bobtehpanda Posted July 4, 2015 Share #26 Posted July 4, 2015 The point about the MTA not continuing to provide service in Nassau County wasn't because they didn't care about the customer but that they failed to improve coordination of regional transit which was another major theme of the article. Instead of taking over Suffolk County, they ended up giving up Nassau County. That was the point. I agree that the MTA wanted to continue to provide Nassau County service, but they couldn't work out the financing with the county. While Long Island Bus was part of the MTA, it was being consolidated into and was a part of Regional Bus Operations, so it's not as if they didn't manage to completely integrate it for lack of trying. Suffolk is way too far from the city to justify regional integration; Babylon is 43 miles away from Times Square. In fact, Suffolk is so big that it's been considered to split SCT into two separate entities before (one for western Suffolk and one for the East End, with LIRR service to the East End discontinued and this new transit authority taking up the pitiful LIRR service there.) If anything, it would make more sense for the MTA to take over the Bee-Line system, but Westchester hasn't expressed any interest in doing so as far as I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBus Posted July 5, 2015 Author Share #27 Posted July 5, 2015 Instead of taking over SCT, they gave up (on) Nassau County? Again, Nassau county got fed up w/ the MTA wanting more money to help subsidize (what was then current) service (levels on its routes) running in its own backyard.... The nerve of Nassau county on that one.... How could you agree that the MTA wanted to provide service in Nassau, but also say they gave up (on) Nassau County? Furthermore, this additional stance you just presented in this thread about that suffolk takeover that never happened, is even worse than simply blaming the dealings with Nassau County on the MTA.... You speak here as if the MTA is supposed to run service in Nassau & Suffolk counties... Fail to improve coordination.... Interesting..... What was the MTA supposed to do when Mangano & company went out & took Veolia in as its new contract carrier? What, exactly? Look, I agree with the general notion of the MTA not caring about riders/customers, but the situation with Nassau county (LIB/NICE) was a bad example.... While Long Island Bus was part of the MTA, it was being consolidated into and was a part of Regional Bus Operations, so it's not as if they didn't manage to completely integrate it for lack of trying. Suffolk is way too far from the city to justify regional integration; Babylon is 43 miles away from Times Square. In fact, Suffolk is so big that it's been considered to split SCT into two separate entities before (one for western Suffolk and one for the East End, with LIRR service to the East End discontinued and this new transit authority taking up the pitiful LIRR service there.) If anything, it would make more sense for the MTA to take over the Bee-Line system, but Westchester hasn't expressed any interest in doing so as far as I know. Perhaps you are both correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
46Dover Posted July 5, 2015 Share #28 Posted July 5, 2015 Instead of taking over SCT, they gave up (on) Nassau County? Again, Nassau county got fed up w/ the MTA wanting more money to help subsidize (what was then current) service (levels on its routes) running in its own backyard.... The nerve of Nassau county on that one.... How could you agree that the MTA wanted to provide service in Nassau, but also say they gave up (on) Nassau County? Furthermore, this additional stance you just presented in this thread about that suffolk takeover that never happened, is even worse than simply blaming the dealings with Nassau County on the MTA.... You speak here as if the MTA is supposed to run service in Nassau & Suffolk counties... Fail to improve coordination.... Interesting..... What was the MTA supposed to do when Mangano & company went out & took Veolia in as its new contract carrier? What, exactly? Look, I agree with the general notion of the MTA not caring about riders/customers, but the situation with Nassau county (LIB/NICE) was a bad example.... Would it be possible for a new administration (sending Mangano packing) to allow the to provide service to Nassau County again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 5, 2015 Share #29 Posted July 5, 2015 Would it be possible for a new administration (sending Mangano packing) to allow the to provide service to Nassau County again? I'm not so sure it's that simple.... Mangano can end up being ousted as county executive & Veolia would still end up being the county's surface transit provider Nassau's contract with Veolia (332 pages) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 5, 2015 Share #30 Posted July 5, 2015 Would it be possible for a new administration (sending Mangano packing) to allow the to provide service to Nassau County again? Why would Mangano be sent packing? He was re-elected not too long ago which shows that Long Islanders approve of what he is doing. He promised to be more fiscally responsible and cut waste. That