DOCSLIB.ORG

Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Project Number Capital Plan Agency Name Plan Revision D501CB08 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200504 D501CB08 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200512 D501CB08 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200612 D501CB08 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200807 D501CB08 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200907 D501CB08 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D501TN85 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200504 D501TN85 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200512 D501TN85 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200612 D501TN85 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200807 D501TN85 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200907 D501TN85 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D502BW89 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200504 D502BW89 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200512 D502BW89 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200612 D502BW89 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200807 D502BW89 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200907 Page 1 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Budget Submission Date Project Description 2005 Apr. Deck and Structural Rehabilitation - Cross Bay Bridge 2005 Dec. Deck and Structural Rehabilitation - Cross Bay Bridge 2006 Dec. Deck and Structural Rehabilitation - Cross Bay Bridge 2008 Jul. Deck and Structural Rehabilitation - Cross Bay Bridge 2009 Jul. Deck and Structural Rehabilitation - Cross Bay Bridge Current Deck and structural rehabilitation - Cross Bay Bridge. 2005 Apr. Suspended Span Cable Rewrap. 2005 Dec. Suspended Span Cable Rewrap. 2006 Dec. Suspended Span Cable Rewrap. 2008 Jul. Suspended Span Cable Rewrap 2009 Jul. Suspended Span Cable Rewrap Current Structural steel repairs at the suspended spans and tower spans of the Throgs Neck Bridge. 2005 Apr. Elevated and on Grade Approach Deck Replacement - Whitestone Bridge 2005 Dec. Elevated and on Grade Approach Deck Replacement - Whitestone Bridge 2006 Dec. Elevated and on Grade Approach Deck Replacement - Whitestone Bridge 2008 Jul. Elevated and on Grade Approach Deck Replacement - Whitestone Bridge 2009 Jul. Elevated and on Grade Approach Deck Replacement - Whitestone Bridge Page 2 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Change Narrative Revised estimate to include CCTV and fiber optic work Budget was revised based on costs of construction and support requirements at time of award Reflects addition of Variable Speed Limit Signs Budget revised to reflect estimate at completion. Scope change to add catwalk work formerly part of another project (TN-47). Budget reflects favorable construction bid (Phase B). Reflects estimate to complete (Phase B). As a result of Best Value Review of the 2010-2014 Capital Program, the second phase of construction for structural steel repairs was accelerated to the 2005-2009 Program and $51 million was added to the project budget. Additional work identified, requiring extension of contract. Substantial completion declared for December 2013 Budget was revised based on costs of construction and support requirements during design Scope modified to reflect new codes and to enhance safety and constructability, including temporary substation protection, additional lighting, and installation of a sprinkler system and HVAC at the lower garage. Page 3 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Plan Year - Year 1 Allocation Plan Year - Year 2 Allocation 48845 49845 5023 5625 5625 4697 1491 7189 904 15349 904 14650 975 14650 975 14650 595 12336 Page 4 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Plan Year - Year 3 Allocation Plan Year - Year 4 Allocation 62894 63717 63717 58266 133080 133080 13427 143287 14124 186618 14124 186618 Page 5 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Plan Year - Year 5 Allocation Out Years Allocation Total Allocation 48845 49845 67917 69342 69342 62963 8680 16253 15554 15625 15625 21662 34593 133080 133080 156714 200742 200742 Page 6 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail D502BW89 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D502HH80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200504 D502HH80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200512 D502HH80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200612 D502HH80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200807 D502HH80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200907 D502HH80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D502TB64 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200504 D502TB64 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200512 D502TB64 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200612 D502TB64 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200807 D502TB64 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200907 D502TB64 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D502TN50 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200504 D502TN50 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200512 Page 7 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Current Elevated and on grade approach deck replacement at the Whitestone Bridge. 2005 Apr. Lower Level Deck Replacement - Henry Hudson Bridge 2005 Dec. Lower Level Deck Replacement - Henry Hudson Bridge 2006 Dec. Lower Level Deck Replacement - Henry Hudson Bridge 2008 Jul. Lower Level Deck Replacement - Henry Hudson Bridge 2009 Jul. Lower Level Deck Replacement - Henry Hudson Bridge Current Lower level deck replacement at the Henry Hudson Bridge. 2005 Apr. Replacement of Decks at Randall's Island and Ward's Island Viaduct and new Ramps - Robert F Kennedy 2005 Dec. Replacement of Decks at Randall's Island and Ward's Island Viaduct and new Ramps - Robert F Kennedy 2006 Dec. Replacement of Decks at Randall's Island and Ward's Island Viaduct and new Ramps - Robert F Kennedy 2008 Jul. Replacement of Decks at Randall's Island and Ward's Island Viaduct and new Ramps - Robert F Kennedy 2009 Jul. Replacement of Decks at Randall's Island and Ward's Island Viaduct and new Ramps - Robert F Kennedy Current Replacement of decks at Randall's Island and Ward's Island Viaduct and new ramps at Robert F. Kennedy Bridge. 2005 Apr. Replacement of Concrete Deck and Rehabilitation Of the Abutment and Retaining Walls, Queens Approach 2005 Dec. Replacement of Concrete Deck and Rehabilitation Of the Abutment and Retaining Walls, Queens Approach Page 8 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail Budget revised to reflect estimate at completion. test Revised to include complete structural replacement instead of rehabilitation of the North Approach to the Henry Hudson Bridge, additional steel repairs at the Manhattan and Bronx towers. Budget was revised based on costs of construction and support requirements at time of award Reflects additional work required, including additional quantities of structural steel needed for additional stiffener replacement on the west fascia. Budget revised to reflect estimate at completion. Revised scope due to the deletion of the Office of Mental Health Ramp from the construction contract. The plan year 2005 allocation was reduced to reflect latest deck replacement estimates, while the 2009 and out years allocations were increased to reflect new repairs accelerated from the 2010-2014 Capital Program. Scope change to add catwalk work formerly part of another project (TN-47). Page 9 of 822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail 4231 46620 1164 57608 1164 85419 1517 85419 1517 85419 1660 81785 276369 269156 315 252215 9256 254085 405 254085 405 234792 450 1447 957 2491 1057 Page 10 of822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail 14368 183946 1440 1440 1489 15274 16061 Page 11 of822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail 198314 50851 58772 86583 86936 86936 83445 276369 269471 261471 255930 255930 4362 4697 245790 17678 19609 Page 12 of822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail D502TN50 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200612 D502TN50 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200807 D502TN50 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200907 D502TN50 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D502VN80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200504 D502VN80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200512 D502VN80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200612 D502VN80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200807 D502VN80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 200907 D502VN80 Capital Plan 2005 - 2009 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D601AW98 Capital Plan 2010 - 2014 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D601BB28 Capital Plan 2010 - 2014 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D601BW07 Capital Plan 2010 - 2014 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D601BW14 Capital Plan 2010 - 2014 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 D601BW84 Capital Plan 2010 - 2014 Bridges and Tunnels 999999 Page 13 of822 09/24/2021 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Dashboard Agencies Detail 2006 Dec. Replacement of Concrete Deck and Rehabilitation Of
Recommended publications
  • Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Field Guide to the Water Life

    Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Field Guide to the Water Life

    Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Field Guide To The Water Life Of Britain by Reader's Digest Association Britain's Butterflies A Field Guide to the Butterflies of Great Britain and Ireland. Britain’s Butterflies is a comprehensive and beautifully designed photographic field guide to the butterflies of Britain and Ireland. Containing hundreds of stunning colour photographs, the fourth edition has been extensively revised and updated, and provides the latest information on every species ever recorded. It covers in detail the identification of all 59 butterfly species that breed regularly, as well as four former breeders, 10 rare migrants and one species of unknown status. The easy-to-use format will enable butterfly watchers – beginners or experts – to identify any species they encounter. Produced in association with Butterfly Conservation, the fourth edition features new introductory sections on the identification of more difficult groups; revised maps that show the latest distributions recorded by the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme; expanded sections on food plants and on recording and monitoring; a new section on climate change; and a revised species order reflecting the latest taxonomy. Customer Reviews. Biography. David Newland has been a butterfly enthusiast since boyhood. He is the author of Discover Butterflies in Britain and the coauthor of Britain's Day- flying Moths (both WILDGuides). Robert Still , the cofounder of WILDGuides, is an ecologist and graphic artist, and has designed more than thirty of its titles. Andy Swash , the managing director of WILDGuides, is an ecologist and wildlife photographer. Swash and Still are the coauthors of a number of books, including Britain's Habitats , Britain's Dragonflies , Britain's Day-flying Moths and Britain's Sea Mammals (all WILDGuides).
  • Chapter 3: Description of Construction Methods and Activities A. INTRODUCTION

