PABT may get $10 Billion overhaul

[GojiMet86]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/21/nyregion/port-authority-bus-terminal.html

 

Quote

 

Notorious’ Port Authority Bus Terminal May Get a $10 Billion Overhaul
After years of study and debate, there is finally a proposal to rebuild the Midtown Manhattan eyesore from the ground up.

By Patrick McGeehan and Winnie Hu
Jan. 21, 2021
Updated 2:20 p.m. ET

Few public spaces in the country have been derided so thoroughly and so often as the Port Authority Bus Terminal in the heart of Manhattan.

The dreary 70-year-old station, with its leaky ceilings and dingy vestibules, has become synonymous with the overburdened, crumbling infrastructure that has made commuting in New York City a grim slog.

Now, the agency that operates the bus terminal — the busiest in the country — has settled on a final proposal for transforming it into a 21st-century transit hub capable of handling many more buses.

The project’s announcement on Thursday follows the opening on Jan. 1 of the Moynihan Train Hall, a majestic, light-filled terminus meant to alleviate overcrowding and offer a far more appealing gateway to New York than Pennsylvania Station, which is arguably the most miserable train hub in the United States.

Taken together, the projects, along with the rebuilding of La Guardia Airport and an overhaul of Kennedy International Airport, signal an ambitious rebuilding of New York’s tattered infrastructure after decades of decline, and they could provide the city a vital boost as it struggles to recover from the pandemic.

The bus terminal plan, which has been in the works for more than seven contentious years, would cost as much as $10 billion and could take a decade to complete. It comes amid a steep decline in the financial condition of the agency, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, that operates the terminal.

The agency hopes to get help in financing the project by selling rights to put a commercial tower on top of the expanded terminal and build three other high-rises nearby.

The Port Authority is counting on federal aid to avoid jeopardizing plans for major improvements to other transportation facilities it operates in the region, including La Guardia and Kennedy, as well as Newark Liberty International Airport.

Port Authority officials estimated that, by early next year, the pandemic would have wiped out about $3 billion in expected revenue largely because of the plunge in air travel.

Even though several big projects stand in line ahead of the bus terminal in the Port Authority’s building plans, agency officials say their intention to replace it is staunch.

“The Port Authority is committed to dramatically transforming one of the region’s most notorious and out-of-date transit facilities,” said Rick Cotton, the agency’s executive director.

Mr. Cotton said it was too soon to provide a reliable estimate of the project’s cost, which has been projected in the past at $7.5 billion to $10 billion. The proposal, which he called “ingenious,” must still get through environmental reviews before it can compete for any federal funding. He said the agency had a “10-year time frame” for completing the project.

An earlier proposal had caused an uproar among community leaders because it suggested the liberal use of eminent domain powers to relocate the terminal. But the revised plan is less likely to rile up the terminal’s neighbors in the Hell’s Kitchen neighborhood because it does not include the taking of any private property.

Instead, they would rebuild and enlarge the existing bus terminal while keeping it open for travelers.

The new proposal also addresses a constant complaint of Manhattan residents: the steady stream of intercity buses that pick up and drop passengers at various curbsides, snarling traffic and blocking sidewalks. The plan calls for building a depot west of the main terminal that could accommodate those buses and provide storage for others.

The Port Authority has eliminated several alternatives, including building the new terminal under the old one, under the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center or in New Jersey.

“They’ve come up with a much better plan than they had originally,” said Thomas K. Wright, chief executive of the Regional Plan Association, an influential planning group.

Mr. Wright said replacing the terminal is a necessity no matter how much it costs because of the integral role it plays in the city’s daily commute. More than 250,000 people passed through it on a typical weekday before the pandemic, according to the Port Authority. Since March, that traffic has dropped by more than 65 percent.

“New York ceases to exist without its connections to the surrounding communities and the work force,” Mr. Wright said. “Without it, the city enters into a period of decline.”

The bus terminal, a brick hulk perched at the mouth of the Lincoln Tunnel, has long exceeded its capacity — when it opened in late 1950, it was expected to handle 60,000 passengers a day. Though the station was rehabilitated in the early 1980s, it cannot accommodate the crush of commuters mostly from New Jersey that use it in normal times.

