The MTA isn't exceptionally well run, but one thing the subway does provide is consistent 24-7 service and replacement service when they do work, two things which the PA has fought. And the MTA (even with delays) expanded the 7 and is working on the 2nd ave line. With the PA, it was only when David Samson "lobbied" United for a flight to his summer home that the PA contemplated expanding the PATH to EWR, and the study alone is costing millions.
My other idea would be make a commission with members of the cities that are stakeholders on the PATH line, perhaps even voted on by the city residents.
The way the federal law is worded, the PA has control where the work is interstate, and thus the GWB would be in their purview but not the Tap (without looking I don't know has that but my guess is the Thruway Authority). That said, I understand why both states want a say and why those connections are federally important for security reasons.
In terms of the airports I think there can be flexibility. IMO EWR and JFK are good, not great, versus some other major hubs I've been to (LAX awful; Heathrow pleasant).
Fair enough. I've actually done work on the 2nd Avenue line for over two years now, and it's very far along. It's still on budget and scheduled to open next new year's day, and at worst may be a few months late while the new-old system's kinks are worked out. The thing is that MTA Capital Construction is fully responsible for new stations and/or construction, not the core agency division that runs the exisiting system and performs routine maintenance.
I tend to think that with the Port Authority, the facilities/crossings/PATH are better-maintained, but expansion/new construction has a better chance of being poorly managed. My firm used to provide C.M. for the World Trade Center, but tapped out several years ago because it was getting too ridiculous. The Gateway Tunnel project, currently in its initial stages to replace & supplement the Hudson rail tunnels, is being done in conjunction between Amtrak and the Port Authority, with the MTA and both NY/NJ on tap for financing (which is how it should have been done in the first place).
And for your information, the Tappan Zee bridge is indeed maintained by the New York State Thruway Authority. The whole reason the bridge was located there was to fall outside the Port Authority's 25 mile "range of influence". The more reasonable $5 one-way toll to cross an exceptionally wide portion of the Hudson River probably explains that as well.
Last edited: