Gateway Project/New York Penn Station capacity improvement

Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
NYT editorial on the proposal from Cuomo and Christie to pay for 1/2 the cost of Gateway (or whatever they think should be built): Half a Tunnel Is a Good Start. Unlike the WSJ, this is not behind a paywall (until you get to 10 NYT articles in a month).

Excerpt:

Many issues need to be resolved. It’s welcome news that Mr. Cuomo has hopped aboard — at one point he said it was “not my tunnel,” but rather New Jersey’s and Amtrak’s. He insists he will go forward if the federal government provides, as he put it in an interview with The Times, “cash, not loans” for its half of the deal. The final agreement will almost certainly involve a complicated payment plan with contributions from all sources.

Amtrak has already spent more than $300 million to begin designing Gateway and to preserve its right of way, including underground space beneath Manhattan’s booming West Side. Eventually, however, Congress must come through in a major way, increasing funds devoted to mass transit and allowing the rerouting of some of the resources the government devotes to roads to a project of vital importance to as many as 200,000 riders a day on Amtrak and New Jersey Transit.
Click to expand...
 
Both Christie and Cuomo are advocating for new tunnels.

But they do not specifically say Gateway. Could ARC or Seven Subway Extension to Secaucus be back on track?

If they want the Fed's to pay half in grants, I don't see how this is possible. Perhaps an Amtrak RRIF Loan can be part of the Fed's half?
 
http://www.northjersey.com/news/nj-transit-agrees-to-lead-environmental-review-for-hudson-tunnel-project-1.1423177?page=all

NJ Transit has agreed to lead the environmental review necessary to build a new tunnel under the Hudson River, U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said Thursday. Amtrak will perform preliminary engineering on the project, and the U.S. Department of Transportation will speed approval of environmental permits, Foxx said.

......
Click to expand...
But there is no funding source identified to fund even the EIS at present.

This also clearly indicates that the Federal DOT is not terribly excited about the Cuomo/Christie idea of giving over control of the tunnel to the corrupt Port Authority, and the joint NY and NJ corruption ring.

The author of the article is wrong in stating that the Gateway tunnels follow the same path as the NJT ARC ones. They do not either horizontally or vertically. They are on a completely different alignment with steeper gradients allowing it to connect to the tunnel boxes that are being constructed near Penn Station.
 
Obviously many questions remain over who contributes and what amounts for the EIS process, but this is real progress. If the EIS process can be expedited or fast-tracked, that will save money. And lots of questions on who makes the final decisions on the configuration. If NJT takes the lead on the EIS, are they going to impose changes that favor NJT short term thinking over Amtrak or future capacity and HSR options for the entire NEC?

NYT article on NJT joining with Amtrak on the EIS: Early Planning for New Hudson Rail Tunnel Is Underway, U.S. Transportation Secretary Says.

The federal transportation secretary said on Thursday that officials were taking important initial steps to accelerate long-stalled plans to build a new rail tunnel under the Hudson River.

Speaking at a business breakfast in Manhattan, the secretary, Anthony Foxx, said that New Jersey Transit had agreed to lead the project’s environmental study and that Amtrak would oversee engineering work.

Mr. Foxx said federal officials would shorten the timeline for approving permits and would discuss federal grants and other financing options with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the agency that could be designated to oversee the project.
Click to expand...
....

The Gateway proposal, which includes a new two-tube rail tunnel, an expanded Pennsylvania Station, a replacement for the Portal Bridge in New Jersey and other upgrades, could happen in phases, Mr. Foxx said, with the new tunnel being the first priority.

“All of that is up for discussion,” he said. “I can’t answer those questions for the region. They have to come together and start answering those questions for themselves. What I can say is that I’m going to be as helpful as I can be in helping them accelerate on the scope they agree to.”
Click to expand...
So what about the north Portal bridge replacement? Where is the funding for it?
 
It is not clear to me whether the Portal Bridge cost is now considered to be the grand $20 billion for Gateway or not. Of course there is no money allocated for anything yet, and it is not known how much the EIS and preliminary engineering will actually cost either. Yes it is progress, but there are many more steps of progress that needs to take place. I am glad that Foxx seems to be pushing a reluctant bunch of blowhards from the NY/NJ area to actually put some wheels on rails, in a manner of speaking.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Andrew said:
The link below is from NJ Transit's board meeting that has the NEPA process expected to get completed in September of 2018. But, does this include the Record of Decision?
Click to expand...
The answer appears to be in the NJT board agenda document you provided the link for. The proposed schedule is 36 months from a Notice to Proceed is given to the consultant team to complete and receive a Record of Decision from the FRA. But that is only a proposed schedule. It will ultimately be up to the FRA and US DOT as to how long they take to review the NEPA and PE documents, ask for additional information and responses from the NEPA/PE team, and issue a official Record of Decision.
 
