HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #361  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2016, 2:41 PM
Submariner's Avatar
Submariner Submariner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,341
We should demand that the seats of government in Albany and Trenton must relocate to the PABT until a new one is funded and built.

Watch the barriers to success come crashing down...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #362  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2016, 12:51 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,018
You've got to be kidding me...

Port Authority chair asks ethics panel to decide if he has conflict of interest

Quote:
Port Authority Chairman John Degnan has asked the state's Ethics Commission to decide if he should participate in the process of replacing the agency's aging bus terminal, a question raised when a Manhattan congressman and other New York officials charged that he has a conflict of interest.

The Nov. 15 letter sent by Congressman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., Manhattan Borough President Gale A. Brewer and several state lawmakers last week, accused Degnan of having a conflict of interest and demanded that he recuse himself from participating in the issue of building a new midtown Manhattan bus terminal. They asked the authority to replace him with a New York representative to participate in the planning process.

Nadler's letter charged that Degnan had demonstrated a bias in favor of locating the terminal in Manhattan, rather than in New Jersey, an option being weighed, though not widely embraced, as part of the planning process. His letter suggested Degnan favored a New York location for "political" reasons, though it did not say what those were.

Late Wednesday, Degnan wrote to the state Ethics Commission, asking it to render an opinion on whether he should have recused himself from voting on a March resolution, where the Port Authority board endorsed building the new terminal.
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/..._to_revie.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #363  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 5:13 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,917
http://therealdeal.com/2016/11/29/cu...-bus-terminal/

Cuomo takes aim at NJ’s Port Authority chairman, bus terminal
The governor seems to be filling the agency's power vacuum






November 29, 2016


Quote:
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has a power vacuum, and Gov. Andrew Cuomo is trying to fill it.

Since the debacle at the George Washington Bridge — known as Bridgegate — New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has stepped away from the bi-state agency and deferred to his appointee, chairman John Degnan. At the same time, Cuomo has taken aim at Degnan and plans to replace the Port Authority Bus Terminal, Politico reported.

Cuomo reportedly told Degnan in a phone call that he could care less about building a new $10 billion bus terminal, referring to it as mainly a New Jersey project, sources told Politico. He said he’d approve a $2 billion allocation for the project, below the $3.5 billion that Degnan was seeking from the bi-state agency.

Sources told Politico that Cuomo’s office urged allies, including New York Congressman Jerry Nadler, earlier this month to call for Degnan’s recusal from the bus terminal project. New Jersey state Sen. Loretta Weinberg told Politico that Nadler and others were wrongfully trying to tie the recusal to the fact that Degnan’s son, Philip, was recently confirmed as New Jersey’s comptroller. Representatives for Cuomo said his office wasn’t involved but agreed with Nadler.

Cuomo and Degnan seem to be wrangling over what projects should take priority. The governor is pushing for the planned renovations at LaGuardia and John F. Kennedy airports, while Degnan is focused on the bus terminal.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #364  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 5:29 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,018
It gets better and better. Degnan is ineffective
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #365  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2016, 10:50 PM
BBMW BBMW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 89
NYers should demand the PABT be removed from NYC. It mostly benefits Jerseyites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
We should demand that the seats of government in Albany and Trenton must relocate to the PABT until a new one is funded and built.

Watch the barriers to success come crashing down...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #366  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2016, 6:42 AM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
Should the NJTransit side of Penn Station be moved to NJ too?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #367  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2016, 3:14 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by scalziand View Post
Should the NJTransit side of Penn Station be moved to NJ too?
Given the pace of Gateway that seems more like an eventuality than a possibility. When Amtrak finally has no choice but to start closing the North River Tunnels for rehabs they'll prioritize their own traffic and leave NJT to twist in the wind.

NY seems quite content to cross it's arms and watch the PABT literally crumble. Maybe the next governor of NJ will have better luck and a little more foresight.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #368  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2016, 3:38 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,018
The main criticism against having a new PABT on the Jersey side is that Jersey riders would no longer have a one-seat ride into Manhattan. Cuomo's comments are very interesting. For the $10-15 billion it would cost for a replacement and lack of political support on the NY side, Trans-Hudson rail capacity expansion may look more attractive.

