N.J. senators, Amtrak to announce new Hudson tunnel project

Jishnu wrote:Time for a bit of reality check, considering the amount of drool that is flowing here, as if this whole thing is a done deal.

The $50 million that is needed to study this, is something that Amtrak will have to find in its budget, which at present stands slashed by $248 million from their original request. If they had to choose between $50 million for this vs. $50 million to keep the Viewliner order alive this year, which one do you suppose they will choose? Political horse trading on this is only just about to begin. It was necessary to have a concrete something on paper for such to start, and that goal has been achieved. It is good that it is based on the NEC Master Plan, rather than a random twiddle added on. But that's about it for now.

Christie's pocketing $271 million of unreturned Fed grant money for ARC if they're sufficiently motivated to shake him down for it.

krtaylor wrote:So, to repeat myself: Forget about today's Superliners. But prepare for tomorrow's. There is such a thing as hi-level-platform-compatible bilevels as I am sure you are well aware.

I believe I already stated that if Amtrak wanted to build larger tunnels, then it was a good idea as long as it was being done for the proper reason (i.e. not just to get superliners into PSNY). As for "hi-level-platform-compatible bilevels", yes I should hope that I'm aware of them seeing as I just mentioned them in the post above yours.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

Jishnu wrote:Time for a bit of reality check, considering the amount of drool that is flowing here, as if this whole thing is a done deal.

The $50 million that is needed to study this, is something that Amtrak will have to find in its budget, which at present stands slashed by $248 million from their original request. If they had to choose between $50 million for this vs. $50 million to keep the Viewliner order alive this year, which one do you suppose they will choose? Political horse trading on this is only just about to begin. It was necessary to have a concrete something on paper for such to start, and that goal has been achieved. It is good that it is based on the NEC Master Plan, rather than a random twiddle added on. But that's about it for now.

Christie's pocketing $271 million of unreturned Fed grant money for ARC if they're sufficiently motivated to shake him down for it.

Spare us your political malarkey. Christie, nor the state of NJ, is pocketing any money. The Feds issued a bill for the money they had doled out which got spent on a project that eventually didn't get built. It's not as if that money went to a treasure chest where Christie is hiding it. Again, all the money got spent on property acquisitions and planning purposes which, if Amtrak is smart, they will take advantage of. The proposed line through NJ is basically exactly the same as the original ARC plan and there is no reason why Amtrak can't make use of the work NJT has already done.

cruiser939 wrote:Spare us your political malarkey.

The 'tude in that post is not necessary, sir.

The reason there's a spat going on is that some of the ARC parties do think he's pocketing money for roads that he needs to return. It'll be sorted out whether that's true or not, and Christie does sit at a slight advantage for keeping it. But it's not sorted out yet.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

cruiser939 wrote:Spare us your political malarkey.

The 'tude in that post is not necessary, sir.

The reason there's a spat going on is that some of the ARC parties do think he's pocketing money for roads that he needs to return. It'll be sorted out whether that's true or not, and Christie does sit at a slight advantage for keeping it. But it's not sorted out yet.

How does one pocket money that has already been spent? Besides what does any of it have to do with the fact that money will need to be found to first study the new proposal and then further money has to be appropriated to construct it. Even if Christie or NJ returned some money, it does not automatically get allocated for this or anything else. it could even be subject to rescission by the Congress. So I am afraid you need some additional reality check.

Jishnu wrote:So I am afraid you need some additional reality check.

$77 million was unspent. The Feds asked for $128 million back (I don't know the rationale for the difference, but a Google news search ought to fill in that detail). This letter from the Feds to the Director of NJ Transit is the request for return of the money: http://secondavenuesagas.com/wp-content ... unnel2.pdf. Second such official notice sent to them following the cancellation order.

Don't shoot the messenger and make false assumptions that this is my armchair opining. Read the on-the-record notice and surrounding news coverage and discuss from the merits (or lackthereof) of the Feds' official position. They're the ones who staked their own lawyers to it.

So, what actually needs to happen for this project to get funded? Anyone know what the position of the relevant House committee(s) is on this thing?

Ridgefielder wrote:So, what actually needs to happen for this project to get funded? Anyone know what the position of the relevant House committee(s) is on this thing?

Funding for the Gateway project itself will be years away at best. The first step is for Amtrak to get $50 million, which is listed as a separate item in their FY2012 funding request released today, to do the engineering design and study work. If some form of the President's 6 year Transportation plan is passed, then once the engineering study and FEIS is approved, multi-year funding for construction of the Gateway project would likely come from a combination of HSIPR grants, FTA grants and funding from the Port Authority, NJ Transit, maybe NY State and MTA?

Thanks to Cruiser and Jishnu for their fact-based posts. Here's why I think this isn't much different from ARC. First you've still got stub-end tracks which means that Amtrak won't use them except for Empire service so it'll be NJ Transit. Where will those NJ transit trains go? Probably a new yard in Secaucus. Where will those NJ Transit riders come from? Probably Bergen county -- yep the loop will be built. (Let the yelling begin!!!)

Oh and Cruiser is right -- the drilling through the Hudson River bulkhead was one of the main reasons ARC's station was deep under ground. Not sure how Amtrak's going to get around that or how they are going to buy an entire block of Manhattan real estate. (Again one of the reasons the ARC station was under 34th Street -- not Macy's -- was to avoid hassles with property owners.)

One reason this is far less likely to be built than ARC is the simple fact that Republicans in Congress will never give up trying to kill Amtrak and even under the best of scenarios this couldn't possibly get going until long AFTER Obama is gone from office.

I do hope something gets done. As a NJ Transit commuter ARC would have worked just fine for me. This plan isn't going to be better in my opinion -- if for no other reason than it will still allow Amtrak to screw up my commute.

However, looking on the bright side we'll have years and years of online fights about what's right or wrong with it.

bleet wrote:First you've still got stub-end tracks which means that Amtrak won't use them except for Empire service so it'll be NJ Transit.

That's true for the new platforms but not the tunnel. See the last page of http://lautenberg.senate.gov/assets/Gateway.pdf and the "I and L Ladder Extensions".

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

Jishnu wrote:So I am afraid you need some additional reality check.

$77 million was unspent. The Feds asked for $128 million back (I don't know the rationale for the difference, but a Google news search ought to fill in that detail). This letter from the Feds to the Director of NJ Transit is the request for return of the money: http://secondavenuesagas.com/wp-content ... unnel2.pdf. Second such official notice sent to them following the cancellation order.

Don't shoot the messenger and make false assumptions that this is my armchair opining. Read the on-the-record notice and surrounding news coverage and discuss from the merits (or lackthereof) of the Feds' official position. They're the ones who staked their own lawyers to it.

There seems to be some disconnect between you and what is actually going on here. The $77 million that went unspent got deobligated by the FTA. That's not money that Christie just thumbed his nose and hid under the mattress. That's money that the FTA never paid out and will retain. The $271 million that it did release was used already for planning purposes and land acquisition. I fail to see, and you've failed to explain, how Christie is pocketing any money here.

Is there any truth to the rumor that the clearances in the North (Hudson) River tubes are less than in the East River tubes? That some equipment, like Long Island Rail Road double deck cars can only get to Penn Station, New York from the East?
This could be a good reason to make new Hudson River tubes slightly bigger than the old ones.

JimBoylan wrote:Is there any truth to the rumor that the clearances in the North (Hudson) River tubes are less than in the East River tubes? That some equipment, like Long Island Rail Road double deck cars can only get to Penn Station, New York from the East?
This could be a good reason to make new Hudson River tubes slightly bigger than the old ones.

Actually the LIRR bilevels can fit through the Hudson River Tunnels. I have heard of our guys(Amtrak engineers) being involved in the testing along with LIRR train crews. They can fit as long as they had a straight shot out of the tunnels and thru say tracks 11-12 but they cant do all of the diverting moves on the X's or the ladders onto certain platforms because of clearances. This is why the NJT cars have the ends that they do on the roof line. The NJT cars are not restricted anywhere in NYP or in any tunnel.

So far, Chris Christie looks like the biggest winner from this announcement. It looks as if Christie was right about the escalation in overall project costs, so this proposal lends further credibility to his cancellation of the embarrassingly named ARC Tunnel. He also comes out looking like a hero, since the proposal allows him to posture himself as a supporter of the new project in the unlikely event in goes forwards, with absolutely no blame attached in the event that the new project isn't funded.

Now obviously, having another Hudson tunnel isn't a bad idea, and this proposal is less flawed than the ARC tunnel, although it still amounts to a "tunnel to nowhere." Considering the bleak funding situation in New York and New Jersey, not to mention the looming Federal deficit crisis and the shaky municipal bond market, it's hard to see where the money is going to come from. Unless the project can be funded directly from increased commuter fares, I don't see it happening any time soon, which is probably just as well.

Indeed, what wrong with approaching the project from the standpoint of recouping capital costs directly from commuters? Obviously it's a non-starter, because no commuter would ever wish to pay the staggering fares neccessary to pay for this, or any other, Hudson tunnel project. Of course, why should federal taxpayers or upstate New York taxpayers pay for a tunnel that primarily benefits New Jersey residents?

goodnightjohnwayne wrote: Of course, why should federal taxpayers or upstate New York taxpayers pay for a tunnel that primarily benefits New Jersey residents?

Perhaps because in the net New Jersey subsidizes the overall federal taxpayer, and upstate New York would be poorer than an average third world country if it was not subsidized by New York City taxpayers?

Also the Gateway Proposal actually serves the entire Northeast Corridor as opposed to just New Jersey residents. It certainly is not a tunnel to nowhere. it is a tunnel to Penn Station with all sorts of through running possibilities. It is Amtrak that gets the most out of it proportionately. MNRR and LIRR also get additional capacity to use. Please take the trouble to read the entire proposal.