Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal

Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal (303462)	Home · Maps · About

Home > BusChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3 4 5]

Page 1 of 5

Next Page >

(303462)	view threaded
Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Euclid Avenue A Train on Tue Mar 17 17:19:16 2015 edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d From The Wall Street Journal See web page for photos and charts. http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-push-to-fix-port-authority-bus-terminal-1426547679 Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal New depot is estimated to cost up to $11 billion By Andrew Tangel Updated March 17, 2015 12:47 p.m. ET When the Port Authority Bus Terminal opened in 1950, it helped New York City funnel a growing number of buses carrying commuters into Manhattan’s West Side. Today, the terminal west of Times Square is a major chokepoint for bus traffic from New Jersey suburbs. Commuters complain of delays, crowding and a dreary environment. Like Penn Station about 10 blocks to the south, the terminal is also the butt of jokes. Last summer, the comedian John Oliver declared it “the single worst place on Planet Earth” and joked that even cockroaches are trying to escape. Now the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has preliminary estimates for how much it could cost to replace its eponymous terminal: $8 billion to $11 billion, a potential price tag rivaling that of a project to dig new passenger rail tunnels under the Hudson River. The terminal is expected to take the spotlight at the Port Authority’s board meeting on Thursday, highlighting how the agency is trying to refocus on regional transportation in the wake of the September 2013 scandal involving lane-closures at the George Washington Bridge in Fort Lee, N.J. “It is an existential mission,” said Kenneth Lipper, a Port Authority commissioner from New York who has pushed for replacing the terminal. “We must do it.” Talk of replacing the terminal comes as the Port Authority also seeks to play a starring role in jump-starting a project to build two rail tunnels under the Hudson River. An earlier tunnel project, known as Access to the Region’s Core, or ARC, was killed in 2010 by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie over concerns that his state’s taxpayers would end up paying for cost overruns. But the push to replace or overhaul the terminal comes as the timing of the Hudson River tunnel project and another major Port Authority construction project—an overhaul of the maligned Central Terminal Building building at La Guardia Airport in Queens—remain uncertain. Amtrak, the national passenger railroad, now estimates its plan to build two tunnels as part of a set of upgrades known as Gateway, could cost from $15 billion to $20 billion. Last year, Amtrak said it might need to close its two existing tunnels between New York and New Jersey for major repairs in coming years. A closure of those tunnels, which opened in 1910, threatens to snarl traffic on the East Coast amid growing ridership for Amtrak and NJ Transit commuter train riders. Replacing the Port Authority Bus Terminal could take a decade a longer. But more daunting would be to work on both the depot and tunnel project simultaneously, while also finding enough capacity in the transportation network to keep people moving between both states. “It’s like a big puzzle,” said Rich Barone, director of transportation programs at the Regional Plan Association. “We have to look at all the pieces and figure out how we actually put this thing together.” While both projects are expensive, the terminal handles twice as many riders as Penn Station handles rail passengers from New Jersey during the morning peak. About 80,000 riders enter Manhattan through the terminal during the weekday morning rush hours, compared with about 40,000 who take trains into Penn Station from New Jersey, Mr. Barone said. Bus traffic into Manhattan through the nearby Lincoln Tunnel has jumped significantly over the past decade, according to the RPA. In 2003, 6,556 buses carrying 133,835 riders came through the Lincoln Tunnel on the average weekday, nearly all of them heading to the terminal, according to the RPA. More than a decade later, ridership was up about 30%, according to the RPA. In 2013, there were 6,905 buses carrying 174,396 riders over the same route on an average day. The Port Authority expects the terminal’s rush-hour passenger traffic to grow by as much as 51% by 2040. The Port Authority’s meeting comes ahead of a forum expected in May to discuss the transportation needs between New York and New Jersey. While the authority takes steps toward a major overhaul for the terminal, it has focused short-term fixes on including repairs to the leaky ceilings, upgrades to restrooms and improvements to ventilation. Meanwhile, Evan Cutler, a TV producer who lives in Upper Montclair, N.J., commutes to work after the morning rush to avoid delays getting buses through the Lincoln Tunnel and into the crowded terminal. On his way home, he confronts disorganized, long lines. “It’s a terrible combination of lack of ventilation, the most depressing décor possible and just complete anarchy,” Mr. Cutler said. Write to Andrew Tangel at Andrew.Tangel@wsj.com
Post a New Response

