HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2015, 2:38 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
Well the Gateway/Penn Station South would add that extra capacity... The Gateway and Bus Terminal expansion/7 Expansion are roughly the same cost. But the Gateway should have higher prority since it benefits a larger chunk of the Northeast then the bus upgrades. The last president of the LIRR wasn't to keen on giving up slots at Penn station , but she was forced out. A standard Bus can hold 60 to 70 people , while a 10 to 12 car train can hold up to 1200 to 1300 people. I don't really buy your argument that the current PABT can handle the extra capacity. Having used PABT during rush hr , its worse then Penn Station..., its slow...long lines , always an issue. Penn has issues aswell but getting the people on the train isn't one of them...its a Tunnel issue.

As for NJ Rail upgrades , we'll just milk the PA like everyone seems to be doing.

HBLR doesn't really service the Heavily congested routes in the Gold Coast which are along the higher sections. There are basic upgrades to the Rail lines that would not cost billions but boost capacity...
Penn South doesn't need to be built, it's an Amtrak wish list item that isn't justifiable from a cost standpoint. Rebuilding Penn itself to actually circulate human beings is a far sounder investment and you don't need another prime block of Manhattan land to do it.

The LIRR isn't going to give up Penn slots to anybody except MNRR because the NY state gov will literally make them do it. NJT will never see those slots.

I never argued that the current PABT could handle any additional load, quite the opposite in fact. Which is why I strongly favor building a larger modern facility at Secaucus to connect to the 7. Building a $10B+ replacement that will not have capacity to handle anticipated loads is nuts. People are moaning about another transfer but given the delay prone nature of the Lincoln tunnel approaches, the XBL, and the tremendous inefficiency of the PABT I'm not convinced there would actually be a time penalty involved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2015, 1:41 AM
CIA CIA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,340
il
Quote:
Originally Posted by drumz0rz View Post
A typical NJ Transit bus holds 49 passengers. Using your own figures 1,000 buses per hour could move 49,000 people, which is at the high end of your PATH train replacement figures. Hardly seems worth it considering you've now also forced the Lincoln tunnel to a single lane should work be required in one of the tubes (currently if 1 tunnel is closed it's traffic is diverted to the other, so both directions maintain 2 lanes).

Also, what would you do for the years during which the tunnel would have to be closed for construction? Where would the trains come from and go to? How are you going to acquire the right-of-way to build all that? How expensive would it be to tunnel further under the west side?

It's an idea, just not a good one...
I just want to point out that you're responding to an article I posted and not my words.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2015, 6:11 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
atomic
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 12,571
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1052 View Post
People are moaning about another transfer but given the delay prone nature of the Lincoln tunnel approaches, the XBL, and the tremendous inefficiency of the PABT I'm not convinced there would actually be a time penalty involved.
Can we examine this assumption? Which commuters would see an extra transfer, and where are they headed?

If they are going downtown, then maybe there is a different routing that can take them there without going through Port Authority (regardless of location). If they are going to the Grand Central area, I'm not sure what to suggest.

Separate from this, it is not difficult to design a quick and convenient bus->rail transfer station. If the 7 train terminates in Secaucus, then you just build two side platforms lined with bus bays. It would literally be a cross platform transfer, with no stairs, escalators, or grade changes. Fare control is an issue, but for billions of dollars you could buy 100 faregates and just set them up in a long line. Maybe you even build several platforms in this manner.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2015, 2:34 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Can we examine this assumption? Which commuters would see an extra transfer, and where are they headed?

If they are going downtown, then maybe there is a different routing that can take them there without going through Port Authority (regardless of location). If they are going to the Grand Central area, I'm not sure what to suggest.

Separate from this, it is not difficult to design a quick and convenient bus->rail transfer station. If the 7 train terminates in Secaucus, then you just build two side platforms lined with bus bays. It would literally be a cross platform transfer, with no stairs, escalators, or grade changes. Fare control is an issue, but for billions of dollars you could buy 100 faregates and just set them up in a long line. Maybe you even build several platforms in this manner.
People who walk from the PABT to their final destination would incur an extra transfer. Judging by observed pedestrian traffic alone this would seem to be a decent number of people but I haven't seen any hard figures breaking it down by destination. Again, from a time perspective I'm not convinced that this would actually take any longer than dealing with the PABT/tunnel xbl backups.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2015, 9:17 PM
Nexis4Jersey's Avatar
Nexis4Jersey Nexis4Jersey is offline
Greetings from New Jersey
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: In the Pascack Valley
Posts: 2,920
PORT AUTHORITY BUS TERMINAL OPENS 1950s