The Port Authority wants the new terminal to be able to handle 1,000 buses during the peak evening rush hour, up from about 850 today. It also would be designed to provide charging equipment for electric buses, according to the plan.

Buses may be less romantic than trains, but other big cities have been investing in their bus transit systems to help alleviate traffic and pollution from cars. More than a dozen American cities, including San Francisco, Denver and Raleigh, N.C., have moved in the past decade to build new bus stations or create multimodal transit hubs that bring together bus and rail services, said Joseph P. Schwieterman, a professor of public service at DePaul University in Chicago.

“You get a lot of bang for your buck with bus terminals because you can pack so much into a small space and move a lot of people,” Mr. Schwieterman said.

In San Francisco, a $2.2 billion regional transportation hub, the Salesforce Transit Center, consolidated regional bus service in 2018 in a terminal that covers more than four downtown blocks and includes a fitness center, stores and a rooftop park. There are plans to add rail service that would connect with the region and state.

Of course, no American city compares to New York in the sheer number of buses that converge on it every morning during rush hours. In addition to the suburban commuter fleets, the city is a hub for regional and national bus companies and has the largest municipal bus system in the nation.

“New York is in a class of its own with its massive schedule of operations,” Mr. Schwieterman said. “You have this crush of motor coaches during rush hour. It’s a tremendous logistical challenge.”

But the questions of what to do and how to pay for a new bus terminal have bedeviled officials of the Port Authority for years. In early 2017, after heated debates among its commissioners, the agency inserted $3.5 billion into its long-term capital plan for replacing the terminal.

The project will cost far more than that, Mr. Cotton said. But the agency hopes to raise much of the balance by selling development rights and striking a deal with the city to allow the developers to make payments toward the project in lieu of local taxes.

The agency also intends to seek federal transportation funds, which it does not normally receive. Port Authority projects usually are paid for with a combination of the agency’s own money and contributions from private developers. The agency collects tolls at its bridges and tunnels that connect New York City to New Jersey, and fees and rents at its airports, seaport and other facilities.

Port Authority officials have pleaded for emergency aid to compensate for the revenue it has lost during the pandemic.

“We’ve been sounding this alarm since the early weeks of last spring,” Mr. Cotton said. “We believe the projects in the Port Authority capital plan can make a major contribution to restarting the economy, and we can have a big impact in terms of near-term spending on projects that are ready to go.”

 

 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I've been involved in this project going back a few years. Some people are not thrilled about this project, in that it doesn't appear to be expanding capacity, and comes in with a high price tag to boot. Should've been having hearings on this going back to last year, but those were pushed back because of COVID. Any meetings now will be done remotely.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[R10 2952]

People keep talking about building a new terminal, but I honestly think there are ways they can make the existing facility work if they just rebuilt some things and exapnded by adding an extra wing or level.  Granted, PABT isn't perfect, but then, nothing in New York really is; GWB terminal sucks, and the South Jersey routes to Lower Manhattan don't even have a dedicated facility of their own.

Would like to see them at least seriously consider the 10th-41st station for the , though- real missed opportunity there. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by R10 2952

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, R10 2952 said:

People keep talking about building a new terminal, but I honestly think there are ways they can make the existing facility work if they just rebuilt some things and exapnded by adding an extra wing or level.  Granted, PABT isn't perfect, but then, nothing in New York really is; GWB terminal sucks, and the South Jersey routes to Lower Manhattan don't even have a dedicated facility of their own.

Would like to see them at least seriously consider the 10th-41st station for the , though- real missed opportunity there. 

As someone who uses that terminal, that place needs to go. The layout is like a rat maze. 

[R10 2952]

20 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

As someone who uses that terminal, that place needs to go. The layout is like a rat maze. 

I've been using PABT for over 20 years; I know it's shitty.  Replacement isn't the only option, though- they reconfigured things when expanding the terminal in '79-81, they could do the same this time around if need be.  Starting from scratch costs a lot of money, especially in the context of construction.

Edited January 22, 2021 by R10 2952

[Via Garibaldi 8]

20 minutes ago, R10 2952 said:

I've been using PABT for over 20 years; I know it's shitty.  Replacement isn't the only option, though- they reconfigured things when expanding the terminal in '79-81, they could do the same this time around if need be.  Starting from scratch costs a lot of money, especially in the context of construction.