(303470)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Tue Mar 17 23:11:58 2015, in response to Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Euclid Avenue A Train on Tue Mar 17 17:19:16 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Rail tunnels need to take priority. Build new tunnels into a new terminal and reactivate a bunch of the rail lines currently served by buses. There's no reason for Academy's route 36 service to exist to the extent that it does when there's a rail line running parallel. Same goes for a lot of the Shortline services along Rt 17 between Monroe and Middletown. This scenario is repeated all throughout the state and in Rockland/Orange counties in NY. That will take the pressure off the XBL and the PABT and allow it to be used more efficiently for corridors that don't have a rail option.
Post a New Response

(303471)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Wed Mar 18 00:07:20 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by NIMBYkiller on Tue Mar 17 23:11:58 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The bus terminal needs to take priority because bus transportation is the basic food group of mass transit. In addition, the bus terminal has revenue sources that can be pledged to pay for its use (the tenants). The rail tunnel is much harder to finance.
Post a New Response

(303473)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 18 07:46:20 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 00:07:20 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Meaning the PA wants toll revenue from buses and so is anti-rail. Time to liquidate this agency. Build the #7 to Secaucus, and off-load bunch of buses there. Sending a couple of thousand buses into Manhattan and back each rush hour is ridiculous. It doesn't work anymore, there won't be anymore Lincoln Tunnel capacity, however much they fumble with the PABT ramps.
Post a New Response

(303477)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by TerrApin Station* on Wed Mar 18 07:50:25 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 00:07:20 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Wrong
Post a New Response

(303478)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by TerrApin Station* on Wed Mar 18 07:50:34 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by NIMBYkiller on Tue Mar 17 23:11:58 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Correct
Post a New Response

(303481)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Stephen Bauman* on Wed Mar 18 08:44:39 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 00:07:20 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d In addition, the bus terminal has revenue sources that can be pledged to pay for its use (the tenants). The Port Authority lost $105 million operating the PABT in 2012. That includes tenant income.
Post a New Response

(303483)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by northshore* on Wed Mar 18 11:09:19 2015, in response to Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Euclid Avenue A Train on Tue Mar 17 17:19:16 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Replace the terminal with what? The current terminal is perfect. It just needs sprucing up and updating.
Post a New Response

(303484)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by kcram3500* on Wed Mar 18 12:21:45 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by northshore on Wed Mar 18 11:09:19 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The original terminal was designed at a time when all the buses that would use it were no larger than 35 feet long, 96 inches wide, and 10 feet tall. The first 40-foot GMC Old Looks in NY/NJ were a year away, and the Scenicruiser was 4 years away. Now there are 102-inch wide buses of all types, 45-foot coaches on all levels, artics on the second floor, and buses ranging from 10'5" (transits with roof AC) to 11'5" (MCI D-series) in the upper floors, and as high as 11'9" (J4500) or 12'3" (Prevost H-series) downstairs. There are space, clearance, and maneuverability issues today that simply did not exist in 1950. A new terminal would also not want to have higher levels because that could lead to access issues (requiring more spiral ramps/steeper angles) and that adds rain/winter traction concerns. So a new building would need to be larger in floorplan area. The current 1.5 blocks could conceivably need to be 2 or even 2.5 blocks to handle the current load and current bus size, but also allow for future expansion without major disruption.
Post a New Response

(303485)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by terRAPIN station* on Wed Mar 18 13:14:27 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Mar 18 08:44:39 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d NICE
Post a New Response

(303487)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Wed Mar 18 13:20:10 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 18 07:46:20 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Customers want to transfer to a subway in Manhattan, not in NJ. Secaucus is not set up to handle 700 buses an hour.
Post a New Response

(303488)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by terRAPIN station* on Wed Mar 18 13:23:07 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by northshore on Wed Mar 18 11:09:19 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d I really hope you're being sarcastic.
Post a New Response

(303489)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Wed Mar 18 13:24:22 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Mar 18 08:44:39 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d They can build it in such a way to lower costs. For starters, the terminal could use LED lighting all over the place. Speed bumps could double as electrical generators. Rainwater could be caught to flush toilets and wash the building. They could offer many more gates and bring in new users.
Post a New Response

(303490)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by terRAPIN station* on Wed Mar 18 13:27:08 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 13:20:10 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Customers want to transfer to a subway in Manhattan, not in NJ. WTF? Why??? Assuming these "customers" would arrive inside the Times Square subway station faster via the 7 from NJ than via a bus to the PABT, then why in the world would people who need to take a subway once in Manhattan anyhow rather stay on the bus all the way to the PABT?????
Post a New Response

(303491)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by terRAPIN station* on Wed Mar 18 13:27:52 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 13:24:22 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d You're REALLY grasping at straws.
Post a New Response