includes running NICE on less. If I were a Long Islander I would approve of what he did with NICE. No person in their right mind moves to the suburbs expecting good local bus service. People move to the burbs to DRIVE and given how high taxes are on Long Island, I would think there would be more important things to spend that money on. The was running crap service on bloated expenses, and Mangano came in and got that under control. For all of the complaining about NICE, LI Bus wasn't much better and far more expensive to operate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHV9218 Posted July 5, 2015 Share #31 Posted July 5, 2015 Why would Mangano be sent packing? He was re-elected not too long ago which shows that Long Islanders approve of what he is doing. He promised to be more fiscally responsible and cut waste. That includes running NICE on less. If I were a Long Islander I would approve of what he did with NICE. No person in their right mind moves to the suburbs expecting good local bus service. People move to the burbs to DRIVE and given how high taxes are on Long Island, I would think there would be more important things to spend that money on. The was running crap service on bloated expenses, and Mangano came in and got that under control. For all of the complaining about NICE, LI Bus wasn't much better and far more expensive to operate. You're ignoring the much larger dynamic here, which is that yes, many wealthy Nassau residents who voted for Mangano couldn't care less about transit. Those people do "move to the burbs to drive." But many day laborers, workers, and less well-off residents of Nassau are actually quite dependent on transit--and a portion of them just don't have a say in this. The MTA service was not bloated. It's the opposite: NICE's service is dangerously underfunded, which is why safety standards are a joke and fleet conditions are appalling. Giving Mangano any credit whatsoever is a foolish mistake, because he's only robbed the MTA of money owed and made bus service less safe and consistent. Overall, the privatization has been a massive failure for those who actually use the buses, but Mangano isn't particularly concerned with those folks. The unfortunate reality is that I doubt Mangano will be sent packing. He is a greedy, ignorant, and incompetent leader, but that's exactly what many residents of Nassau support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 5, 2015 Share #32 Posted July 5, 2015 You're ignoring the much larger dynamic here, which is that yes, many wealthy Nassau residents who voted for Mangano couldn't care less about transit. Those people do "move to the burbs to drive." But many day laborers, workers, and less well-off residents of Nassau are actually quite dependent on transit--and a portion of them just don't have a say in this. The MTA service was not bloated. It's the opposite: NICE's service is dangerously underfunded, which is why safety standards are a joke and fleet conditions are appalling. Giving Mangano any credit whatsoever is a foolish mistake, because he's only robbed the MTA of money owed and made bus service less safe and consistent. Overall, the privatization has been a massive failure for those who actually use the buses, but Mangano isn't particularly concerned with those folks. The unfortunate reality is that I doubt Mangano will be sent packing. He is a greedy, ignorant, and incompetent leader, but that's exactly what many residents of Nassau support. I think many residents of Nassau would disagree. They would rather have their taxes fund more important things like schools, lower property taxes etc. Transportation is not a priority. They're the ones that vote so that's what they want and Mangano is delivering on their requests. Nothing greedy about it. He promised to come in and do more with less and he's done just that. ' s service wasn't bloated. What they wanted to run the service was indeed bloated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted July 5, 2015 Share #33 Posted July 5, 2015 I think many residents of Nassau would disagree. They would rather have their taxes fund more important things like schools, lower property taxes etc. Transportation is not a priority. They're the ones that vote so that's what they want and Mangano is delivering on their requests. Nothing greedy about it. He promised to come in and do more with less and he's done just that. ' s service wasn't bloated. What they wanted to run the service was indeed bloated. Ah, yes, bus maintenance and accident prevention is a clear misuse of taxpayer money and just bloated bureaucracy. The road of deferred maintenance has certainly been kind to other MTA services in the past, and certainly didn't lead to issues in the long run. It's strange how Nassau is shortchanging basic services like transportation, when the island's share of young, working-age people has been dropping like a rock. Long Island's population is growing very slowly, and the share of young people has been dropping, so the Island's ability to attract and retain talent is certainly not very good. Coupled with the fact that the population of Long Island is aging at a rate significantly faster than population growth, long-term