    Chapter 3: Description of Construction Methods and Activities A. INTRODUCTION

    Chapter 3: Description of Construction Methods and Activities A. INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the construction process for the Second Avenue Subway. Potential envi- ronmental impacts that could result from its construction, as well as mitigation measures to lessen their effects, are discussed in subsequent technical chapters. A preliminary sequencing plan for the proposed construction activities is also identified, although this plan could still change as engineering evolves and depending on the availability of funding. At this time, design of the Second Avenue Subway is still ongoing, and will continue to evolve over the next year. Consequently, this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) assesses the range of construction methods and activities that may be required, using a reasonable worst case approach throughout to describe potential impacts. In other words, where a variety of construction techniques could reasonably be used to build a particular project element, the method that would result in the worst overall impacts is the one that has been selected for analysis. The Second Avenue Subway would consist largely of twin tunnels with outside diameters of up to 23½ feet. (The tunnels described in the SDEIS would have had outside diameters of 21 feet.) Each tunnel would be approximately 8.5 miles long, running from East Harlem to Lower Manhattan. Sixteen new stations, numerous fan plants and ventilation cooling facilities, pumping stations, electrical power substations, new train storage yards, and various other elements would also be built. As described later in this chapter, where possible, construction would take place underground to minimize disruptions at the surface. Between approximately 92nd and 4th Streets (instead of 6th Street as described in the SDEIS), and again from Maiden Lane south, where Manhattan’s hard bedrock is relatively close to the surface, tunnels and stations would mostly be constructed underground in the rock, by one of several mining techniques.
  • Broadway Triangle Redevelopment Project Williamsburg, Brooklyn, New York

    Broadway Triangle Redevelopment Project Williamsburg, Brooklyn, New York

    BROADWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WILLIAMSBURG, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK PHASE IA CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Prepared For: New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development New York, New York Prepared By: The Louis Berger Group, Inc. New York, New York February 2009 BROADWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, WILLIAMSBURG, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK PHASE IA CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Prepared For: New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development New York, New York Prepared By: Tina Fortugno, RPA Zachary J. Davis, RPA Deborah Van Steen The Louis Berger Group, Inc. New York, New York February 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) is seeking discretionary actions in order to facilitate the redevelopment of a nine-block area known as Broadway Triangle, located in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. The Proposed Action includes zoning map amendments to generally rezone the existing M1-2 Manufacturing District to Residential and Commercial Districts; zoning text amendments to establish Inclusionary Housing in the proposed R6A and R7A zoning districts; the disposition of City-owned properties; Urban Development Action Area Projects designation; the modification of an Urban Renewal Plan; and City Acquisition through eminent domain. The Project Area encompasses approximately 31 acres and is generally bounded by Flushing Avenue to the south, Throop Avenue to the east, Lynch Street to the north, and Union Avenue, Walton Street, and Harrison Avenue to the west. As part of this action, the HPD is undertaking an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Broadway Triangle Redevelopment Project. Consideration for cultural resources, including both archaeological and historic architectural resources, must be undertaken as part of the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) process.
  • Chapter 3: Socioeconomic Conditions

    Chapter 3: Socioeconomic Conditions

    Chapter 3: Socioeconomic Conditions A. INTRODUCTION This chapter analyzes whether the proposed actions would result in changes in residential and economic activity that would constitute significant adverse socioeconomic impacts as defined by the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Technical Manual.1 The proposed actions would result in the redevelopment of an underutilized site with an approximately 214,000- square-foot (sf), 60-foot-tall commercial building currently anticipated to be a BJ’s Wholesale Club along with up to three other retail stores on the second level, 690 parking spaces, and approximately 2.4 acres of publicly accessible waterfront open space. The Brooklyn Bay Center site (“project site”) is located at 1752 Shore Parkway between Shore Parkway South to the east, Gravesend Bay (Lower New York Bay) to the west, and between the prolongation of 24th Avenue to the north and the prolongation of Bay 37th Street to the south. The objective of the socioeconomic conditions analysis is to determine if the introduction of the retail uses planned under the proposed actions would directly or indirectly impact population, housing stock, or economic activities in the local study area or in the larger retail trade area. Pursuant to the CEQR Technical Manual, significant impacts could occur if an action meets one or more of the following tests: (1) if the action would lead to the direct displacement of residents such that the socioeconomic profile of the neighborhood would be substantially altered; (2) if the action would lead to the displacement of substantial numbers of businesses or employees, or would displace a business that plays a critical role in the community; (3) if the action would result in substantial new development that is markedly different from existing uses in a neighborhood; (4) if the action would affect real estate market conditions not only on the site anticipated to be developed, but in a larger study area; or (5) if the action would have a significant adverse effect on economic conditions in a specific industry.
  • Fixing the L Train and Managing the Shutdown a Community Consensus Proposal

