Local-Motion

What's the worst stretch of road in New York? We're not sure that's easily defined, since there's so many candidates for the title. But, certainly, the section of the Grand Central Parkway between Jackie Robinson Parkway and the Cross Island Parkway is a leading candidate. And that should be an embarassment to the New York State Department of Transportation and the New York City Department of Transportation. Because, it's unforgivable. Drive the Grand Central eastbound through the area and prepare to undergo shock treatment -- because that's just what you'll get. Jolted, body-slammed. Jarring bump after jarring bump, not to mention kidney-bruising, spine-tingling dips in the road surface. There are pavement-bulging "blow-ups" in the road surface -- sections where problems with the road subsurface has caused the surface asphalt to lift several inches, causing "speed bumps" to be created across entire lanes -- and areas where huge dips in the road have formed, creating drops that would be great at Astroland but are downright dangerous driving on the parkway. The damage these road surfaces are surely doing to cars using the Grand Central is bad enough. The potential they create for a driver losing control of their vehicle -- and having an accident -- is downright scary. We know the NYSDOT and NYCDOT have been working on the road in recent months, doing repavement work to improve the surface. But, honestly, more needs to be done. And soon. It's disgraceful that a major parkway like the Grand Central, one of the major arteries between Long Island and the five boroughs, is in such sad shape. And it's criminal that such dangerous and damaging conditions in the road surface are allowed to exist with nothing being done to fix them.

The bomb scare that paralyzed the Long Island Rail Road for about an hour on Friday afternoon should be cause for concern for all Long Islanders. Because, once again, it proved just how vulnerable our transportation system is -- not just to terrorist threats, mind you, but to anything other than normal operating procedure. The fact is that, though the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Police and the NYPD are to be commended for their quick and thorough response to -- and investigation of -- a "suspicious package" left on the platform between Track 7 and Track 8 at Jamaica Station on Friday, the bottom line is that all it took was a suspicious package to shut down 10 of the 11 branches of the LIRR. And that is a huge cause for concern. During the past month, Long Islanders have seen just how vulnerable our transportation systems are -- a sudden, violent thunderstorm knocking out most major roads, as well as our airports, subway lines and the LIRR; this "suspicious package" report bringing the LIRR to a sudden standstill. Part of this is our geography: By it's very nature, Long Island is a huge cul de sac with one way on and one way off -- that way being through New York City. And if Friday's event showed us anything it's that there is no way for railroad commuters to bypass Jamaica. Just like all roads once led to Rome, all railroad tracks lead to Jamaica. That means that any issue that could cause the closure of Jamaica Station -- rain, winter storms, electrical failures, suspicious package investigations or real, true terrorism -- will simply bring the entire system to a halt and with it transporation for more than a quarter-million passengers who use the railroad daily. That's a scary thought. We're not sure if it's feasible. But, if it is, someone needs to rethink the layout of Jamaica Station ASAP. Because most obvious in the aftermath of Friday's closure is that the LIRR needs a way to have trains bypass Jamaica in case of an emergency so the entire system isn't brought to a screeching halt. We're glad police are on the ball. We're glad MTA and LIRR officials took such quick action, as well, on Friday. The report came in, police were dispatched, the area was evacuated, the situation was investigated and the entire scenario was resolved within 65 minutes. This was all good. But that doesn't mean it wasn't cause for alarm. Because it was. Now, we need to learn from it. And make improvements. So the next time something happens it doesn't paralyze us.

Hey, straphangers. Though the Metropolitan Transportation Authority says your subway fare is probably going up sometime soon, don't fret. The price of your ticket apparently now includes admission to an off-Broadway show -- an off-color underground peep show performed by a cast of subterranean perverts. A report released this week by Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer found that a staggering 63 percent of subway riders said they had been subjected to sexual harrassment on the subways, suffering everything from unwelcome sexual advances to requests for sexual favors, flashing, groping and fondling to being forced to witness acts of public masturbation. The vast majority of the victims were females, according to the report. The report was compiled from almost 1,800 responses to a survey taken by subway riders in all five boroughs. Though not scientific, Stringer said the results provide "an invaluable snapshot of a problem that persists." That seems obvious. Equally apparent is that while MTA chairman Peter S. Kalikow says fare hikes are needed so the system doesn't slip back into the 1970s, when the agency cut service instead of raising fares and abyssmal service became the norm, the sad fact of life is that the New York City Transit system continues to slip one stop closer to that abyss every day under his reign -- fare hikes or not. The homeless are sleeping on trains again. Graffiti is making a comeback. Now, sexual predators are using subway trains as their playground. And the MTA is busy asking to hike fares. To think we thought the City cleaned up those old Times Square Peep Shows for good in the 1990s. Little did we know that all they did was drive them underground, charging us to suffer the public performances while officials stand around like ushers waiting for tips.

