BLOTTER: The Blitz

Theatergoers outside the TKTS booth in Times Square last week expressed surprise at the sight of uniformed police officers on ladders removing the street signs along Broadway.

According to John O'Connell, Assistant Communications Director for the NYPD, it's something New Yorkers should get used to.

The midtown street-sign removal is part of a broader security policy, and is soon to be extended throughout the city (excluding isolated parts of Staten Island).

Mr. O'Connell said the purpose of street-sign removal is to confuse would-be terrorists. He described the policy as common sense:

"Street-sign removal is an effective security option with a proven track record. It's the same thing the English did in London during the Blitz. They removed the street signs to confuse German paratroopers, and it worked. I don't need to remind you, but the Nazis never made it to Buckingham Palace."

(Mr. O'Connell later told reporters that in mentioning the Nazis, he did not intend to compare any person or group to members of Hitler's National Socialist Party.)

In Manhattan, all street signs are scheduled for removal by the end of next week, and despite scattered protests from small-business owners fearful of losing customers, the majority of residents appear to be taking the changes in stride.

In Tribeca, Sara Jones shrugged when told of the new policy. "We used to have street signs at all four corners of an intersection," she said. "They cut that down to two signs about ten years ago; now they're moving to no signs. We're in a situation, so it's just a process you go through."

In Greenwich Village, an Egyptian fruit seller who asked not to give his name voiced strong support for the initiative. "If you don't know where you're going, why are you going there? The police are doing this for safety, so I'm happy about that."

But while the NYPD has met little resistance, a sister program introduced yesterday by the MTA is proving more controversial.

At a morning press conference attended by both Mayor Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Gifford Miller, MTA executive director Katherine Lapp announced a series of new subway security enhancements, headlined by the phaseout of named station stops.

Speaking at length about the risks of commuting, Ms. Lapp told reporters that "all platform-visible geographic identifiers are scheduled for renovation."

The renovation means that all subway stop names-14th Street, Brooklyn Bridge, etc.-will be replaced with generic Station Stop signs.

Ms. Lapp assured reporters that the new Station Stop signs will be as aesthetically pleasing as the current stop-specific signs. The MTA, she said, has already received more than 400 entrants in its design competition for the new signage.

She was followed by counterterrorism expert Richard Morse, who endorsed the MTA's plan and hinted that the action was long overdue.

"Stop names are a holdover from the pre-9/11 era," said Mr. Morse. "They don't have a security value and frankly, do you really want a terrorist to know when he's arrived at Penn Station? It's like giving him a green light to blow himself up."

Mayor Bloomberg did not speak at the press conference, but administration officials have been quietly supportive of the MTA's decision. A source close to the mayor who did not wish to be identified admitted that Mr. Bloomberg secretly approved the plan shortly after his re-election.

"It's a matter of saving lives," said the source. "You can say it's a cold calculation, but, if a bomb goes off, you want it to go off at 145th Street, not Times Square. Take away the station names, and you make it that much less likely a terrorist can find Times Square."

Word of the MTA's station name phaseout spread quickly around the commuter community. Initial reactions were largely unfavorable.

Shortly after the MTA's press conference Robert D. Yaro, president of the Nypirg Straphangers Campaign, said that his organization was filing suit in Superior Court to seek an injunction that would prevent the station name phaseout from going into effect until after completion of a 45-day public comment period.

MTA official David Gomprecht acknowledged the need for public input but countered that the 45-day comment period was announced three months ago in a small print disclaimer at the bottom of the "If You See Something, Say Something" page of the MTA's website.

At present the legal status of the station name phaseout remains in limbo but Mr. Gomprecht insisted that, whatever the judges decide, the MTA will press forward aggressively with other aspects of its enhanced security plan.

In addition to the station name phaseout, the plan includes simplifying the subway's color-coding system-henceforward all lines will be denoted with green dots-as well as what the MTA calls the "unbranding" of various subway lines.

"There's no more A, C, E," said Mr. Gomprecht. "There's no more 1, 2, 3. From now on, all trains are 'X' trains."

As part of the unbranding campaign the MTA has drawn up a new security-conscious subway map that will begin appearing in trains sometime within the next 17 months.

"Change takes time," said Mr. Gomprecht. "But meanwhile, we're asking all MTA representatives to be as unhelpful as possible when someone asks them for directions. It's basically a continuation of existing policy, but enhanced for security purposes."