    Fixing the L Train and Managing the Shutdown a Community Consensus Proposal

    Fixing the L Train and Managing the Shutdown A Community Consensus Proposal November 2016 Contents Executive Summary / 3 Summary of Recommendations / 3 Introduction / 6 Impact on Commuters and Residents / 8 Implications/how to prepare for the shutdown / 10 Impact on Businesses / 11 How much do local businesses depend on the L train? / 11 How to prepare for the shutdown / 11 Providing the Best Travel Alternatives / 12 Prepare adjacent subway lines for higher ridership / 12 New rapid bus services with dedicated preferential treatments and auto-free zones / 13 Transform streets in Brooklyn to better connect people and cyclists to transit / 17 Improve ferry service and reduce fares to serve Williamsburg residents / 18 Making the Most of the Shutdown: Transforming the L Train / 19 Capital improvements at five stations / 20 Timing and funding / 20 Procurement and design / 21 An Inclusive Process / 22 Community Profiles /23 Manhattan / 24 Williamsburg/Greenpoint / 25 Bushwick/Ridgewood / 26 East New York/Brownsville/Canarsie / 27 2 Fixing the L Train and Managing the Shutdown: A Community Consensus Proposal | November 2016 Executive Summary The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has said it will shut ⊲ State Senator Martin M. Dilan down the L train tunnels under the East River for more than a ⊲ Council Member Stephen Levin year to repair the severe damage caused by Superstorm Sandy. ⊲ Council Member Antonio Reynoso That is grim news for the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers ⊲ Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer who rely on the L and who will have few easy alternatives to get ⊲ Brooklyn Borrough President Eric L. Adams to where they’re going every day.
  • March 2012 Photo Notes

    March 2012 Photo Notes

    The Newsletter of the Park West Camera Club Photo Notes Our 75th Year March/April 2012 Presidentʼs Letter Flower Power! Spring is in the air. It has actually been in the air for much of this past winter with temperatures in the 40s and 50s many days and abundant sun- shine, but for PWCC it means a time to speak anew of many things such as more field trips, the Club auction on April 9th, return of the Florida contingent, annual election of officers, planning the Otto Litzel Dinner and awards, short pants, sleeveless dresses, sandals, sun block, longer days for shooting pictures, Chuck’s Expanding Visions class, the Manhattan Borough President’s Office In This Issue show and whatever I’ve left out, such as shoes, ships, sealing wax, cabbages and kings1. President’s Letter.................................1 Who’s Who & What’s What........2 & 3 So instead of winding down, the Club is heating Club Info..................................3, 5 & 10 up, invigorated by the warmer weather and an- Rules of Photography..........................4 ticipation of all our upcoming events and activi- B&H Space............................................5 ties, photographic and otherwise. Competition...................................6 & 7 Sitzfleisch..............................................8 I’m particularly looking forward to the Otto Litzel Election Procedures.............................9 Dinner this year. It’s dedicated to the Club’s 75th Inquiries..............................................10 Anniversary and we’re still looking for sugges- Business Meeting Minutes................11 tions for a restaurant roomy enough to display Call for Entries...................................14 Club memorabilia or at least to project a slide- Expanding Visions 18........................15 show. Please give your suggestions to Sid Geor- Auction................................................16 giou.
  • Reopening Closed Subway Entrances Using High Entry/Exit Turnstiles

    Reopening Closed Subway Entrances Using High Entry/Exit Turnstiles

    REOPENING CLOSED SUBWAY ENTRANCES USING HIGH ENTRY/EXIT TURNSTILES Suggestions from the New York City Transit Riders Council November 2001 New York City Transit Riders Council 347 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10017 (212) 878-7087 • www.pcac.org © 2001 NYCTRC Table of Contents Introduction 1 Methodology 2 Findings 3 Closed Fare Control Areas 3 Open Exit-Only Fare Control Areas 6 Open Fare Control Areas with HEETS but No MVMs 8 Summary of Recommendations 10 Appendix: Surveyed Stations 12 List of Tables Table One: Status of Fare Control Areas 3 Table Two: Closed Fare Control Areas 3 Table Three: Open Exit-Only Fare Control Areas 6 Table Four: Open Fare Control Areas With HEETs but No MVMs 9 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Council would like to thank former PCAC Transportation Planner Joshua Schank for his efforts in the research and writing of this report and Associate Director Mike Doyle for final editorial assistance. ABOUT US The New York City Transit Riders Council is the independent, legislatively mandated representative of NYC Transit riders. Our 15 volunteer members are regular users of the transit system and are appointed by the Governor upon the recommendation of the Mayor, Public Advocate, and Borough Presidents. The Council is an affiliate of the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA. For more information about us, please visit our website at: www.pcac.org. INTRODUCTION New York subway stations tend to be quite large. Although these stations are often named after one cross street, the stations stretch so far that they often take up several blocks and multiple cross streets.
  • Valley Forge Ins. Co. V Allstate Indem. Co