the Island's economic future does not look very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 6, 2015 Share #34 Posted July 6, 2015 Ah, yes, bus maintenance and accident prevention is a clear misuse of taxpayer money and just bloated bureaucracy. The road of deferred maintenance has certainly been kind to other MTA services in the past, and certainly didn't lead to issues in the long run. It's strange how Nassau is shortchanging basic services like transportation, when the island's share of young, working-age people has been dropping like a rock. Long Island's population is growing very slowly, and the share of young people has been dropping, so the Island's ability to attract and retain talent is certainly not very good. Coupled with the fact that the population of Long Island is aging at a rate significantly faster than population growth, long-term the Island's economic future does not look very good. Nice of you to compare apples to oranges. The fact of the matter is workers have bloated benefits which in turn makes services expensive to run. We've seen first hand just how the cost of healthcare and other benefits continue to skyrocket, so let's not pretend like that's not a factor because it is. Additionally the young population that's coming to NYC are coming from suburbs in other places and want to be in urban centers. Even if Long Island had stellar transportation, I'm not sure it would make a difference. What irks me about your position is this: People that want the suburbs live in the suburbs and people that want to live in urban environments like in urban environments. I don't know why you insist on trying to create an urban environment in a suburban one. People that live in suburban areas of the city move there because they like living in isolated areas, not because they want tons of buses and pollution everywhere. The city offers the concrete jungle. People living in the suburbs and suburban environments want the complete opposite. There was an article in the NY Times that discussed the very issue that you've raised and ultimately the thought process is that this is a trend that is part of a cycle. For years people moved to the suburbs for a quieter life and to get more space and live the American dream. The suburban life is still one that many prefer, especially as they get older, so let's not paint this picture as if everyone wants to live in an urban environment because that simply isn't true. Plenty of people that live in suburban environments do so not because they can't afford to live in the city but because they don't want the noise, filth, people and everything else that comes with living in urban environments. Suburban areas offer a retreat from that. I have friends that live right off of 5th Avenue down in the Village. As nice as that seems when I've stayed at their apartments, I wake up disgusted at the idea, especially when I see how filthy Union Square is on my way to the express bus to go back to my suburban environment in Riverdale, which is MUCH cleaner and greener. Transportation is important, but it isn't the only factor that's considered when people move to certain areas. This article from Forbes paints a much different picture than the one you're trying to create: "One supposed trend, much celebrated in the media, is that younger people are moving back to the city, and plan to stay there for the rest of their lives. Retirees are reportedly following suit. Urban theorists such as Peter Katz have maintained that millennials (the generation born after 1983) show little interest in “returning to the cul-de-sacs of their teenage years.” Manhattanite Leigh Gallagher, author of the dismally predictable book The Death of Suburbs, declares that “millennials hate the suburbs” and prefer more eco-friendly, singleton-dominated urban environments. The environmental magazine Grist envisions “a hero generation” that will escape the material trap of suburban living and work that engulfed their parents. Less idealistic types on Wall Street see profit in this new order, hoping to capitalize on the growth of what Morgan Stanley’s Oliver Chang dubs a “rentership society”; in this scenario millennials remain serfs, forking over rent all their lives to the investor class. But a close look at migration data reveals a more complex reality. The millennial flight from suburbia has not only been vastly overexaggerated, it fails to deal with what may best be seen as differences in preferences correlated with life stages." Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2013/12/09/the-geography-of-aging-why-millenials-are-headed-to-the-suburbs/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted July 6, 2015 Share #35 Posted July 6, 2015 Nice of you to compare apples to oranges. The fact of the matter is workers have bloated benefits which in turn makes services expensive to run. We've seen first hand just how the cost of healthcare and other benefits continue to skyrocket, so let's not pretend like that's not a factor because it is. Additionally the young population that's coming to NYC are coming from suburbs in other places and want to be in urban centers. Even if Long Island had stellar transportation, I'm not sure it would make a difference. What irks me about your position is this: People that want the suburbs live in the suburbs and people that want to live in urban environments like in urban environments. I don't know why you insist on trying to create an urban environment in a suburban one. People that live in suburban areas of the city move there because they like living in isolated areas, not because they want tons of buses and pollution everywhere. The city offers the concrete jungle. People living in the suburbs and suburban environments want the complete opposite. There was an article in the NY Times that discussed the very issue that you've raised and ultimately the thought process is that this is a trend that is part of a cycle. For years people moved to the suburbs for a quieter life and to get more space and live the American dream. The suburban life is still one that many prefer, especially as they get older, so let's not paint this picture as if everyone wants to live in an urban environment because that simply isn't true. Plenty of people that live in suburban environments do so not because they can't afford to live in the city but because they don't want the noise, filth, people and everything else that comes with living in urban environments. Suburban areas offer a retreat from that. I have friends that live right off of 5th Avenue down in the Village. As nice as that seems when I've stayed at their apartments, I wake up disgusted at the idea, especially when I see how filthy Union Square is on my way to the express bus to go back to my suburban environment in Riverdale, which is MUCH cleaner and greener. Transportation is important, but it isn't the only factor that's considered when people move to certain areas. This article from Forbes paints a much different picture than the one you're trying to create: Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2013/12/09/the-geography-of-aging-why-millenials-are-headed-to-the-suburbs/ What apples am I comparing to oranges? NICE and Long Island Bus run bus services, and NICE has significantly increased rates of vehicle breakdowns and accidents ever since the handover. Last time I checked, cutting pensions or benefits doesn't usually result in deferred maintenance and significant increases in accidents. It's very interesting that you use an article hypothesizing about national trends projected very far into the future, when I am using current trends based on local Census data. Long Island, specifically Nassau, is doing worse than the other suburban areas in the metro area, whether it's North Jersey, the Hudson Valley, Westchester, or Connecticut, and Nassau is also rapidly aging faster than every other section of the metro area as well. But I guess I'm trying to push a narrative of urban supremacy because I'm saying millenials are trying to bust down the doors of White Plains and Stamford. It certainly has nothing to do with the fact that it's easier to travel around other suburban areas than in Long Island, or that reverse commutes into Long Island are very inconvenient due to a lack of reverse-direction LIRR services, or that Long Island has terrible traffic congestion. It's just a phase that hasn't shown any sign of ending in the current Census data. The silly thing about all this is that the Third Track is a project that is fairly simple to do, already has the supporting infrastructure in place or being built to support it, and is the only remaining constraint in the doubling of services that Long Island politicians and voters have been begging for since the East Side Access money pit was started in the first place. But Long Islanders want to have their cake and eat it too, since they want doubled service without the actual infrastructure to double service, while also fighting the Penn Station Access project for MNR even though there is no way that LIRR could use all of the capacity into both Penn and GCT due to the lack of a Third Track and also a lack of demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 6, 2015 Share #36 Posted July 6, 2015 What apples am I comparing to oranges? NICE and Long Island Bus run bus services, and NICE has significantly increased rates of vehicle breakdowns and accidents ever since the handover. Last time I checked, cutting pensions or benefits doesn't usually result in deferred maintenance and significant increases in accidents. It's very interesting that you use an article hypothesizing about national trends projected very far into the future, when I am using current trends based on local Census data. Long Island, specifically Nassau, is doing worse than the other suburban areas in the metro area, whether it's North Jersey, the Hudson Valley, Westchester, or Connecticut, and Nassau is also rapidly aging faster than every other section of the metro area as well. But I guess I'm trying to push a narrative of urban supremacy because I'm saying millenials are trying to bust down the doors of White Plains and Stamford. It certainly has nothing to do with the fact that it's easier to travel around other suburban areas than in Long Island, or that reverse commutes into Long Island are very inconvenient due to a lack of reverse-direction LIRR services, or that Long