So the New York State Department of Transportation this week extended the deadline for public commentary on the Long Island Truck Rail Intermodal Facility it is proposing to build on the grounds of the old Pilgrim State Hospital in Brentwood. This, to give the public more time -- now, until September 24 -- to speak its piece. Which is all well and good. And politically correct. But, no offense. Enough of this "See you in September" stuff, enough of this, as NYSDOT Regional Director Subi Chakraborti said, making sure to give "all members of the Long Island community . . . ample opportunity to provide input on the proposed project." The time for talking is done. Or should be. An intermodal facility is, in laymen's terms, basically a big freight yard where goods can be shipped by rail and transferred onto short-haul trucks. And the need for one on Long Island is basic. Only one percent of all consumer goods currently delivered to Long Island are delivered by rail. This, compared to a national average of 15 percent. What that means for Long Island residents is this: More long-haul trucks on the Long Island Expressway and other major roads; a higher cost incurred for shipping those goods; more traffic congestion and wear-and-tear on our roads; and, a more-dangerous driving environment for all motorists. Meanwhile, the anticipated benefits of building the intermodal are: Shipping goods to Long Island will become four times more fuel-efficient than the present system; vehicle emissions and the need for road repairs will be cut dramatically; traffic congestion will be significantly reduced, with perhaps more than 100,000 tractor-trailers removed from our roads annually; the cost of delivering goods will be cut in half. Oh, and it is projected that the fatal-accident rate for crashes involving tractor-trailer trucks will also be cut in half. The downside? That the intermodal facility -- any intermodal facility -- will have to be built in someone's back yard. Planners studied 19 sites across Long Island before deciding on Pilgrim State. By all accounts, it is the best choice. There is access to a Long Island Rail Road line suited for freight shipments. There is access to major roads -- i.e., the Long Island Expressway. It is located at about the midway point of Long Island. It is largely vacant land. Still, officials have talked about this project for years now. And nothing has been built. Meanwhile, tractor-trailer trucks continue to tear up our roads, continue to create hazards for everyday drivers. And we continue to over-pay for the delivery of goods we need to live our everyday lives. And at the earliest, construction on the project -- if and when officials finally agree to build it -- will not begin until 2009. Which means more years of spinning our wheels, all the time getting nowhere fast. Hey, we appreciate public officials being sensitive to public opinion. But at some point someone needs to make a call. If this intermodal facility is really good for the 2.8 million residents of Long Island -- and, transportation experts agree it is -- now is the time to stop talking and build it at Pilgrim State. Because talk is cheap.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is in need of fast cash and needs to increase fare and toll revenues by 6.5 percent in 2008. This, according to MTA Chief Executive Elliot (Lee) Sander, who presented a four-year financial plan to the MTA Board on Wednesday that also calls for additional fare increases — every two years, at the rate of inflation — beginning in 2010. How much all this will actually cost commuters is unclear. What is clear is that the MTA is in financial trouble. Big financial trouble. And something needs to be done to fix that. For the sake of all commuters. Earlier this year, MTA officials predicted a deficit of $799 million in 2008 — that deficit growing to $1.78 billion in 2010. The situation is so dire that the MTA plans to ask the state and city to contribute an additional $600 million towards its operating costs starting in 2010. All this said, it’s time for city and state officials to step in and take a hard look at the transportation network overseen and operated by the MTA. To look at what can be done to trim the fat. And to look at what can be done to make the system more efficient. Any driver will tell you London Bridge is — or, more accurately, the Triborough and other bridges and tunnels operated by the MTA are — falling down. That MTA bridges and tunnels are nightmare even on their best days, that the infrastructure is in dire need of modernization. But the problems facing the New York City subway system, buses and, of course, the beleagured Long Island Rail Road and MetroNorth, seem to be systematic and endemic. Heap the historical criticism all you want on Robert Moses. But at least he had vision. Which is more than we can say for the MTA. What the MTA — and the New York-metro area — needs right now is a real, true transportation czar. Someone with a real eye toward the future. Someone who can set real priorities, develop a real game plan. Someone who can get the system fixed. And bring costs under control. Someone who can really make the trains run on time. Because they don’t. There’s no reason an area with the vast wealth of ours should have infrastructure — bridges, tunnels, transportation — in such a sorry state. It’s unforgivable. It’s also unforgivable to think that no matter how much money is raised through fare increases and toll hikes the system never seems to get better. Instead, it only gets worse. We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again: Fare increases and toll hikes are a hard fact of life. They’re dictated by inflation. They come with the territory. But we shouldn’t have to pay more to get less. If we’re going to have to dig into our pockets to ante up, then the system should be required to ante up, as well. It’s time for commuters — for all New York taxpayers — to demand more bang for their buck from those in charge. Starting with Lee Sander. And the MTA Board. Because, right now, our transit system faces financial ruin. And under the current system we’re only going to burn any money generated by fare and tolls hikes — with nothing concrete to show for it. An ironic embarassment for our embarassment of riches. That’s a disgrace in a city as great as New York City.