(303492)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by r33/r36 mainline* on Wed Mar 18 13:33:43 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by kcram3500 on Wed Mar 18 12:21:45 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The location of the current PABT is perfect, its too bad they decided to already to build something over that open air space west of NYP, from there to West Side Yard would have been the prefect location for a new PABT, they could still keep the direct access to the Lincoln Tunnel as well. Maybe they could also squeeze the midtown MTA express bus routes in the terminal.
Post a New Response

(303495)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by kcram3500* on Wed Mar 18 13:55:36 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by terRAPIN station on Wed Mar 18 13:27:08 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Commuters want the one-seat ride into New York - it gives them the option of walking once they're there, and the majority of people on that 7 would be forced to stand. If you're familiar with the core passenger on the Route 9 corridor in NJ, those people will not settle for such a transfer... they actually feel they are entitled to the exact same seat on the bus every day. If all the NJ commuter buses currently using the PABT transferred their passengers to an extended 7 in Secaucus, what happens if there's a problem on the 7? Secaucus Junction isn't equipped to handle that volume, and sending all those buses to Manhattan with no PABT would become the nightmare the original PABT was built to avoid. And what happens to the long-distance carriers? Do Greyhound and Peter Pan also transfer in Secaucus, or do they wander the streets like Megabus and Bolt? Like the Express Bus Lane the building eventually led to creating, the PABT is a victim of its own success. The expansion to 42nd street should have been their first clue to plan a new/larger facility 30 years ago.
Post a New Response

(303496)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Wed Mar 18 14:01:36 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by terRAPIN station on Wed Mar 18 13:27:52 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d No, everything he said adds up and does matter, and should be implemented as much as possible in all new construction. Otherwise the future is dead.
Post a New Response

(303497)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Wed Mar 18 14:02:48 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 00:07:20 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The sooner the rail project gets started the easier it will be to renovate (demolish and rebuild? hehehe) PABT. You'll have far less traffic moving in and out and thus the room to do the work.
Post a New Response

(303498)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Wed Mar 18 15:24:05 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by terRAPIN station on Wed Mar 18 13:14:27 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d No. Port Authority. :-)
Post a New Response

(303499)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Wed Mar 18 15:27:27 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 13:24:22 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Some of these features might cost more than the energy savings over the lifetime of their installation.
Post a New Response

(303500)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 18 15:34:40 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Wed Mar 18 13:20:10 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Is that so ? They want to get up at late as possible and get to work ASAP and will transfer wherever feasible. I also did not say to terminate 700 buses an hour there.
Post a New Response

(303501)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 18 15:37:26 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by kcram3500 on Wed Mar 18 13:55:36 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d One seat ride on a bus is no longer convenient. The 1970's are over. The concept no longer works for buses. Give passengers a choice of a 30 - 45 minute schlep on a bus from Secaucus, verses a 15 minute subway ride, and you will not be able to prevent the stampede to get off. Nobody said to send Greyhound and such there, nor shut down PABT.
Post a New Response

(303502)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 18 15:46:09 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by NIMBYkiller on Wed Mar 18 14:02:48 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d San Fransisco replaced Transbay Termninal, though I don't know the details. About 20 years ago, someone got murdered in the old facility, and Amtrak moved their Thruway bus operations out of there the next day to the Ferry Terminal.
Post a New Response

(303503)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by kcram3500* on Wed Mar 18 15:58:44 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 18 15:37:26 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Has nothing to do with "the 1970s". It has everything to do with commuters traveling much farther than they did 40 years ago, which is why they WANT the one-seat ride. No one traveling from Lakewood/Toms River, northwest NJ, Orange County NY, or eastern PA wants more vehicle changes than they have now. To these people, the subway in NYC is a necessary evil if they have to use it once arriving at PABT - they don't want a longer ride on that if it's not necessary. They want the big cushioned reclining seat, overhead racks so they don't have to carry/hold their stuff, and as little crowding as possible.
Post a New Response

(303504)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 18 16:13:15 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by kcram3500 on Wed Mar 18 15:58:44 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d You need to stop with this one seat ride nonsense, which is consumer fraud. Many of them transfer to a subway anyway. People want to get to work and they will get off their cushy bus to save a half hour.
Post a New Response

(303505)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by kcram3500* on Wed Mar 18 16:20:19 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 18 16:13:15 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d NJT's customer service surveys say otherwise. Prove your point with data instead of speculation.
Post a New Response

