Jump to content
jis

Amtrak Gateway and NJ HSR

Recommended Posts

By the time this is completed and operational, I'm pretty sure my current teenage boys will be married, with adult children. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NJT is putting their money up, hoping the Feds do the same.

 

New Jersey to Borrow More to Help Pay for Portal Bridge Replacement

 

Here is a not so brief fair use quote. Hopefully, the mods will trim as necessary:

 

 

Earlier this year, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao challenged New York and New Jersey to put more “skin in the game” to pay for the Gateway program, which includes the replacement of the Portal Bridge at Kearny, N.J.

A senior official in the administration of New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy said Wednesday: “They asked us for skin in the game. We are showing them we’ve got skin in the game.”

Until this week, New York and New Jersey had jointly committed more than $600 million toward the $1.7 billion bridge project. But federal transportation officials viewed the commitment with skepticism.

The Trump administration saw the plan for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to take out a federal loan of almost $300 million as not counting toward local funding for the project.

Although New Jersey had also committed to a bond issuance of more than $300 million for the bridge, no formal authorization for such an issuance had been given.

That changed this week when New Jersey Economic Development Authority approved the sale of $600 million in bonds to pay for the bridge. NJ Transit will repay the money in the form of rental payments funded by New Jersey’s Transportation Trust Fund.

The Port Authority is expected to shift its commitment to cover almost $300 million in federal loans to other projects that are part of Gateway, pending approval of the agency’s board.

The new Portal Bridge project is fully designed and has all of the necessary regulatory approvals. But it is in limbo after the Trump administration held up federal funding while suggesting that New York and New Jersey should contribute more to the project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

NJT is putting their money up, hoping the Feds do the same.

 

New Jersey to Borrow More to Help Pay for Portal Bridge Replacement

 

Here is a not so brief fair use quote. Hopefully, the mods will trim as necessary:

 

 

Earlier this year, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao challenged New York and New Jersey to put more “skin in the game” to pay for the Gateway program, which includes the replacement of the Portal Bridge at Kearny, N.J.

A senior official in the administration of New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy said Wednesday: “They asked us for skin in the game. We are showing them we’ve got skin in the game.”

Until this week, New York and New Jersey had jointly committed more than $600 million toward the $1.7 billion bridge project. But federal transportation officials viewed the commitment with skepticism.

The Trump administration saw the plan for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to take out a federal loan of almost $300 million as not counting toward local funding for the project.

Although New Jersey had also committed to a bond issuance of more than $300 million for the bridge, no formal authorization for such an issuance had been given.

That changed this week when New Jersey Economic Development Authority approved the sale of $600 million in bonds to pay for the bridge. NJ Transit will repay the money in the form of rental payments funded by New Jersey’s Transportation Trust Fund.

The Port Authority is expected to shift its commitment to cover almost $300 million in federal loans to other projects that are part of Gateway, pending approval of the agency’s board.

The new Portal Bridge project is fully designed and has all of the necessary regulatory approvals. But it is in limbo after the Trump administration held up federal funding while suggesting that New York and New Jersey should contribute more to the project.

 

Good thing Christie is gone... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New computer simulation movie clips for trains running on the new Portal Bridge and the Gateway tunnels have been posted to illustrate what the completed projects would look like. The Portal bridge simulation has a 3-D movie format. The Gateway tunnel simulation is a little different in that it has both a look-down views at the top of the screen and a cross-section view at the bottom of the screen showing how deep the tunnels will be at different locations.

 

https://www.rtands.com/uncategorized/new-animations-depict-completed-portal-north-bridge-and-hudson-river-tunnels

Edited by DSS&A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great video's...the local television station's only played a very short clip from them...thanks so much for posting them! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the video, but did scroll thru the other...

Just curious why the new tunnel doesn't just go straight across, parallel to the old tunnel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just curious why the new tunnel doesn't just go straight across, parallel to the old tunnel?

Because they are larger diameter bore than the old tunnels and they are being bored deeper to provide for a guaranteed protective thick layer of earth below the river bed between the river bed and the top of the bore. Because it has to go deeper using a grade limited to 2.3%, they have to be longer than the old tunnels. The only way to get greater length between two fixed points is to curve the route. Of course the other concern about getting too close to the old tunnels was that that may not be good for the health of the old tunnels.