They're not starting from scratch though. They're building on top of the existing structure.

[Mtatransit]

5 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

People keep talking about building a new terminal, but I honestly think there are ways they can make the existing facility work if they just rebuilt some things and exapnded by adding an extra wing or level.  Granted, PABT isn't perfect, but then, nothing in New York really is; GWB terminal sucks, and the South Jersey routes to Lower Manhattan don't even have a dedicated facility of their own.

Would like to see them at least seriously consider the 10th-41st station for the , though- real missed opportunity there. 

GWB is not too bad these days. They did renovate that terminal a couple of years back. But PABT really sucks

[oknazevad]

The changes to the GWB bus station are like night and day. It's not a crap hole anymore. It's still underutilized, though, mostly because people commuting to Manhattan still mostly want to go to midtown or downtown, not way up in Washington Heights. 
 

As for the PABT, any level of reconfiguration that it would need to become functional for modern use would be pretty much just as extensive as rebuilding from scratch anyway. As noted in the Times article, the decks themselves aren't robust enough for the weight of all the buses they want to be able to handle there. So if you need to rebuild the most critical part of the physical plant of the building, the whole thing should just be rebuilt from the bottom up. Oh, and the place is barely ADA compliant, so there's that issue as well.
 

And the plan does include expansion in a way. Per the scoping report (found here), the first stage of construction would be to build a temporary facility on the block bounded by 9th and 10th aves and 39th and 40th streets, which would be used while the main terminal is rebuilt, and then after the terminal is done would become a midday layover facility for parking buses without having to go back to Jersey, and could also accommodate some of the intercity buses that currently use street boarding because there's no room at the PABT. So, at some point in the future, Megabus would likely wind up there, for example, either in the main terminal or the western adjunct. Though I would expect that operators will angle for the main building, as it's the part that's directly connected to transit. 
 

Which, by the way, is exactly why they're going with a build-in-place option instead of earlier ideas of a new facility a couple of blocks west. Almost every customer survey said in no uncertain terms that not having the direct subway connection was a fatal flaw (to use the exact wording in the scoping document). 

[R10 2952]

I see your point, but then the question with PABT becomes; if a plan is decided to either renovate/expand/fully-rebuild the current terminal at 410 West 40th, why not simply divert a sizeable chunk of service up to GWB for the duration? It would allow the Port Authority a freer hand in renovating PABT, and if properly communicated (making it clear to passengers that the diversions are necessary to speed up PABT renovations) they could probably pull it off.  Not to mention taking advantage of lower ridership resulting from the current crisis.

On another note, I would say that one of the main reasons PABT became so overcrowded with intercity long-distance buses (pre-coronavirus of course) is because of the price gap between Greyhound and the like versus Amtrak.  In the last 15-20 years the Northeast Regional train service has really become overpriced; a lot of people who would otherwise take the train to Boston or DC are now taking buses because Amtrak prices have become ridiculous.  Most of us know why of course; Congressional Republicans refuse to increase funding for Amtrak, so Amtrak uses the NEC as a cash cow to subsidize and prop up the various loss-making routes all over Redneckistan that said Republicans won't let them abandon, despite refusing Amtrak's funding requests.  But I digress...

Perhaps the real issue, once all the layers of the onion have been peeled away, is a complete lack of coherent transportation policy and planning on the national level- because if there was, I'm damn sure people wouldn't be taking a damn bus all the way to Chicago or Atlanta if they could just take a train, or that government regulators would allow a plane flight to be priced lower than a train ride, for that matter.

Edited January 30, 2021 by R10 2952

[pkim87]