There is a 1/4 page size ad on page A15 of the October 26 Washington Post from Amtrak pushing for the Hudson Tunnel Project. I don't have an image handy, but the ad shows a HSR type trainset and a electric locomotive emerging from two sets of tunnel entrances with the NY skyline in the background.

The text is:

"Each day, 200,000 people move in and out of the world's economic capital through a tunnel that is 105 years old."

"The Hudson Tunnel Project"

"It's time to build"

So, Amtrak is continuing to push for funding for Gateway or, what could be the new name, the Hudson Tunnel Project. If the Hudson Tunnel Project refers to the entire Gateway project (or maybe all of it minus NYP South), arguably a better name for getting funding.
 
News report from Politico New York on the negotiations on setting up a new development authority to oversee the construction of the Gateway project: Governors, senators hammering out a framework for new rail tunnel. Excerpt:

In August, U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer called on the region to create a separate "development corporation" to build a new rail tunnel connecting New Jersey commuters to their jobs in midtown Manhattan.

Multiple sources have told POLITICO New York the two states, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and federal officials are now hammering out a framework for a new entity dedicated solely to building the project.

Negotiations are continuing, but one source said the entity's board would likely be populated by two Port Authority representatives, one representative from Amtrak and another from the federal transportation department. The structure of the board is still in flux, the source said.
Click to expand...
Geez, go figure, Senator Schumer and the US DOT are reluctant to allow the Port Authority to be the lead agency to directly run the project. A four person board is not going to work if the board routinely splits 2-2 on votes between Christie/Cuomo cronies and Amtrak & the feds. Perhaps they should get a selected representative from the NEC Commission to have a fifth seat on the new authority board to represent the interests of all the states on the NEC.

The writer of the Second Avenue Saga blog has his take on the negotiations and proposed new dedicated entity: Report: Feds, NY, NJ may create new entity to oversee Gateway construction.
 
I can't say I blame them. I wouldn't want the Port Authority running things. I would prefer they remain on the sidelines for this project even though they are the multi-state agency that controls the crossings between NY and NJ.
 
Thirdrail7 said:
I can't say I blame them. I wouldn't want the Port Authority running things. I would prefer they remain on the sidelines for this project even though they are the multi-state agency that controls the crossings between NY and NJ.
Click to expand...
I agree. Port Authority these days is like the inverse Midas touch. Anything they touch turns to mud.
 
By the way, NEC Futures just released more documents regarding upgrades to the Northeast Corridor.

jis said:
Until they identify specific source of the money it is all just feel good lullaby IMHO.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that a future New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund would likely contribute to the Hudson Tunnel Project (or Gateway Project), with perhaps a RRIF Loan being used for New Jersey to contribute to Gateway.

afigg said:
There is a 1/4 page size ad on page A15 of the October 26 Washington Post from Amtrak pushing for the Hudson Tunnel Project. I don't have an image handy, but the ad shows a HSR type trainset and a electric locomotive emerging from two sets of tunnel entrances with the NY skyline in the background.

The text is:

"Each day, 200,000 people move in and out of the world's economic capital through a tunnel that is 105 years old."

"The Hudson Tunnel Project"

"It's time to build"

So, Amtrak is continuing to push for funding for Gateway or, what could be the new name, the Hudson Tunnel Project. If the Hudson Tunnel Project refers to the entire Gateway project (or maybe all of it minus NYP South), arguably a better name for getting funding.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that the Hudson Tunnel Project refers to the area between Secaucus Junction, New Jersey, and the vent shaft near the future extension of the Manhattan Tunnel Box near 12th Avenue in Midtown, Manhattan.

jis said:
It is not clear to me whether the Portal Bridge cost is now considered to be the grand $20 billion for Gateway or not. Of course there is no money allocated for anything yet, and it is not known how much the EIS and preliminary engineering will actually cost either. Yes it is progress, but there are many more steps of progress that needs to take place. I am glad that Foxx seems to be pushing a reluctant bunch of blowhards from the NY/NJ area to actually put some wheels on rails, in a manner of speaking.
Click to expand...
I heard that the $20 Billion includes the proposed Penn Station South Expansion and new infrastructure between Kearny, New Jersey, and Secaucus Junction, New Jersey.

afigg said:
News report from Politico New York on the negotiations on setting up a new development authority to oversee the construction of the Gateway project: Governors, senators hammering out a framework for new rail tunnel. Excerpt:

In August, U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer called on the region to create a separate "development corporation" to build a new rail tunnel connecting New Jersey commuters to their jobs in midtown Manhattan.