 

In spite of using a deeper path, there is about 300'-400' at the New York end where the top of the tunnel will be too close to the river bed. This will require pre-grouting the river bed to solidify it enough to be able to withstand the TBM drilling through it without blowing out to the river bed. PRR can probably repeat what he posted on this matter on railroad.net, where we discussed this matter sometime back.

 

Incidentally, for those that did not notice, this pair of tunnels will have cross passages connecting the two at regular intervals to facilitate escape from fire or other hazard in one tunnel to the other. This is why those that keep harping on building just one tunnel are whistling in the wind. Such a tunnel would be considerably less safe, unless a parallel escape tunnel is constructed. And if you have to do that then might as well make it a full size second tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Incidentally, for those that did not notice, this pair of tunnels will have cross passages connecting the two at regular intervals to facilitate escape from fire or other hazard in one tunnel to the other. This is why those that keep harping on building just one tunnel are whistling in the wind. Such a tunnel would be considerably less safe, unless a parallel escape tunnel is constructed. And if you have to do that then might as well make it a full size second tunnel.

 

JIS thanks for that point/ We have debated this before. Even the light rail bores now being done especially SEA use this same method. On the other end the Chunnel and Gottard Base tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just curious why the new tunnel doesn't just go straight across, parallel to the old tunnel?

Because they are larger diameter bore than the old tunnels and they are being bored deeper to provide for a guaranteed protective thick layer of earth below the river bed between the river bed and the top of the bore. Because it has to go deeper using a grade limited to 2.3%, they have to be longer than the old tunnels. The only way to get greater length between two fixed points is to curve the route. Of course the other concern about getting too close to the old tunnels was that that may not be good for the health of the old tunnels.

 

In spite of using a deeper path, there is about 300'-400' at the New York end where the top of the tunnel will be too close to the river bed. This will require pre-grouting the river bed to solidify it enough to be able to withstand the TBM drilling through it without blowing out to the river bed. PRR can probably repeat what he posted on this matter on railroad.net, where we discussed this matter sometime back.

 

Incidentally, for those that did not notice, this pair of tunnels will have cross passages connecting the two at regular intervals to facilitate escape from fire or other hazard in one tunnel to the other. This is why those that keep harping on building just one tunnel are whistling in the wind. Such a tunnel would be considerably less safe, unless a parallel escape tunnel is constructed. And if you have to do that then might as well make it a full size second tunnel.

 

 

This is what I posted. This reply was in response to a statement that the tunnel construction would not require river disturbance.

 

On the east (Manhattan) end of the proposed tunnel, the combination of inadequate cover (as low as 9.5 feet) and poor geotechnical conditions will not permit TBM boring without ground modification. This will impact tunnel construction in the river from a point 200 feet west of the Manhattan pierline and extending 550 feet west toward New Jersey. The method to stabilize the soil in this area will be grout injection - essentially pressure injecting columns of grout in a pattern that establishes a hardened layer from the riverbed to the midpoint of the proposed tunnel cross-sections. Once that hardened layer is established, the TBM will be able to safely bore the tunnels.

 

Due to the riverbed disturbance and material displacement, the grout injection work in the river will be performed within large sheetpile cofferdams - not unlike what would be used for cut and cover construction. Three rectangular sheetpile cofferdams will be installed sequentially from east to west: the first two being 200' linear by 120' wide and the third being 150' by 120'. Once a sheetpile cofferdam is in place, the water within the cofferdam will be pumped down in order to lower the interior water elevation to about two feet lower than the water elevation outside. This ensures water inflow and not outflow and will prevent disturbed material from exiting the cofferdam. Surrounding each cofferdam. a 100' perimeter area will be reserved for mooring of work barges. As the jet grouting proceeds, displaced material will be retained within the cofferdam, removed by excavators, and transported to an approved disposal site, Once an area is completed, turbid water will be processed, the cofferdam will be removed and the process will start over until all three sections are completed .

 

The three cofferdams, the grout injection wotk and associated material removal will be a substantial on-river operation. Is is kind of "cut and cover lite." As such, the work will be subject to permits and procedures from the USACE, the USCG and others for both the river work and material disposal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×