and a real will to make it work.

 

What we do here is some politician gets brownie points by getting a federal grant for a trial service which is just discontinued when the money runs out. That's why ferry service has not been working. That doesn't mean it coudn't work with routes that make sense, free parking at one end and buses that are coordinated with the ferries, and a reasonable total cost for the entire trip.

Yeah but I don't think it would be wise for the to have bus routes running to ferries overall.  Staten Island the exception because you HAVE to use the ferry OR make your way to Brooklyn OR use the express buses.  There were talks about us having ferry service here in Riverdale, and I'm pretty sure if we had it, the community would get together and push for separate shuttle bus service directly to the ferry just like we have with Metro-North, although those buses are run by the , but they are timed with all Metro-North trains in Riverdale.

[BrooklynBus]

Yeah but I don't think it would be wise for the to have bus routes running to ferries overall.  Staten Island the exception because you HAVE to use the ferry OR make your way to Brooklyn OR use the express buses.  There were talks about us having ferry service here in Riverdale, and I'm pretty sure if we had it, the community would get together and push for separate shuttle bus service directly to the ferry just like we have with Metro-North, although those buses are run by the , but they are timed with all Metro-North trains in Riverdale.

I'm not saying the MTA would or should operate the buses. My point is that they are not interested in running them since they don't provide the ferry service. The SI ferry is a separate case and really cannot be used for comparison because without the ferry, no one would be on the buses. The MTA was created to coordinate regional transportation, but they have never really done that, have they? They should be interested in serving ferries and any new land use that appears. Instead they try to keep new services to a bare minimum.