Multiple sources have told POLITICO New York the two states, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and federal officials are now hammering out a framework for a new entity dedicated solely to building the project.

Negotiations are continuing, but one source said the entity's board would likely be populated by two Port Authority representatives, one representative from Amtrak and another from the federal transportation department. The structure of the board is still in flux, the source said.
Click to expand...
Geez, go figure, Senator Schumer and the US DOT are reluctant to allow the Port Authority to be the lead agency to directly run the project. A four person board is not going to work if the board routinely splits 2-2 on votes between Christie/Cuomo cronies and Amtrak & the feds. Perhaps they should get a selected representative from the NEC Commission to have a fifth seat on the new authority board to represent the interests of all the states on the NEC.

The writer of the Second Avenue Saga blog has his take on the negotiations and proposed new dedicated entity: Report: Feds, NY, NJ may create new entity to oversee Gateway construction.
Click to expand...
At least folks are talking about Gateway. New Jersey senator Cory Booker even said that New Jersey and New York have had recent discussions regarding Gateway, and that an announcement would be announced soon.

Also, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is expected to announce details of a new capital plan at it's December 10th, board meeting. It is possible that Gateway Tunnel funding would be included in the amended capital plan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FWIW, an EIS on the underwater tunnels would probably fly through really, really fast. The Portal Bridge EIS can mostly be reused. It should be possible to go through the EIS process much faster than is typical.
 
jis said:
Interesting article on NEC Futures in Philly.com

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/in-transit/Three-wishes-for-a-new-Amtrak.html
Click to expand...
Alternative 3 ("transform") is a joke and will not happen short of a revolution. It seems to be there as the dumping ground for wishlists; it includes a tunnel under Long Island Sound, which is never going to happen.

Alternatives 1 ("maintain") and 2 ("grow") are interesting. Both contain the Baltimore tunnel replacements and the new Hudson tunnels.

What's really interesting is in New England, however. "Maintain" builds a New London bypass. "Grow" builds a full-scale Hartford-Providence line. Both options seem to have half an eye on sea level rise, as they move critical segments inland (not just in New England).
 
The "maintain" and "grow" proposals around New London are all rehash of things that have been beaten to death once before when alternatives for electrification to boston were being considered. They are not really new, but just brushed off old ideas. And yes, the "transform" items are truly transformative/revolutionary. They are there because NEC Future was specifically tasked to consider such transformative ideas and carry out an EIS Level 1 consideration of them.

You can view the full Tier 1 EIS Alternative Report (PDF).

What I find very interesting is the Appendix A: Service Plans and Train Equipment Options Technical Memorandum.
 
I wish that instead of large, bundled "alternatives" with multiple projects included the study would break out individual/discrete projects - so we could see that Project A (regardless which alternative it's included in) will cost $X and save Y minutes. Because, frankly, that's how this whole thing will likely end up being constructed - piece by piece, project by project, over time, rather than by all the various agencies coming together and agreeing to fund one entire "alternative" or another.

EDIT: I recognize that this is typically how such studies work, that different alternatives are studied, and a preferred alternative is selected. However, it should also be possible to break down costs and time savings for the discrete projects as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Eric that is what many folks have said to this poster. You can even break it down further to how many passenger minutes per dollar spent for present traffic and also future traffic. So first priority should be given for those sections that would save say 6000 passenger minutes saved per million dollars. Compare that to say 5000 passenger minutes saved per million dollars.

The hardest thing to do for that case is how many extra revenue passenger miles will result outside of a section improvement ?. Example: Increasing WASH - Wilmington to 160 MPH will add how many revenue passengers WIL - PHL and WIL - NYP ?
 
Remember this is a tier 1 EIS. What some are asking for is generally seen as a tier 2 issue.

There will be many tier 2 EISs that are and will happen. Already in progress are the Gateway and B&P tunnel ones for example.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Eric S said:
EDIT: I recognize that this is typically how such studies work, that different alternatives are studied, and a preferred alternative is selected. However, it should also be possible to break down costs and time savings for the discrete projects as well.
Click to expand...
Usually they do. I've read a lot of studies, and they usually do provide a breakdown.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top