(303506)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 18 17:18:24 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by kcram3500 on Wed Mar 18 16:20:19 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Customer service surveys clearly say they are disgusted with bus OTP into PABT. Fiddling with bus ramps will not accomplish anything. There will be no more XBL's. There will be no more Lincoln Tunnels tubes. Adding more buses with the market will make matters worse. So start looking for rail solutions, let go of the 1970's, and all and the cliches of transportation planners and Port Authority plutocrats.
Post a New Response

(303507)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by kcram3500* on Wed Mar 18 19:04:13 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 18 17:18:24 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Here's an example why it won't happen: New Bridge Landing rail station on the Pascack Valley Line, border of Hackensack and River Edge. Travel to NYC. PVL to Secaucus, change trains to NEC to NYP (definitely standing on this part of the trip). Fare $7.25 one way, $208 monthly. During morning peak, train runs every 15-20 minutes between 7:15 and 8:15, 45-60 minutes otherwise. Bus 165 (which stops adjacent to the train station), one-seat ride to PABT. Fare $5.50 one way, $153 monthly. During morning peak, bus runs every 5-8 minutes. The bus is notably cheaper, far more frequent, and no transfer required. There will always be those who prefer the train. But you will not get the majority of people off their bus.
Post a New Response

(303508)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by Joe V* on Wed Mar 18 19:11:29 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by kcram3500 on Wed Mar 18 19:04:13 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d You used NJT fares to NYPS, forgetting #7. Use Monthly Metrocard on the #7, which they may already be in possession of. Bus fare to SEC would also be much cheaper than to PABT - intrastate fares apply, which went up only 10% last time, while interstate went up 25%. I kept ALL the articles when this was hot a few years ago. Hundreds of comments by readers, all positive, anything to get off the XBL and PABT. And then rail passengers who want out of NYPS and are headed to the East Side. I'd be happy with 25% shift, and that is far more doable from points south.
Post a New Response

(303509)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Wed Mar 18 20:10:58 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 18 17:18:24 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d I agree we need a rail solution, but running the 7 to Secaucus is a band aid that doesn't address the real problem. It's an inefficient system currently, running all these buses from the different outlying areas when a train could handle the capacity better. Build a new commuter rail tunnel/terminal in Manhattan and expand upon the existing network of rail service. Let the buses handle the corridors inaccessible or not dense enough for rail service.
Post a New Response

(303510)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Wed Mar 18 20:11:56 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Mar 18 15:27:27 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Obviously those get eliminated as options.
Post a New Response

(303511)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by merrick1* on Wed Mar 18 20:46:24 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by kcram3500 on Wed Mar 18 15:58:44 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Why not give them a real one seat ride? Get rid of the terminal. Run buses up and down the avenues in Manhattan like the express buses from the outer boroughs. That way most passengers won't need to transfer to the subway or a local bus.
Post a New Response

(303513)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by r33/r36 mainline* on Wed Mar 18 21:11:46 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by merrick1 on Wed Mar 18 20:46:24 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d That would be a traffic nightmare, 5 Ave is busting at the stems during the PM Rush, same goes for 42nd street. Not to mention pedestrian traffic, I remember seeing the line for some extend all the down to the 2nd floor where the bathrooms are at. They already have that for Lower Manhattan but very few NJT routes go there though.
Post a New Response

(303514)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by J trainloco* on Wed Mar 18 22:09:37 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 18 07:46:20 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d 7 to Secaucus was DOA, and was a silly proposal anyway. You might not think the one seat ride means much, but it does, to a lot of people, and if it can increase property values, then it's worth it. That said, a new rail link is sorely needed between NY and NJ. Ideally, it should be commuter/regional rail, not Metro.
Post a New Response

(303516)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Wed Mar 18 23:08:12 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by merrick1 on Wed Mar 18 20:46:24 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d helllllllllllll no! We need less vehicles on the street, not more
Post a New Response

(303517)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Wed Mar 18 23:08:35 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by J trainloco on Wed Mar 18 22:09:37 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d THANK YOU!
Post a New Response

(303518)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by SMAZ* on Thu Mar 19 00:44:52 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by northshore on Wed Mar 18 11:09:19 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d I've been informed that it is time for my triennial pro forma post on BusChat so that I can continue to remain a member in good standing. The current terminal is perfect. Words of folly.
Post a New Response

(303519)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Thu Mar 19 02:12:06 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by Joe V on Wed Mar 18 17:18:24 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d They want the buses to work better, not a train. NJT cross subsidizes intrastate bus service with profits made going into NYC. The subsidy money and the capital cost needed to implement that solution does not exist.
Post a New Response