Wednesday is the MTA's scheduled monthly meeting when LIRR riders will find out how much more they will have to shell out in the coming years to hop on the train. The transit advocacy group, The Straphangers Campaign, has already concluded that a 20 percent fare hike is needed by 2010. That means an average one-way LIRR fare would jump from $5.58 to $6.72. So when is that congestion pricing thing coming again?

We understand that into every life a little rain must fall. But if there's one thing New Yorkers have learned over the course of the past year it's that all it takes is a little bit of rain or snow or even fog to toss the entire tri-state airport network into disarray. Letter-carriers from the U.S. Postal Service might be able to brave rain, sleet, snow and the dark of night. Airlines? Forget it. All air travelers at LaGuardia, Kennedy and Newark-Liberty airports get are endless, exhaustive flight delays. In recent months the Federal Aviation Administration has pledged to review traffic patterns -- approach and departure paths -- for the three major airports serving New York City. The idea is to determine if a more-efficient pattern can be put in place in an attempt to relieve congestion. But the bottom line is that alone will not be enough. Especially since all three airports are among the most-congested in the nation. And expansion of their facilities -- namely, runway expansion -- is not a realistic option. All that said, it's time for officials to look to other avenues to improve air traffic -- and service -- into and out of the region. The possibilities: The expansion of Long Island-MacArthur Airport and the expansion of Westchester County Airport. So far, community activists and politicians have fought such moves. It's time for state officials to step in -- with an eye toward the future -- and foster this development. There's no reason that Westchester and MacArthur cannot become even bigger players in the regional game when it comes to airline travel. Certainly, by being able to utilize these two airports for regional domestic service we could lessen the demand on the Big Three airports -- and relieve some of the congestion. Another option might be to look at the development of a true East End airport on Long Island. If expansion isn't possible at MacArthur, how about taking a look at the commercialization of Gabreski Airport in Westhampton? It's the best available space for airport development left on Long Island. And with some thought, planning -- and a bit of forward-thinking by state and local politicians -- could be a real 21st Century chance to build a significant airport to serve almost three million Long Islanders. And ease the burden on Kennedy and LaGuardia. Will it happen? Chances are no, it won't. It is an idea that will receive about as much support as those long-ago plans to build a bridge to Connecticut. But that doesn't mean we don't need it. Or that it shouldn't be considered. Because we need to start considering our options, before they're gone -- and we're stuck in airport-terminal heck every time we get a little bit of moisture in the air. The time is now. If not, get used to the Departure Board signs reading: DELAYED.