As someone who also utilizes the PABT, it needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up. The design and construction are sorely outdated and it is the ugliest building in NYC. Upon arriving, if you are lucky to be dropped off near an escalator, they are single-width and are always in disrepair. You have to expect to be going down stairs. There is only "one" long curb that buses use to discharge passengers in the upper level (unless the driver is nice or in a time crunch, he will go to his gate and discharge passengers there instead if it's too backed up). The 200-level gates are virtually non-ADA compliant (there is a very limited number of escalators). Once you get to the gate level, the "waiting area" and "Doors" are terribly designed. Might as well just make them unique gate numbers to avoid confusion. The bus has to make a double stop if someone has luggage since the bus lanes are so tight, flanked by waiting rooms on both sides. The HVAC here is in disrepair, hence the installation of ductless mini-splits with condensate drain lines haphazardly strung together and visible from adjacent waiting areas (and they are not always on or working). If your bus is scheduled to depart either at 10pm or just a slither before, it is always a gamble to go up the 200-gates before they close down, and you end up going up and back down the gates multiple times because someone tells you the bus should be coming at a 200 gate, but then the bus does not show. It will arrive at the 300-gate instead. The 300-level gates are just plain madness (though pre-pandemic) with mazes of people all around the floor trying to locate their gates then backtracking the line of people so they get on the correct line (and lack of windows does not help the ambiance nor if you need to "peek" to see what bus is outside since on occasion the bus will pull into the adjacent gate without any notice). You have to go through a line of folks waiting at a gate to go to the restroom during rush hour. These are just some of the things that give PABT a bad rap. We'll see how the air rights will be sold. With the dynamics of work changing due to the pandemic, there may not be the same demand for office or commercial space as there was before. At least they got this into the 10-year plan. It makes much more sense than the preposterous "EWR" PATH terminal in the middle of no man's land on the NEC, though I digress.

[Mtatransit]

On 1/30/2021 at 6:55 PM, R10 2952 said:

On another note, I would say that one of the main reasons PABT became so overcrowded with intercity long-distance buses (pre-coronavirus of course) is because of the price gap between Greyhound and the like versus Amtrak.  In the last 15-20 years the Northeast Regional train service has really become overpriced; a lot of people who would otherwise take the train to Boston or DC are now taking buses because Amtrak prices have become ridiculous.  Most of us know why of course; Congressional Republicans refuse to increase funding for Amtrak, so Amtrak uses the NEC as a cash cow to subsidize and prop up the various loss-making routes all over Redneckistan that said Republicans won't let them abandon, despite refusing Amtrak's funding requests.  But I digress...

PABT like NYP is crowded because of commuter traffic not long distance buses. Intercity bus in America has been on the decline since the 90's. So there is less and less Greyhound buses each year. Commuter traffic on the other hand is increasing. 

Local GOP has been pretty supportive of Amtrak. Its the Congressional ones that wanted to "zero out" amtrak

28 minutes ago, pkim87 said:

As someone who also utilizes the PABT, it needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up. The design and construction are sorely outdated and it is the ugliest building in NYC. Upon arriving, if you are lucky to be dropped off near an escalator, they are single-width and are always in disrepair. You have to expect to be going down stairs. There is only "one" long curb that buses use to discharge passengers in the upper level (unless the driver is nice or in a time crunch, he will go to his gate and discharge passengers there instead if it's too backed up). The 200-level gates are virtually non-ADA compliant (there is a very limited number of escalators). Once you get to the gate level, the "waiting area" and "Doors" are terribly designed. Might as well just make them unique gate numbers to avoid confusion. The bus has to make a double stop if someone has luggage since the bus lanes are so tight, flanked by waiting rooms on both sides. The HVAC here is in disrepair, hence the installation of ductless mini-splits with condensate drain lines haphazardly strung together and visible from adjacent waiting areas (and they are not always on or working). If your bus is scheduled to depart either at 10pm or just a slither before, it is always a gamble to go up the 200-gates before they close down, and you end up going up and back down the gates multiple times because someone tells you the bus should be coming at a 200 gate, but then the bus does not show. It will arrive at the 300-gate instead. The 300-level gates are just plain madness (though pre-pandemic) with mazes of people all around the floor trying to locate their gates then backtracking the line of people so they get on the correct line (and lack of windows does not help the ambiance nor if you need to "peek" to see what bus is outside since on occasion the bus will pull into the adjacent gate without any notice). You have to go through a line of folks waiting at a gate to go to the restroom during rush hour. These are just some of the things that give PABT a bad rap. We'll see how the air rights will be sold. With the dynamics of work changing due to the pandemic, there may not be the same demand for office or commercial space as there was before. At least they got this into the 10-year plan. It makes much more sense than the preposterous "EWR" PATH terminal in the middle of no man's land on the NEC, though I digress.

I agree 100%. PABT needs to be completely rebuilt from scratch. There is nothing you can do to "fix" that building. You can gut the interior and start over, but at that point it may as well be cheaper to just start over again.