    Valley Forge Ins. Co. V Allstate Indem. Co

    Valley Forge Ins. Co. v Allstate Indem. Co. 2014 NY Slip Op 31968(U) July 25, 2014 Sup Ct, Kings County Docket Number: 504449/2013 Judge: David I. Schmidt Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various state and local government websites. These include the New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service, and the Bronx County Clerk's office. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [* FILED:1] KINGS COUNTY CLERK 07/25/2014 03:42 PM INDEX NO. 504449/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 75 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/25/2014 :1 At an lAS Term, Part Comm 2 ofthe Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of Kings, at the Courthouse, at 360 Adams Street , Brooklyn, New York, on the 9th day of July, 2014. PRE SENT: HON. DAVID I. SCHMIDT, Justice. ----------- ----- - --- -- -- --- --------x VALLEY FORGE INSURANCE C,OMPANY FOR ITSELF AND AS SUBROGEE OF GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC., Plaintiff, . - against- Index No. 504449/13 ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY, Defendant. ------------- --- --- --::-- --- ----- --- -x ,I The following papers numbered 1 to 10 read on the motions.herein: Papers Numbered Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause/ Petition/Cross Motion and Affidavits (Affirmations) Ann,exed ~ _ 1-2,3-4 Opposing Affidavits (Affirmations ) _ 5 Reply Affidavits (Affirmations) _ 6,7,8,9,10 _____ Affidavit (Affif111ation) _ Other Papers _ Upon the foregoing papers, plaintiff Valley Forge Insurance Company (VFI) moves ., I I~ for summary judgment declaring that defendant Allstate Indemnity Company (Allstate) is an insurer for Granite Construction Inc.
  • NYC TRANSIT's RESPONSE to DECEMBER 2010 BLIZZARD INTRODUCTION on Sunday, December 26, 2010 and the Early Hours of Monday, Dece

    NYC TRANSIT's RESPONSE to DECEMBER 2010 BLIZZARD INTRODUCTION on Sunday, December 26, 2010 and the Early Hours of Monday, Dece

    MTA/OIG Report #2011-07 December 2011 NYC TRANSIT’S RESPONSE TO DECEMBER 2010 BLIZZARD Barry L. Kluger MTA Inspector General State of New York INTRODUCTION On Sunday, December 26, 2010 and the early hours of Monday, December 27, over two feet of snow fell on the New York metropolitan area accompanied by high winds. The blizzard was not predicted until just 24 hours before and hit New York City with even more force than anticipated. New York City Transit (NYC Transit) service was dramatically curtailed on both buses and subways by 9:00 PM. Many customers and employees traveling aboard subway cars and buses became stranded during the evening of the blizzard and as the night wore on. Their isolation increased by having little to no communication with outside parties. NYC Transit estimates that approximately 650 buses were stuck in the snow, while some 500 people were stranded aboard subway cars overnight. The recovery process was lengthy, with passengers still being rescued on Monday morning. Full service was not restored for several days. Following the storm and subsequent clean up, the Chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) charged the various MTA agencies (including NYC Transit) with conducting internal reviews of their responses to the December blizzard to identify weaknesses and make recommendations for improvement. Best practices from other transit properties were to be analyzed by MTA along with the need for long-term technological improvements in communication and storm response capability. In June 2011, MTA officials presented to the MTA Board the proposed final agency report on MTA Storm Performance Review.
  • Show Them the Money! Seniors Still Stuck at Slope Old Folks’ Home Despite Pledged Payment

    Show Them the Money! Seniors Still Stuck at Slope Old Folks’ Home Despite Pledged Payment