What do New York City Transit riders want from their subway system? Shorter wait times for trains, trains that arrive on a regular basis, the chance to get a seat, the chance to ride on a clean subway car and announcements they can hear -- and understand. Seems reasonable to us. But the latest "State of the Subways Report" released Monday by the Straphangers Campaign found, not surprisingly, these basic requirements are sadly lacking on most of the 22 major subway lines servicing New York City. Given so-called "MetroCard Ratings" where the highest-possible score was $2, the best line in the city -- the No. 1 train -- scored $1.25. The worst lines -- the C and W trains -- scored a dismal 65 cents. This is what riders get for their $2-per-trip investment: A best-case negative return. All of which should tell city and state officials that improvements need to be made. Now. The subway system is the lifeblood of New York City. But the bottom line is the system is old -- and so is its infrastructure. If New York City doesn't want to suffer an economic heart-attack caused by the oft-clogged arteries of its subway system, something needs to be done. Soon. And we mean something other than simply raising subway fares. Again. Cleaning schedules need to be accelerated. Stations need to be rehabilitated. A way needs to be found to schedule more frequent service on the most-heavily utilized lines. Subway cars need to receive better maintenance. In recent months, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has called for the institution of a so-called "congestion pricing plan" that would charge drivers between $8 and $21 a day to access Manhattan below 86th Street. The idea is to get commuters out of their cars -- and onto public transportation. But to really entice those commuters to use public transportation officials need to make the system more enticing to commuters. That means improving service. Travel to other major cities around the world -- Barcelona, Madrid, Paris, London, Rome -- and you'll find metro systems with cleaner and more-frequent train service than you'll find on any subway line in New York. True, those systems are younger -- and, therefore, more modern -- than the subway system in New York. And they're not as large -- or as intricate -- in their network of service. All of which makes them more manageable. And efficient. Still, there's no reason for politicians not to earmark greater investments to the infrastructure of the New York City Transit system -- a system neglected financially all-too-long. If there's one thing overwhelmingly clear from the 2007 State of the Subways Report it is that the subway system is in dire need of a major overhaul, the sooner the better. Hang the expense. The future is at stake.

If it is safer to drive drunk than it is to drive while talking on your cellphone -- and, it is, according to a study conducted by the University of Utah in 2003 -- then how dangerous must it be to Drive While Texting? Incredibly, it would seem. That hasn't stopped drivers armed with the latest technology from texting friends and associates from behind the wheel. After all, most drivers figure, it's not against the law. So, why not? On Tuesday, New York State Sen. Carl Marcellino announced a bill that would ban Driving While Texting. It can't pass soon enough. Some drivers told Newsday on Tuesday that the proposed ban is overkill. The work of an overzealous politician trying to stop people from conducting crucial communications from their cars. One driver, Dave Palden of Islip, told Newsday reporter Laura Albanese: "I want text messaging," adding "I still pay attention to the road." Is that so? A 2004 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, an industry research group, estimated that 2.1 percent of all drivers in New York used hand-held cellphones while driving -- despite the fact usage was against the law. That's probably a conservative estimate. The estimate should scare everyone who travels on the roads, since a 2002 study by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis estimated cellphone usage results in about 2,600 deaths, 330,000 moderate-to-critical injuries, 240,000 minor injuries and 1.5-million instances of property damage in auto accidents nationwide each year -- at a cost of $43 billion. And it should scare you because of that University of Utah study, which tested drivers driving with a .08 percent blood alcohol content -- on a closed road course -- and found they drove more safely than sober drivers driving while talking on their cellphones. That included hand-held cellphones and hands-free cellphones. So imagine how much texting from behind the wheel can affect your ability to concentrate on the road? "When you are in the car -- you've got a 4,000-pound missile that you are guiding," Marcellino told Newsday on Tuesday. "You have to keep your eye on the road." It's common sense. But common sense a lot of drivers seem to be lacking at the moment. Which, sad to say, is why we need a law to stop them. Hey, BRB. ATHAA: About To Have An Accident.

New York City's congestion pricing proposal lives another day after it's Monday deadline, apparently, according to the governor's office. The Associated Press this morning reports the governor's office as saying that there is a new tentative proposal to pitch to state legislators. However, the governor's office did not immediately provide details. Meanwhile, the word coming from the city sounds more somber. A news release from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's office this morning would only note that the state Assembly failed to vote on the city proposal before the deadline. The release went on to take a slap at the Assembly by saying: "This Administration will continue to work with the more than 140 civic, business, environmental and labor organizations that support our plan to make progress, and we will continue to press for real solutions, not interminable study groups whose only real purpose is to avoid accountability and results." Which is it? Potential paying commuters want to know.

When he's not behind the wheel of his yellow and black 2003 Mini Cooper S, he's riding the Long Island Rail Road, subway trains, the bus or headed somewhere on a plane.

And when he's not doing any of that, award-winning reporter John Valenti is blogging about commuting issues, commuting woes and anything related to commuting in Local-Motion.