I wonder if it's becoming more politically and financially feasible to extend the 7 line or PATH to Secaucus and placing a new PABT there, with a smaller terminal in Manhattan servicing just North Jersey.

It will piss off some Jersey riders, but Cuomo is not Governor of the Region and has made it clear that he doesn't care. lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #369  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2016, 3:42 PM
BStyles BStyles is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 557
Honestly, the 7's extension to Secaucus, to me, is an excuse to supplement the fact that the North River tubes are in desperate need of repairs, replacements and upgrades. Not to mention the capacity issues that will eventually plague the line should it become a success.

MTA is more in favor of extending the line downtown to make a connection to make connections with existing subway routes as opposed to going to New Jersey, which I have not heard any support on their side from. Upgrading commuter rail infrastructure is more feasible than extending a mass transit line outside the five boroughs in hopes of attracting ridership.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #370  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2016, 8:25 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by BStyles View Post
MTA is more in favor of extending the line downtown to make a connection to make connections with existing subway routes as opposed to going to New Jersey, which I have not heard any support on their side from. Upgrading commuter rail infrastructure is more feasible than extending a mass transit line outside the five boroughs in hopes of attracting ridership.
Do you have any supporting links to back up this claim? I've never heard that the MTA would like to run the 7 line downtown instead of NJ, but read plenty to the opposite.

http://www.nycedc.com/sites/default/...April_2013.pdf

The ridership is already there as PATH and the NJ Transit commuter lines are already at capacity. Even if there are no new riders, it would relieve the stress on the existing lines, and would add new trans-hudson capacity. That's vital for the economic health of the entire region. Especially as NYC becomes more expensive and NJ becomes an affordable alternative. New York City has not been building enough new affordable units to accommodate everyone being displaced by gentrification. And can you honestly say Staten Island is more deserving of a mass transit connection than Hudson County. The population density is 13,700 per mile and is growing rapidly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #371  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2016, 10:04 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,375
It seems like the tail tracks extending to 25th have been sort of casually described as possibly being extending southward in the future. Whether that was uttered by someone from MTA I don't recall.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #372  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2016, 5:48 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
The main criticism against having a new PABT on the Jersey side is that Jersey riders would no longer have a one-seat ride into Manhattan.
That's common sense. It's ridiculous for anyone to suggests that the terminal be moved to Jersey. It would be just as ridiculous to suggest both Penn and Grand Central be moved out of Manhattan. Or being even more ridiculous, having all subways terminate before entering Manhattan (there will be ferries coming). Direct access is key, and a primary reason NJ Transit trains that only terminated in Hoboken now have a direct connection to Manhattan through Penn.

If anything, the Port Authority should be broken up.



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/ny...Fnyregion&_r=0

Battle Over New Bus Terminal Threatens to Paralyze Port Authority’s Board

By PATRICK McGEEHAN
DEC. 6, 2016


Quote:
After three years of planning for a new bus terminal in Manhattan, the commissioners of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey still agree that New York City badly needs one. But, as the nasty debate over paying for it has spilled out in public, they appear to agree on little else.

The discord has threatened to paralyze the board that oversees the agency and that is responsible for transportation projects critical to the region. When the time came on Friday to publish the board’s monthly agenda, the agency punted, hinting that Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York, a Democrat, might instruct his appointees not to conduct any business, just as he did before the board’s previous meeting.

When the agenda for the meeting this week finally appeared on Monday afternoon, it suggested that politicians from the opposite sides of the Hudson River had still not bridged their differences. They may still be billions of dollars apart in their views on how the agency should spend the money it collects from tolls and transportation fees.

The battle over the bus terminal shows just how quickly the Port Authority can fall into the kind of dysfunction that allowed appointees of Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, a Republican, to spitefully close lanes at the George Washington Bridge in 2013. Mr. Christie has since stepped back from the agency, but the tussle for influence over its vast finances has remained fierce.