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2015, 3:58 PM
sparkling's Avatar
sparkling sparkling is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 766
Officials Want to Accelerate New Hudson River Tunnel Plans

Friday, October 2, 2015
Jessica Dailey

Quote:
Over the last few months, momentum has been growing for a new trans-Hudson River train tunnel, and it seems like things are actually going to start happening. The Times reports that federal transportation secretary Anthony Foxx said officials are "taking important initial steps to accelerate long-stalled plans" in order to "move as quickly as possible on preliminary work because of the deteriorating condition of the current tunnel."

The steps include shortening the timeline for approving permits and discussing financing options with the Port Authority. The Times says this is "the most substantive movement on the project in years." However, a new tunnel is still many years away—a timeline outlined on Amtrak's Gateway website estimates a 2028 completion date, assuming adequate funding— and a lot of questions and concerns remain.

Continue Reading
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2015, 7:35 PM
CIA CIA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,340
The Port Authority will be holding a meeting on Oct. 22 to possibly decide the future of the PABT. The New York members of the board have been pushing for a delay on a decision to give more time to study options, while the New Jersey members want a decision to be made sooner rather than later.

Chairman Degnan has hinted his openness to demolishing the existing facility and replacing the PABT on the New Jersey side, but PA staff have been studying the same five concepts announced back in March.

It will be interesting to see if the PA picks one of the five concepts, or order staff to look at an NJ option.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2015, 3:36 AM
aquablue aquablue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
The Port Authority will be holding a meeting on Oct. 22 to possibly decide the future of the PABT. The New York members of the board have been pushing for a delay on a decision to give more time to study options, while the New Jersey members want a decision to be made sooner rather than later.

Chairman Degnan has hinted his openness to demolishing the existing facility and replacing the PABT on the New Jersey side, but PA staff have been studying the same five concepts announced back in March.

It will be interesting to see if the PA picks one of the five concepts, or order staff to look at an NJ option.
It will never be built in Jersey given the politics of the situation. All the talk about a Jersey station is a waste of time and is pie in the sky dreaming!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2015, 3:55 AM
Design-mind's Avatar
Design-mind Design-mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
The Port Authority will be holding a meeting on Oct. 22 to possibly decide the future of the PABT. The New York members of the board have been pushing for a delay on a decision to give more time to study options, while the New Jersey members want a decision to be made sooner rather than later.
Wow how many options do they need to see before a decision can be made! This must be the most indecisive board of all time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 2:01 PM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,448
Port Authority Approves Plan For New NYC Bus Terminal
October 22, 2015 7:36 PM

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) — The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has moved forward with a plan to replace its aging bus terminal in New York City.

Board members approved a plan Thursday that will include an international design competition for a new terminal.

The current terminal at Eighth Avenue and 42nd Street is over 50 years old and handles more than 200,000 people per day. It’s considered outdated and ill-suited for projected increases in traffic in the coming years.

“We expect ridership to double by 2040 at the bus terminal, from 120,000 people each way to 240,000,” New Jersey Senate President Stephen Sweeney said earlier this month. “It’s not going to work in the location it’s at.”

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/10/...terminal-plan/

-----------------
NYC's Port Authority Bus Terminal to be replaced
Melanie Eversley, USA TODAY 12:20 a.m. EDT October 23, 2015

It has long been an icon of the grit of New York City and now it's slated to be replaced.

The Board of Commissioners of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey voted Thursday to replace the 65-year-old Port Authority Bus Terminal in the Times Square neighborhood, according to various media reports.

Concrete decisions about a new site would be opened up to an international design competition to be concluded in 2016, NJ.com is reporting. Construction is projected to take 11 to 15 years and cost estimates range from $7.5 billion to $10.5 billion, the news organization reports.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...aced/74436918/

--------------------
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 2:43 PM
mrnyc mrnyc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,170
i wish it would have been rebuilt in jersey with a 7 train extension, but oh well. at least it will make much better use of the blocks just to the west with that wacky tangle of ramps.

i heard on the news today that they will finish the new station and bus staging area before tearing down the old pabt to minimize disruption as much as possible, but it this will still be a mess around there for years to come. also, supposedly the old pabt property and air rights and all that will pay for 2/3rds of this mega project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 5:23 PM
Submariner's Avatar
Submariner Submariner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,050
What's the over under on the actual final price and date of completion?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 5:33 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
What's the over under on the actual final price and date of completion?
I say 20 years and $15B.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 7:23 PM
CIA CIA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,340
Talking

I'm all smiles!!! The newspaper reports give such a weak account of what actually happened yesterday.

