# NYCT Chief Andy Byford resigns: How he improved NYC transit



## Thirdrail7 (Jan 26, 2020)

I've been meaning to get to this for two days. This is a big deal and probably a big loss. Politics interferes with potential and possibly progress. 

https://ny.curbed.com/2020/1/23/21078735/mta-nyct-andy-byford-resignation-fast-forward



> Train Daddy is leaving the station.
> 
> Andy Byford, the head of New York City Transit, has resigned. During his two-year tenure, Byford was responsible for initiatives that helped stabilize service throughout the ailing subway system, and spearheaded ambitious projects aimed at improving the long-term health of the city’s subways and buses. He was also exceptionally popular with transportation advocates, city officials, and riders; the latter affectionally dubbed him “Train Daddy,” a moniker he embraced.


----------



## jiml (Jan 26, 2020)

Don't forget he was our guy before NYC, and often butted heads with the politicians who thought they knew how to run a transit system. He won't be unemployed for long.


----------



## adamj023 (Jan 26, 2020)

I remember when Andy Byford was hired and Governor Cuomo mentioned that and he seemed to have great credentials coming from the UK and Canadian transit systems so I wanted to believe it would lead to good changes and improvements. Byford has been very vocal and did a number of good thing on various levels from handicapped accessibility to making the trains go faster and so on. The R179 car issue was resolved more quickly than I thought it would and the next subway car replacements will be due in. The sticking point of contention seemed to be the speed of signal installations which has been going on for years with not much to show and Cuomo wanted this to be finished ASAP. Riders had to contend with weekly and weekend outages for years with what seemed to be no signs of progress. I don’t know who will replace Andy Byford, but a former MTA head is a possibility. Andy Byford will more than likely get reemployed either in private sector or another transit agency in the USA or elsewhere. He didn’t resign on a low note or because of anything seriously bad he did, but speeding up signal installations is a necessity. The bedbug fumigation issue of a control tower seemed odd tho before he resigned since article made it seem like one bedbug was found leading to immediate action which shut down subways during peak hours. I would have waited till off peak to handle the issue. Not sure what actually happened but issue is corrected at any rate. In the past, a long time before Byford, you had a fire on the signal system due to a homeless person and room had old equipment and was non fireproof. There seem to be more police in subways as well now. The mass transit system will still function and improvements will be implemented even after Byford, but he was helpful in moving the system forward to where we are now. I myself am more for privatization of transit and lower taxation however.


----------



## Willbridge (Jan 26, 2020)

The signal issue is interesting. I can think of cases in other cities in which rail or road signals fell behind schedule and delayed projects. Delays were caused by delayed equipment and shortages of skilled installers.


----------



## adamj023 (Jan 26, 2020)

The new upcoming R211 subway cars look like the nicest subway cars yet which will finally replace the oldest cars. Once CBTC is finalized on some lines combined with the newer subway cars, reliability and service frequency will increase so no more of people getting stuck in subway cars having to wait on those lines.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (Jan 27, 2020)

He also worked for the London Underground in his earlier years and did a stint in Australia. Sounds like he was pretty darn good wherever he worked.

Hey--he's between jobs. Can we get him to run Amtrak?


----------



## adamj023 (Jan 27, 2020)

Mystic River Dragon said:


> He also worked for the London Underground in his earlier years and did a stint in Australia. Sounds like he was pretty darn good wherever he worked.
> 
> Hey--he's between jobs. Can we get him to run Amtrak?



NYC has way too much mass transit and undeserving people who get subsidies. The subway system does need to be improved with new train cars, new signals and modernized stations and the system is necessary as it covers significantly dense areas and is great for local travel. But all these buses are just too much. The bus network redesign that was proposed didn’t go far enough in making actual cuts.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Jan 27, 2020)

adamj023 said:


> NYC has way too much mass transit and undeserving people who get subsidies.



Would you clarify why you think NYC, with a thick and dense population and an overloaded road system, has "way too much mass transit" and clarify who is deserving versus undeserving?


----------



## adamj023 (Jan 27, 2020)

Example of deserving is someone who is ex military who is disabled do to their service. They deserve handicap accessible transit with their employer, the government helping to pick up all or some of the costs. 

However, there are plenty of people who use mass transit that we subsidize where they aren’t contributing except paying a low fare. Workers who deserve transit should negotiate better deals with their employer instead of forcing tax payers and all business owners to pick up the cost. The NYC Subway system completely makes sense to operate but the bus network can be scaled back with significant changes.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Jan 27, 2020)

The NYC subway system has an almost 60 BILLION dollar backlog (which doesn't even cover growth), and you think that it completely makes sense to operate it? Which workers "deserve" transit?


----------



## adamj023 (Jan 27, 2020)

Thirdrail7 said:


> The NYC subway system has an almost 60 BILLION dollar backlog (which doesn't even cover growth), and you think that it completely makes sense to operate it? Which workers "deserve" transit?



Newer signals and equipment will lead to huge cost savings over the long term. The MTA should reduce taxation and increase usage based fares to what it actually costs to run the system. Subways don’t clog up traffic like bus do and when done right becomes the best method of short route travel in the inner cities. Ground transport in the private sector can be an alternative for certain situations but without the subway, inner cities would not function and all the traffic would be diverted to the roads backing up traffic even worse than now where traffic is unbearably slow.


