10 Billion for a new bus terminal. (Newark, Hope: lawyers, construction, tax)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is there a plan to stop them at the border that we don't know about?
Do you see the border crossings continuing at this rate for the next eight years and nothing being done? This is not to set off P&OC-level rants about parties. One way or another, it's going to have to stop.
You don't think the new design will be efficient? I think the ramps going directly into the LT alone will be more efficient.
I'm talking about the exit and entrance to the Lincoln tunnel are in terrible shape by the bus terminal. When you get into manhattan from NJ that area is in horrible shape. If you 1st came into NYC that way you probably thought NYC is in ruins with those badly paved roads full of dents. The busses going into the terminal can use widening or 2 lanes into the terminal.
What they need is wider entry so that more busses can enter and exit without waiting.
Unless someone works Iin midtown west, they're likely transferring anyway. And as someone who lives in Manhattan, I don't feel the need to tolerate the polution, blight and poor land use inherent in keeping a major bus terminal in midtown Manhattan. Replacing the buses with an electric train, which needs no bed infrastructure past the end of the new tunnel to NJ, and freeing up the land absorbed by the PABT and its approaches, would be a huge win for NYC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man
Forcing people to transfer is a big disincentive to riding transit. If your goal is to reduce transit mode share coming into Manhattan, and increase automobile usage (or a reduction in the employment base), your idea would be a good plan.
As far as the Port Authority Bus Terminal goes, I don't have a dog in this fight. I've only used it a few times in my life, back in the 1980s. The odds that I'll ever go there again in my lifetime are only slightly better than the odds that I'll fly to the moon. But the fact is, it serves a major purpose in the New York City commuter market, and I don't think tearing it down would be a good idea.
The extended 7 line. Take the bus to the Meadowlands, or other NJT train station, and change for the subway or other train.
The 7 line cannot be extended into NJ cause MTA NYC Subway is legally NOT commuter rail. It is a rapid transit system. You could extend LIRR or Metro-North into NJ but not NYC Subway. You would have to literally change NYC Subway's function and it would have to be like the DC Metro which is legally commuter rail but acts as a rapid transit for DC, Virginia, and Maryland or like the PATH on the other hand is legally commuter rail but rapid transit.
The best solution would be to merge everything including the airports under the MTA or Port Authority. One unifying transit body so we don't have to deal with three agencies. It would make through running easier and fare system integration a hell of a lot easier.
Originally Posted by USNRET04
Is there a plan to stop them at the border that we don't know about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801
Do you see the border crossings continuing at this rate for the next eight years and nothing being done? This is not to set off P&OC-level rants about parties. One way or another, it's going to have to stop.
I don't want to get off topic on this thread, but I see the border crossings continuing at this rate indefinitely for at least the next decade or two, or possibly three, unless we have elect a new presidential ticket (pres. & VP). Democrat, republican, or independent, it doesn't matter; what matters is two people who actually want to do the job. The two clowns in there now have made it clear that they don't want to do whatever it takes to stop the border madness.
I'm talking about the exit and entrance to the Lincoln tunnel are in terrible shape by the bus terminal. When you get into manhattan from NJ that area is in horrible shape. If you 1st came into NYC that way you probably thought NYC is in ruins with those badly paved roads full of dents. The busses going into the terminal can use widening or 2 lanes into the terminal.
What they need is wider entry so that more busses can enter and exit without waiting.
That's what I'm saying. It's seems that's part of the new design, to fix that. I'll guess I'll see as this thing gets rolling and they start having industry events for it.
To make this happen it would probably take some federal funding. That being the case, if the arbitrary rule you're talking about actually exists, it could be modified or eliminated as necessary in the funding bill for the project.
On the both the MTA, and especially the PA, need to be broken up. But that's for a different thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prodigymma
The 7 line cannot be extended into NJ cause MTA NYC Subway is legally NOT commuter rail. It is a rapid transit system. You could extend LIRR or Metro-North into NJ but not NYC Subway. You would have to literally change NYC Subway's function and it would have to be like the DC Metro which is legally commuter rail but acts as a rapid transit for DC, Virginia, and Maryland or like the PATH on the other hand is legally commuter rail but rapid transit.
The best solution would be to merge everything including the airports under the MTA or Port Authority. One unifying transit body so we don't have to deal with three agencies. It would make through running easier and fare system integration a hell of a lot easier.
To make this happen it would probably take some federal funding. That being the case, if the arbitrary rule you're talking about actually exists, it could be modified or eliminated as necessary in the funding bill for the project.
On the both the MTA, and especially the PA, need to be broken up. But that's for a different thread.
It's not some random local rule, it is a federal rule Federal Railroad Administration determines. Anything legally considered an FRA has its own separate rules which its bounded by.
As for breaking up or unifying, the best solution is unifying the systems. Separate disjointed systems is why we are in the current mess.
First the MTA would need to unify its own commuter rail(LIRR and Metro-North) into one full system and just call it "Metro Commuter Rail" so it can integrate schedules and fares.
Then governors of NY, NJ, and possibly CT have to work an agreement to have NJ Transit, PATH, and JFK, LGA, and Newark airports and seaports under the MTA and take it up with the FRA and they either approve or decline it.
If approved, you have a new unified transit and airport agency called "Tri-State Metropolitan Transportation Agency".
Benefits are fare integration, system integration like timed transfers, through running, and cooperation on transit projects.
This assumes a world where you have NY and NJ get hardcore transit oriented governors, and not scum like Cuomo, Christie, or Murphy.
All of these rules are either made by congress, or by agencies under congressional authorization. If congress can be sold on funding the project, they'd probably be okay with changing the rules to facilitate it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prodigymma
It's not some random local rule, it is a federal rule Federal Railroad Administration determines. Anything legally considered an FRA has its own separate rules which its bounded by.
As for breaking up or unifying, the best solution is unifying the systems. Separate disjointed systems is why we are in the current mess.
First the MTA would need to unify its own commuter rail(LIRR and Metro-North) into one full system and just call it "Metro Commuter Rail" so it can integrate schedules and fares.
Then governors of NY, NJ, and possibly CT have to work an agreement to have NJ Transit, PATH, and JFK, LGA, and Newark airports and seaports under the MTA and take it up with the FRA and they either approve or decline it.
If approved, you have a new unified transit and airport agency called "Tri-State Metropolitan Transportation Agency".
Benefits are fare integration, system integration like timed transfers, through running, and cooperation on transit projects.
This assumes a world where you have NY and NJ get hardcore transit oriented governors, and not scum like Cuomo, Christie, or Murphy.
All of these rules are either made by congress, or by agencies under congressional authorization. If congress can be sold on funding the project, they'd probably be okay with changing the rules to facilitate it.
It's not about funding, it's about literally changing transit system's scope before the money part can even be discussed.
That's why it is complicated because you can't extend the 7 without changing the entire transit agencies in the neighborhood. Also, it's just the 7 that has been looked at for NJ extension, but also the L train as well since both have been getting CBTC signal upgrades.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