(303520)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Thu Mar 19 02:14:00 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by NIMBYkiller on Wed Mar 18 14:02:48 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The tunnel will take 10 years. Does PABT have 10 years left? I doubt it.
Post a New Response

(303522)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Thu Mar 19 02:55:33 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Thu Mar 19 02:12:06 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Yes but the buses are an inefficient solution given the mass of people trying to get into Manhattan. There are plenty of corridors where the bus could be justifiably replaced with a train. Rt 36 in NJ is a perfect example
Post a New Response

(303523)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Thu Mar 19 02:55:59 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Thu Mar 19 02:14:00 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Well, better get started and put that SOB in overdrive
Post a New Response

(303526)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Thu Mar 19 09:47:32 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Mar 19 02:55:59 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d The feds have basically said that they need strong leadership on this project. In other words, this has to be a REGIONAL project. If NJT, MTA, and Amtrak jointly back this project with the full weight of all three agencies, it will happen. What are the chances of this? Almost zero with a 50/50 funding formula. You would have to find $10B in cash between the three agencies and their respective states. I don't see any agency willing or able to come up with $3.3B+.
Post a New Response

(303527)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by HART BUS* on Thu Mar 19 11:12:26 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Thu Mar 19 09:47:32 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Easy to get the money. Just have the PANYNJ hike the tolls, like they always do !
Post a New Response

(303530)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Thu Mar 19 12:00:10 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Mar 19 02:55:33 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d 61 seat buses are really efficient, but passengers hate them. High efficiency is the goal, but we can't lose sight of the transportation objective. If you add another leg to their transit trip, they will drive.
Post a New Response

(303531)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by JAzumah* on Thu Mar 19 12:10:47 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by HART BUS on Thu Mar 19 11:12:26 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d At those rates, you won't have any traffic to worry about.
Post a New Response

(303532)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by kcram3500* on Thu Mar 19 12:18:31 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Thu Mar 19 12:00:10 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d 61 seat buses are really efficient, but passengers hate them. NJT's original MC-9 order in 1982 was spec'd as 53 seats (same seat pitch as a 61-pass 45-footer). MCI found a charter operator in PA who had a 53-pass MC-9 and arranged to bring it to Newark for NJT to review. Executive Director Jerry Premo (6'4") boarded, sat in a seat, and promptly changed the contract spec to 49 seats because he felt it was too cramped. High efficiency is the goal, but we can't lose sight of the transportation objective. If you add another leg to their transit trip, they will drive. And this is why you can't take a "New York City" transit perspective at a New Jersey issue. New Yorkers think nothing of transferring between buses and/or subways for a single trip. NJ commuters have zero interest in that unless they have no choice. If a bus stops near their home and goes all the way to PABT, they are not interested in being short-sheeted to Secaucus, Hoboken, or Weekawken to change vehicles just to cross the river. The one thing no one is discussing is additonal road tunnel capacity. The Pennsylvania Railroad tunnels are old, but the Lincoln Tunnel is equally inadequate for the 21st century (as are the Holland, Battery, and Queens-Midtown). Designed today, those tubes would be four 12-foot lanes with 10-foot shoulders on both sides and 15-foot vertical clearance per tube. But no one wants to broach the subject of vehicle tunnel upgrades/replacement... not even a separate bus-only tunnel for PABT service.
Post a New Response

(303533)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Thu Mar 19 13:44:11 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Thu Mar 19 12:00:10 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Who's adding another leg to their transit trip? I'm saying replace many of the bus routes with rail service. I think sending the 7 to Secaucus is a weak solution that doesn't address the problem at its root. Face it, you're just mad because you can't start you own railroad ;)
Post a New Response

(303534)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Thu Mar 19 13:45:39 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by kcram3500 on Thu Mar 19 12:18:31 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d If we expand NJs rail offerings in NJ perhaps we wouldn't need additional road capacity just yet. We need something for sure, but I think rail takes precedent by leaps and bounds
Post a New Response

(303535)	view threaded
Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal
Posted by NIMBYkiller* on Thu Mar 19 13:55:26 2015, in response to Re: Push to Replace Port Authority Bus Terminal, posted by JAzumah on Thu Mar 19 09:47:32 2015.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailB:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Tax developers a small percentage (5%?) of the total cost of all new construction. Which developments and where is up for debate. It won't pay for the whole project, but it's money they didn't have coming in before. Isn't the 7 extension being financed mostly through the property taxes and other taxes for the development of the far west side?
Post a New Response

[1 2 3 4 5]
	Page 1 of 5	Next Page >

[ Return to the Message Index ]