-International Design Competition, for a new bus terminal one block west of current structure, between 9th and 11th avenues. Participants in the design competition are encouraged to suggest alternative sites for a different PABT if their analysis determines that the current site is not optimal.

-Issue a RFP for an outside consultant to perform a trans-Hudson commuting capacity study over the next 30 years, including commuting patterns after arrival in Manhattan.

-Each design that is submitted must include cost of construction, estimated operating costs, and revenue from potential construction above the new terminal site, and on the site of the existing terminal, for commercial and residential development. Revenue from potential development could cover 2/3rd of the construction costs.

-Continue to solicit comments from the public and government agencies.

-Select design concept no later than September 2016 meeting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2015, 8:44 PM
CityGuy87 CityGuy87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
I'm all smiles!!! The newspaper reports give such a weak account of what actually happened yesterday.

-International Design Competition, for a new bus terminal one block west of current structure, between 9th and 11th avenues. Participants in the design competition are encouraged to suggest alternative sites for a different PABT if their analysis determines that the current site is not optimal.

-Issue a RFP for an outside consultant to perform a trans-Hudson commuting capacity study over the next 30 years, including commuting patterns after arrival in Manhattan.

-Each design that is submitted must include cost of construction, estimated operating costs, and revenue from potential construction above the new terminal site, and on the site of the existing terminal, for commercial and residential development. Revenue from potential development could cover 2/3rd of the construction costs.

-Continue to solicit comments from the public and government agencies.

-Select design concept no later than September 2016 meeting.
The Port Authority is actually getting something done for once!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2015, 8:15 PM
Cynicism Cynicism is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1052 View Post
I say 20 years and $15B.
^

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2015, 2:46 AM
artspook's Avatar
artspook artspook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: manhattan
Posts: 482
Welcome to Manhattan's 21st Century 10 level bus terminal . .
Come on . . commuters are not going to get out of one transport vehicle . .
to get into another to get into Manhattan . . then get into another one (cab train or bus)
. . to transport them to their city workplace . .

If they build this tower terminal here in the city . . where else to put it . .
are they gonna find 1 1/2 huge full blocks to build on . . like they already have . .
Complicated as it is . . they'll probably build right on top of what's already there . .
keeping most of it operational while they build on top . . just like they did it before . .
when they replaced the original bus terminal with what they have now . .

But this time . . there'll probably be a residential/office tower above part of that also
. . I'd recommend keeping the distinctive heavy-truss industrial look of the present PA.
__________________
artSpook
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2015, 3:01 AM
CIA CIA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by artspook View Post
Welcome to Manhattan's 21st Century 10 level bus terminal . .
Come on . . commuters are not going to get out of one transport vehicle . .
to get into another to get into Manhattan . . then get into another one (cab train or bus)
. . to transport them to their city workplace . .

If they build this tower terminal here in the city . . where else to put it . .
are they gonna find 1 1/2 huge full blocks to build on . . like they already have . .
Complicated as it is . . they'll probably build right on top of what's already there . .
keeping most of it operational while they build on top . . just like they did it before . .
when they replaced the original bus terminal with what they have now . .

But this time . . there'll probably be a residential/office tower above part of that also
. . I'd recommend keeping the distinctive heavy-truss industrial look of the present PA.
Where to start?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2015, 3:04 AM
CIA CIA is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,340
Quote:
The Port Authority voted Thursday to hold an international competition to design a new terminal building, with the projected $7 to $10 billion costs largely covered by the construction of a new tower at the current Eighth Avenue site. The new terminal building will occupy a site one block to the west of the existing terminal, which occupies 625 Eighth Avenue in Midtown.

The bistate agency plans to sell the air rights at the current terminal, and estimates that a new tower with condos and commercial space would cover two-thirds of the $10 billion terminal cost, the New York Post reported. According to Property Shark, 625 Eighth Avenue holds 2.3 million square feet of air rights.
See more at: http://therealdeal.com/blog/2015/10/....pBVNDOEF.dpuf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2015, 4:15 PM
antinimby's Avatar
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 1,910
^ Numbers don't sound right. $6.66B for 2.3MSF of just air rights?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:02 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.