It has caused at least one of Mr. Cuomo’s associates to quit abruptly and has drawn in city and state officials from both states, as well as Representative Jerrold Nadler, a Manhattan Democrat. Accusations of bad-faith bargaining have flown back and forth. Mr. Nadler went so far as to question the motivations of the agency’s chairman, John J. Degnan, and to call on him to recuse himself from deliberations over the bus terminal.

On Monday, Mr. Nadler declined to discuss his allegation. But he said of Mr. Degnan, “All I do know is that the New York people at the Port Authority, and the governor’s people, they all say that he’s been just dictatorial on everything.”

Angered by the attacks, Mr. Degnan, a Christie appointee, has planted his feet and squared up for a fight. “I am the chairman of the Port Authority,” he said. “The Port Authority needs to work with the governors, but it should not be submissive to either one of them.”

No decisions have been made about how or where to replace the 66-year-old terminal, a destination widely derided as forlorn, and one that is overrun by over 115,000 daily commuters from New Jersey and beyond. But there is general agreement that the solution must include a new or revamped terminal within a few blocks of the existing one, on Eighth Avenue in Manhattan.

The crux of the current dispute is how much money the authority should commit to the project. The commissioners have been wrestling all year with a revision of the agency’s 10-year capital plan. That budget, drawn up in 2014, did not include any money for the bus terminal.

Facing cost estimates of $3.7 billion to $15.3 billion, Mr. Degnan has demanded that at least $3.5 billion of the capital plan be designated for the terminal. But on Tuesday, Richard Azzopardi, a spokesman for Mr. Cuomo, said the governor would agree to that only if at least two-thirds of the total was effectively contributed by New Jersey. “Asking New Yorkers to shoulder the burden of a $10 billion project many of them won’t ever use is a bad deal and a non-starter,” he said.


Jameson W. Doig, a professor emeritus at Princeton who has chronicled the history of the Port Authority, said he had been told that Mr. Cuomo did not want his appointees to attend the board meeting in November while the dispute was unresolved. One of them, Steve Cohen, who was the vice chairman of the board, skipped the meeting and resigned.

Mr. Cohen was the second Cuomo appointees to depart in the last few months, leaving the New York commissioners outnumbered, six to four. The previous vice chairman, Scott Rechler, left this fall.

Mr. Doig said although there had been gridlock at the agency in the past, he could not recall another instance of a governor’s asking commissioners to boycott a board meeting.

“We know that Governor Cuomo has been very interested in having substantial funds to carry out projects that he thinks are important,” he said, alluding to Mr. Cuomo’s championing of an overhaul of La Guardia Airport. “From his point of view, the bus terminal is not one of them.”

Mr. Azzopardi said: “The law provides that either governor can veto any action of the Port Authority. So if someone wants to run the Port Authority, they should run for governor.”

Mr. Nadler said he thought $2 billion was fair because the Port Authority was including the same amount in the capital plan for a project to build train tunnels under the Hudson River, known as Gateway, which is critical to improving travel in the region.

No draft of the revised capital plan has been released, and the agency has not said how much would go for the Gateway project. Steve Coleman, a spokesman for the agency, said late on Monday that he had no answers to questions about the capital plan.

It was not clear whether the commissioners would have answers when they gather for their monthly board meeting on Thursday. The delayed agenda indicated that they would vote on a resolution to publish a draft of the capital plan by Dec. 19.

After that, the resolution says, the agency would invite the public to join in the debate over how it should spend more than $28 billion in capital funds. Public hearings will be held before any final decisions are made, according to the resolution.

That is a very different process than the authority has used in the past, though it is, essentially, the same process the agency adopted to ram through an unpopular, steep toll increase in 2011.

The public hearings are likely to draw crowds, given the strong reactions to the agency’s previous decisions about the bus terminal.

New Jersey officials fear the agency will decide to build a satellite depot in their state, forcing many bus riders to transfer to PATH trains to reach Manhattan. Residents of the Hell’s Kitchen neighborhood, which surrounds the terminal, fear eminent domain will be invoked to take private property for the project.

Last week, a group of New Jersey officials gathered in Hackensack, N.J., to call for a commitment to fully fund a new terminal on the West Side of Manhattan that would preserve a one-seat ride for commuters. Stephen M. Sweeney, a New Jersey Democrat who is the president of the State Senate, said $2 billion would be too little to ensure that the project moved forward.