    Aug. 12–18, 2016 Including Brooklyn Courier, Carroll Gardens-Cobble Hill Courier, Brooklyn Heights Courier, & Williamsburg Courier FREE ALSO SERVING PROSPECT HEIGHTS, WINDSOR TERRACE, KENSINGTON, AND GOWANUS BLAZ SWEATS AT Y Police protest mayor at morning workout — say they’ll be back BY COLIN MIXSON of the city’s 36,000 offi cers. “We like to Police want to help Mayor DeBlasio surprise him.” sweat every time he visits his Park DeBlasio relocated from the Slope Slope gym. to Gracie Mansion when he took of- Dozens of offi cers picketed Hiz- fi ce in 2014, but continues to lead a mo- zoner outside the Ninth Street YMCA torcade over to his old gym between early twice last week and again on Fifth and Sixth avenues most morn- Tuesday to demand a pay raise — and ings so he can engage in a leisurely they’ll be back soon when he least “workout,” often followed by a visit to expects it, according to their union a nearby patisserie — making him a spokesman. sitting duck for foes and journalists “It’s going to be a pop-up thing un- hoping to catch his attention. expectedly,” said Joseph Mancini of During their early morning rallies, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Associa- the protesting patrolmen waved signs BLAZ AND BLUE: Protesting police offi cers follow Mayor DeBlasio to the Park Slope Y on tion, which represents around 24,000 Continued on page 11 Aug. 2. Photo by Paul Martinka Show them the money! Seniors still stuck at Slope old folks’ home despite pledged payment BY COLIN MIXSON They’re not buying it.
  • Compilation of Concerns, Comments and Recommendations Received

    Compilation of Concerns, Comments and Recommendations Received

    Compilation of Concerns, Comments and Recommendations Received from the Legislature and the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA Pursuant to Chapter 25 of the Laws of 2009 February 1, 2011 through July 31, 2011 Metropolitan Transportation Authority Office of Legislative and Community Input Compilation of Concerns, Comments and Recommendations Pursuant to Chapter 25 of the Laws of 2009 February 1, 2011 through July 31, 2011 Senate, Legislator's Name of Date Request/Concern/ Close Out Agency/Tracking Assembly or Name (none Legislator's or Agency Response Received Recommendation Expressed Date PCAC if PCAC) PCAC Contact Complaints received about NYCT personnel at the Fresh Pond Nolan, Parking is very limited in the depot and elsewhere but they will try to have personnel park NYCT7503 Assembly Diane Ballek 10/4/10 Depot parking their private vehicles on the streets adjacent to 2/2/2011 Catherine T. in other locations. the Depot. Pheffer, NYCT8061 Assembly Mary Lou 10/6/10 Inquiry about Rockaway park line station projects Information provided. 2/2/2011 Audrey I. LIRR993 Senate LaValle, Ken Abbondola, V. 10/22/10 Late train Provided information 4/4/2011 Site walk-thru conducted with Assembly Member Farrell at Tour conducted on 11/19 and cost estimate developed. Approval letter for use of Capital Farrell, Earnestine Bell NYCT9547 Assembly 11/19/10 155th Street Station BD concerning Assembly funded station Reserve Funds for repairs discussed during 11/19 tour sent to Assemblymember Farrell 3/11/2011 Herman D. Temple improvements on 3/11/11. Approval Pending. NYCT supervisors inspected areas cited in letter.
  • Review of the a and C Lines

    Review of the a and C Lines

    Review of the A and C Lines ,. December 11, 2015 Page intentionally left blank AC Line Review Executive Summary Executive Summary The attached report provides a comprehensive review of operations on the A and C lines. Combined, the two lines serve 800,000 riders a day across three boroughs and connect to many of the most important intermodal hubs in New York City. The A differs from most other New York City Transit subway lines in that its route splits three ways at its southern end in eastern Queens. It is also exceptionally long, at 32 miles between 207 St and Far Rockaway-Mott Av. Like many other subway lines, it merges several times with other lines. The combination of these traits tends to reduce reliability. In contrast, the C is a shorter line scheduled to run less frequently than the A and many other lines. C service is relatively reliable, even though it has historically been assigned some of the oldest cars in the system. This review has been prepared within the context of NYC Transit’s service planning procedures, and all discussions of service levels take into account established guidelines for designing and scheduling service. NYC Transit determines how many trains run on a given line based on a number of factors, including line capacity, equipment availability, and the Rapid Transit Loading Guidelines. The Guidelines ensure that limited resources are equitably allocated throughout the system by establishing, by time of day, maximum passenger load levels and minimum service frequencies, where operationally feasible. The Guidelines are applied by evaluating average ridership levels at locations where trains are most heavily loaded (“peak load points”) to develop recommended service frequencies, where operationally feasible.