More Tunnel News

Ken W2KB wrote:I conjecture that many employers will allow telecommuting where that is feasible if not every day, at least many days per week or month. That could considerably reduce the NJT passenger load.

Based on my observations, the trend appears to be going the other way... "we want you where we can see you." "Studies" suggesting that telecommuters aren't as productive as in-office workers haven't helped (and in my opinion were self-serving for the corporate big-wig audience).

Yahoo!'s well publicized retraction of telecommuting is the most well-known example, but there are others.

Commuting time is considered to be the employee's problem, perhaps now more than ever in a soft economy (and that's as far as I'll take that point). "Wake up earlier, or move closer" is actual advice that has been received by some people I know.

Much as I'd like to see the Westinghouse Pile of Rubble near Broad Street Station put to good use, moving jobs from NYC to Newark doesn't really help all the workers who live in NY, who'll still have to deal with the lack of a rail tunnel.

*Mt. Westinghouse

loufah wrote:Much as I'd like to see the Westinghouse Pile of Rubble near Broad Street Station put to good use, moving jobs from NYC to Newark doesn't really help all the workers who live in NY, who'll still have to deal with the lack of a rail tunnel.

Sadly, it would still be a building if it had not been found to be structurally unsound.

This is a 2-3 year project, you do not need to move manhattan's CBD's to hudon & essex county. That kinda thinking is right up there with "staten island joining new jersey". Lets stop beating & bury the horse and get anew live one to ride.

loufah wrote:Much as I'd like to see the Westinghouse Pile of Rubble near Broad Street Station put to good use, moving jobs from NYC to Newark doesn't really help all the workers who live in NY, who'll still have to deal with the lack of a rail tunnel.

Agreed, but it would help the tens of thousands who live in NJ and work in NYC.

umtrr-author wrote:

Ken W2KB wrote:I conjecture that many employers will allow telecommuting where that is feasible if not every day, at least many days per week or month. That could considerably reduce the NJT passenger load.

Based on my observations, the trend appears to be going the other way... "we want you where we can see you." "Studies" suggesting that telecommuters aren't as productive as in-office workers haven't helped (and in my opinion were self-serving for the corporate big-wig audience).

Yahoo!'s well publicized retraction of telecommuting is the most well-known example, but there are others.

Telecommuting is a great invention. However, it remains up to the company to decide whether they want to allow their workers to telecommute or not. In addition, for some (it is true in my case), paying for the telecommuting connectivity costs just as much as maintaining an office cube (probably depends on whether it is VPN secure or not) and for us, we need to be comfortable and establish a good work ethic before we are given this privilege. Other studies such as productivity and upward mobility issues are unfounded, as you know what type of worker you are. If you are productive at home, it really should not matter.

I think i keep having to say this, as it seems to be lost.... this is a 24 month project, two years, it is not going to change anything but how mass transit gets people to where they are all ready going. Sure, it will be a bit painful, especially for those coming from farther away, but no pain no gain,and 2 years is a pretty cheap price to get these tunnels a new lease on life, potentially ending overnight and weekend shutdowns after the reno is complete....... no one has said anything about that..... just moving peole to NJ to work and telecommuting..... not gonna happen.

If businesses find that NJ is better than NYC to do business, maybe some of them can move to places like Newark, Hoboken or Jersey City.

morris&essex4ever wrote:If businesses find that NJ is better than NYC to do business, maybe some of them can move to places like Newark, Hoboken or Jersey City.

The needs of businesses constantly change. A business in SoHo that decides that its needs would be better met by moving to a different building can very likely find a suitable location within the borders of New York City. Dealing with one municipal entity simplifies matters greatly. By contrast, even a two-mile circle drawn from, say, Exchange Place covers several municipalities. Local governments are famously fragmented on our side of the Hudson and heavily influenced by NIMBYs compared to NYC. This is on top of the lag in infrastructure quality in New Jersey and the lower elevation compared to most of Midtown (think about Sandy). With all of this, I find it hard to believe that Hudson and Essex County can meet the needs of more than a very few businesses in Manhattan as things currently stand. Moreover, I think that the cost of the changes that would be needed to accommodate any significant fraction of the jobs in Manhattan greatly exceeds the cost of fully building out the Gateway project. Really, the $16B cost of Gateway is a pittance compared to the economic output of the region. I would be open to a study showing that moving Manhattan-based jobs to NJ is cost-effective, but I have yet to see one get released. I think that, plus the advancement of the Hudson Yards tunnel shell (on top of the $20B investment in real estate there), speaks to what the market wants. Trying to row against that current is a losing battle for NJ.

35dtmrs92 wrote: Trying to row against that current is a losing battle for NJ.

I agree and that danger has long been recognized. Many years ago a study by the Interstate Commerce Commission -- investigating charges of freight rate discrimination -- found that counties in northern New Jersey had more development, higher per capita income and more economic activity than counties in central or southern New Jersey. The conclusion was that being within the New York City Metropolitan Area was an economic boon. That a vibrant economy in the region's core -- essentially Manhattan (and the reason the name "Access to the Region's Core" was chosen) -- provided a lot of spillover benefits. Attempting to decentralize some of the activity carried risks of losing some of the business altogether, of seeing it move not to Hudson or Essex County but out of the region entirely. (One outgrowth of those studies was the formation of the Port Authority.) Amtrak is warning that the need to take a Hudson River tunnel out of service and single-track into Penn Station could have a huge impact on the region's economy.

The regional economy could lose $100 million a day in economic activity, due to a shut down, Amtrak's Joseph Boardman said. Train traffic would slow to a trickle, from an average of 24 to 6 trains per hour if one of the existing tunnels had to be closed. Link

If it happened, if Amtrak and NJ Transit had to make do with a single track into and out of Penn Station for a year or two, then business really would have to shutdown certain operations and move them away. That would hurt everyone in the region. However, Boardman recently told a group of Newark Star-Ledger editors the new Gateway tunnels could be ready in as little as seven years if the work was pushed hard with incentives built into contracts: "We're looking at a minimum of seven years to eleven years. That's from the time we get a go-ahead."

I think the aftermath from sandy, as tragic as it was, will be a net gain. We finally have heated talk of sea barriers, tunnel flood gates etc, and when the pain of losing one tunnel for 2 years is over, as i said, we may be able to get more trains through on weekends and overnight, which currently cannot happen due to single tunnel operation to maintain the now-salt-damaged concrete bottom part of the tunnel interiors.

That brings me to another point that was touched on before..... If anything there will be sporadic weekday closures as the concrete gets more and more unstable. Eventually they may close them before a date they may have selected. That is my one worry, having a closure before all the temporary pieces are in place to offset the loss of that tunnel.

I am glad to hear they are probably moving from ballasted to fixed track. I only wonder if this means more overhead clearance, of if it'll stay the same. I also wonder what will happen to the 3rd rail. I feel it might be in everyone's best interest to have 3rd rail on both tunnels in the event that they are ever needed (the dual modes could be used to evacuate equipment or people from NY). Just keep it switched off unless being used. I think gateway should get 3rd rail too, but that's another topic for another thread.

I'm posting this article here because there are pictures of the tunnels at the bottom of it.

http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/201 ... nters.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;