State Senator Loretta Weinberg, a Bergen County Democrat, said $2 billion was “ not nearly enough to guarantee a commitment to the bus terminal.” Ms. Weinberg said she thought that she and the New Jersey officials had reached the framework of an agreement more than a month ago, and was caught off-guard when the debate turned hostile. Ms. Weinberg said she hoped “cooler heads will prevail” when the commissioners meet and try to wrap up the capital plan.

Mr. Doig said he believed that the infighting was avoidable.

“The kind of severe political meddling that we’ve seen in the last six years is not inescapable,” he said. “You need to have governors who think about the important issues the region faces as opposed to thinking, Let’s find a way to use the Port Authority and its money to enhance my reputation.”
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #373  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 3:02 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,844
Port Authority approves $32B to revamp bus terminal, airports



Quote:
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey reached a deal on how to fund parts of the new 42nd Street bus terminal, airport renovations and other projects, approving a preliminary $32 billion capital-works plan Thursday.

Under the plan, New York State will pay a third of $3.5 billion earmarked for the construction of a new bus terminal, with New Jersey forking over the rest. The project is expected to cost $10 billion, and the authority hopes the federal government will chip in as well.


The two states had been arguing over who should pay what share, and the preliminary funding plan could still be scuttled: the Port Authority’s board will vote on it following public review, and the governor of either state can veto it.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo secured $2.9 billion for the LaGuardia airport revamp he has championed, and another $2.5 billion for a John F. Kennedy airport overhaul announced earlier this week. Another $2.7 billion will pay for debt service on the Amtrak Gateway project to fix bridges and tunnels.

Cuomo has clashed with the Port Authority’s chair John Degnan over projects. On Thursday, Degnan, of New Jersey, said “the capital plan is not a function of any disagreements I might have with the governor.”

The Port Authority was initially scheduled to approve the preliminary plan in December, but postponed it amid a dispute over the bus terminal.
========================
http://therealdeal.com/2017/01/06/po...inal-airports/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #374  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 5:19 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,018
Cuomo is spending billions revamping JFK, LGA and Penn Station. PABT appears not to be priority and Christie has been hands off PABT since...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #375  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 10:15 PM
BBMW BBMW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 89
^
Why would the PABT be a priority for Cuomo? It mostly exists to service Jersey commuters. All NYC/S gets out if is diesel exhaust.

In point of fact, it's a bit of a blight in Manhattan, and should be moved to across the river (as has been discussed extensively above.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #376  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 12:53 AM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
^ Those NJ commuters provides a very large workforce for many NYC companies, which in turn provides the necessary revenue the liberal NYC politicians need to fund their social programs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #377  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 5:09 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
^ Those NJ commuters provides a very large workforce for many NYC companies, which in turn provides the necessary revenue the liberal NYC politicians need to fund their social programs.
You have that backwards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #378  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 1:33 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1052 View Post
You have that backwards.
How so?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #379  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 3:28 PM
Gantz Gantz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
That's common sense. It's ridiculous for anyone to suggests that the terminal be moved to Jersey.
If citizens of New Jersey want the PABT so much, why don't you pay for it with your own tax money? Cuomo's offer of paying 1/3 of the cost of the PABT is very reasonable imo, why should citizens of New York State foot the bill for Christie? Clearly, the governor of New Jersey, who is the representative of the people in the state, doesn't want the PABT at all. Whats next, Cuomo should pay for NJ turnpike as well, just because it brings NJ residents to NYC?

Quote:
It would be just as ridiculous to suggest both Penn and Grand Central be moved out of Manhattan. Or being even more ridiculous, having all subways terminate before entering Manhattan (there will be ferries coming). Direct access is key, and a primary reason NJ Transit trains that only terminated in Hoboken now have a direct connection to Manhattan through Penn.
Penn and Grand Central actually service New Yorkers, we don't mind paying for those.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #380  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 4:09 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,018
I have to say I'm thoroughly enjoying the debate on this topic! Personally, I think there needs to be two terminals, with the larger one on the NJ side with train access to the city.
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:49 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.