----------



## Eric S (Jan 28, 2020)

Uh, it's car traffic that clogs up buses, not buses that clog up (car) traffic. If anything, New York needs more buses and particularly more bus lanes. As for the rest of the deserving vs undeserving (shades of makers and takers, eh?) anti-transit stuff, yeah no.

EDIT: Let me be more constructive. Instead of describing certain riders as undeserving of service, look into reducing costs, both operating and construction.

Look to global best practices. For buses, this means all-doors boarding, proof-of-payment fares, stop consolidation, and bus lanes. For trains, both subway and commuter rail, this means one-person operation and, on commuter rail specifically, shifting to probably a combination of turnstiles and proof-of-payment (not unlike what is used in Paris on the RER system).

And insist that officials find ways to reduce New York's absurdly high construction costs. US costs are well above developed world averages and New York's are well above US levels. Find a way to build at something like Paris costs. (Hint, it won't be a single issue to be solved.)


----------



## neroden (Jan 30, 2020)

Mystic River Dragon said:


> He also worked for the London Underground in his earlier years and did a stint in Australia. Sounds like he was pretty darn good wherever he worked.
> 
> Hey--he's between jobs. Can we get him to run Amtrak?



I like that idea very much.


----------



## jebr (Jan 30, 2020)

adamj023 said:


> The MTA should reduce taxation and increase usage based fares to what it actually costs to run the system.



Only when roads and car drivers actually pay for the full cost (including capital cost and land value) to build and operate roadways.



adamj023 said:


> Subways don’t clog up traffic like bus do and when done right becomes the best method of short route travel in the inner cities.



Cars clog up the road far more than buses do. Eliminate private vehicle operation in Manhattan, and traffic would likely be less. If we also removed ridehail and taxis except for places that the bus and subway network don't go, or for people who can't use that infrastructure, traffic likely would be minimal in Manhattan - just delivery vehicles, buses, and bikes at street level. Meanwhile, removing buses would likely do very little to reduce traffic - any time savings would be quickly eaten up by induced demand for vehicle usage (including by those who no longer can use the buses to get where they're going.) In fact, due to that I wouldn't be surprised if traffic got _worse_ when removing the buses.


----------



## MARC Rider (Jan 30, 2020)

jebr said:


> If we also removed ridehail and taxis except for places that the bus and subway network don't go, or for people who can't use that infrastructure, traffic likely would be minimal in Manhattan - just delivery vehicles, buses, and bikes at street level.



How would you decide which people "can't use" the bus and subway network? It's not just people with obvious disabilities. Travelers who are carrying luggage find that the bus and subway system is very user unfriendly. The late-night service is much to be desired, too. Thus, I think there's a place in the urban mobility picture for taxis and ride hail. 

You don't need to actually ban all cars. Implementing congestion pricing for the cars on the streets and spending the proper amount on the public transportation system would probably do the trick.


----------



## jebr (Jan 30, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> How would you decide which people "can't use" the bus and subway network? It's not just people with obvious disabilities. Travelers who are carrying luggage find that the bus and subway system is very user unfriendly. The late-night service is much to be desired, too. Thus, I think there's a place in the urban mobility picture for taxis and ride hail.
> 
> You don't need to actually ban all cars. Implementing congestion pricing for the cars on the streets and spending the proper amount on the public transportation system would probably do the trick.



I was being a bit tongue in cheek with the suggestion of also banning ride hail and taxis. They do add more congestion on a per-rider basis, but I think ensuring bus-only lanes wherever congestion occurs would be enough to alleviate that issue for transit riders.

Fully agree on congestion pricing + proper spending on public transportation.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Feb 5, 2020)

The plot thickens!

Why Won't The MTA Release Andy Byford's 'Scorching' Resignation Letter?
https://gothamist.com/news/why-wont-mta-release-andy-byfords-scorching-resignation-letter



> Resignation letters are also the sort of document that public agencies are required to be release under the state's Freedom of Information Law. But oddly enough, the MTA isn't sharing. The agency has rebuffed multiple FOIL requests sent by Gothamist/WNYC in recent months, explaining that they need "additional time" to locate the letter.
> 
> Experts say there's little justification for the MTA's reticence.
> 
> ...



Clean up on aisle three!!


----------



## bretton88 (Feb 6, 2020)

Mystic River Dragon said:


> He also worked for the London Underground in his earlier years and did a stint in Australia. Sounds like he was pretty darn good wherever he worked.
> 
> Hey--he's between jobs. Can we get him to run Amtrak?


I suspect he's going to look for an agency that is less of a political animal after his experience with the MTA.


----------



## railiner (Feb 6, 2020)

bretton88 said:


> I suspect he's going to look for an agency that is less of a political animal after his experience with the MTA.


Deja vu?
Remember David Gunn?
I’m afraid even if Byford replaced Anderson, he wouldn’t stay very long...


----------



## jiml (Feb 6, 2020)

railiner said:


> Deja vu?
> Remember David Gunn?


Indeed. Another one with stints in NYC and Toronto.


----------