Island has terrible traffic congestion. It's just a phase that hasn't shown any sign of ending in the current Census data. The silly thing about all this is that the Third Track is a project that is fairly simple to do, already has the supporting infrastructure in place or being built to support it, and is the only remaining constraint in the doubling of services that Long Island politicians and voters have been begging for since the East Side Access money pit was started in the first place. But Long Islanders want to have their cake and eat it too, since they want doubled service without the actual infrastructure to double service, while also fighting the Penn Station Access project for MNR even though there is no way that LIRR could use all of the capacity into both Penn and GCT due to the lack of a Third Track and also a lack of demand. I never knew the suburbs had such "convenient transportation", especially local buses. Who are you kidding? Most people generally prefer Westchester over Long Island and it's mainly due to Westchester offering more overall. Yes Metro-North is MUCH better than the LIRR, but the overall package Westchester offers is much better than Long Island. IMO, Westchester's affluent towns are FAR more appealing than Long Island towns. I mean seriously I'd take Larchmont or Scarsdale ANY DAY over some place in Long Island, even the Hamptons. The Hamptons is far out and takes forever to reach it. Scarsdale and Larchmont while far out are still much more accessible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted July 6, 2015 Share #37 Posted July 6, 2015 I never knew the suburbs had such "convenient transportation", especially local buses. Who are you kidding? Most people generally prefer Westchester over Long Island and it's mainly due to Westchester offering more overall. Yes Metro-North is MUCH better than the LIRR, but the overall package Westchester offers is much better than Long Island. IMO, Westchester's affluent towns are FAR more appealing than Long Island towns. I mean seriously I'd take Larchmont or Scarsdale ANY DAY over some place in Long Island, even the Hamptons. The Hamptons is far out and takes forever to reach it. Scarsdale and Larchmont while far out are still much more accessible. I mean, even road transportation sucks in Long Island. Unless you're helicoptering to the Hamptons, there's pretty much always terrible traffic, and on top of that getting out of the Island requires either taking a very slow ferry or driving through the City, due to the failure of Long Island to build the bridge across the Sound. Even you admit that Westchester is more accessible than Long Island, and for that matter, most of the rest of the metro area is as well. (I'm not sure if North Jersey is better or worse than Long Island in terms of getting around.) The nicest, most accessible town in Long Island is Great Neck; all of the other nice North Shore or South Shore towns are more difficult to get to, and even then that's not saying a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 6, 2015 Share #38 Posted July 6, 2015 I mean, even road transportation sucks in Long Island. Unless you're helicoptering to the Hamptons, there's pretty much always terrible traffic, and on top of that getting out of the Island requires either taking a very slow ferry or driving through the City, due to the failure of Long Island to build the bridge across the Sound. Even you admit that Westchester is more accessible than Long Island, and for that matter, most of the rest of the metro area is as well. (I'm not sure if North Jersey is better or worse than Long Island in terms of getting around.) The nicest, most accessible town in Long Island is Great Neck; all of the other nice North Shore or South Shore towns are more difficult to get to, and even then that's not saying a lot. Just about all of my co-workers live in rather affluent suburbs (a few in New Jersey i.e. Montclair, Ridgewood, etc.). An ex-coworker lived on Long Island, not too far from the Oheka Castle in Huntington and when she decided to buy a place, she moved closer to the Queens border for an easier commute. At my old job, we had a lot of folks from both Westchester (i.e. Rye, Scarsdale, etc.) and Long Island (i.e. Manhasset, etc.), as well as Connecticut (i.e. Greenwich). The guy from Greenwich drove in (a Principal of the company). He somehow managed to get a parking space on the street for his rather large Porsche. The ones from Long Island usually took the LIRR in to the subway, and the same was true of the guys from Westchester, though some may have drove in. I always got the impression that the folks on Long Island had a schlepp overall, and these were all upper middle to upper class folks earning well over 6 figures who certainly drove to and from their respective LIRR stations. One was one of the Principals of the company, and the other was a Senior Project Manager. I find Long Island overall to have inferior infrastructure and certainly an inferior commuter rail system. Metro-North is by far more upscale than the LIRR. The LIRR seems and feels like an expensive version of the subway but not necessarily better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.