Amtrak Gateway Tunnels

[jlr3266]

If they really can keep the EIS requirement away, it will be great for the final development. The budgets for creating Major Investment Studies and Environmental Impact Statements are never sufficient to properly develop designs to catch many major cost impacts that only come out during actual design.

[David Benton]

The EIS is supposed to be about the Environmental impacts , not the costs.
But I would agree that in this location and situation , there is little point to one, but the process of how that is decided needs to be carefully handled to avoid creating precedents.

[BandA]

How do they plan to keep the contaminated sediment contained? Or sediment in general from killing all the aquatic life nearby?

[Backshophoss]

Any fish in the Hudson River,East River and the NY Harbor waters is not edible due to pollution,sport fishing and toss back in the water ONLY!
The BIG problem is the PCB layer on the river bottom,mess with it and you open up a HUGE can of trouble from NYDEC, NYCDEC,and NJDEC for
starters,then the FEDS chime in,any EIS will need to address the PCB problem near the shorelines.

[STrRedWolf]

Isn't the plan to tunnel from the NJ side about a mile in-shore to Penn Station, *under* the Hudson? Deep enough that it *won't* disturb the river bottom?

I doubt an EIS would be needed in this case.

[J.D. Lang]

From what I read in the draft EIS that was released a year or so ago the plan is to freeze the muck on the east side of the Hudson where the tubes come up toward Manhattan. According to the report this will allow the TBM's to bore through it without much disturbance. Hence part of the high cost of the project.

[Ridgefielder]

How do they plan to keep the contaminated sediment contained? Or sediment in general from killing all the aquatic life nearby?

They're going under the sediment. Just like the PRR did back in 1905. As noted above, the only place where they might need to worry is near the river bulkhead on the Manhattan side, and on that end they're going to be freezing it. The TBM's will be deep enough on the Jersey side that they shouldn't need to worry, since they'll have to start about a mile and half back from the river on the far side of Bergen Hill.

[Jeff Smith]

https://www.crainsnewyork.com/transport ... ct-forward

More patronage?

Should federal funding arrive for the $30 billion Gateway project, a shared commission between New York and New Jersey will be ready to receive it.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo and New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy are expected to sign separate bills that would establish the Gateway Development Commission, a multi-state commission would function similar to the Port Authority.

Gateway commissioners would oversee planning, funding and construction of the project to save the infrastructure that carries 200,000 commuters daily between New York and New Jersey. The two states will split the costs of the work after federal funding for the project— which would reconstruct the decrepit Portal Bridge, rehabilitate crumbling Hudson River tunnels and construct a new tunnel.
...

[gokeefe]

More like improved coordination through the creation of an entity that makes the key parties joint stakeholders in success. Good sign.

[Gilbert B Norman]

One must wonder how many, if any, bureaucratic entities were created to bore the 18 (that's eighteen. volks) mile rail tunnel under the Semmering Pass in the Eastern province of Lower Austria.

It was started during 2012 and expected to be completed during 2024.

Care to place bets it will open on time: hint, this is Austria and not the USA.

[Nasadowsk]

Also, for roughly 1/10th the projected cost of Gateway.

[Dcell]

Full environmental studies need to be done before building new Hudson River tunnels. The river is just starting to have improved water quality after decades of industrial abuse. We spent years and years before GE finally was forced to pay for dredging if the Hudson River to remove PCBs. Small progress has been made in improving water quality and more actions are needed. No exceptions for the new tunnels, full environmental studies are needed.

[gokeefe]

No exceptions for the new tunnels, full environmental studies are needed.

If they're boring under the river bed and not disturbing the muck do you still think these are needed? I can fully understand if the bottom would be disturbed but to my knowledge that isn't the case. Beyond that what else could be done? It's not as if there's any flexibility in site selection or alternatives analysis.

[Dcell]

The vibrations from the boring machines will disturb the riverbed. I’m not a marine biologist but we should do all we can to mitigate disturbing fragile marine life. Should the tunnels go deeper? I don’t know but it’s worth studying. Maybe there are tunneling options less disturbing to the marine environment — it’s worth studying. Also, is the rock to be excavated contaminated because PCBs have leached in? I’d hate for that stuff just to be dumped anywhere on land. The Riverkeeper and Sierra Clubs should be among the parties involved in the new rail tunnels before planning us rushed along.

[gokeefe]

At the bottom of the river there would be very little marine plant life that would be affected because there isn't any sunlight. Fish and mammals would simply go elsewhere so that's probably not an issue either. Depending on depth of rock there may be no potential at all for PCB leaching. I don't know the geology but in general I do know that the Manhattan area is very hard rock. If it wasn't it would have been crushed and moved away by the glaciers. Same goes for the bedrock underneath the Hudson (same formation). I am confident that other parties will be involved and likely have been for quite some time. In my opinion the real environmental risk is not in the tunnel but at the opening on the New Jersey side which will have to be engineered in a marshy wetland area.

If you're really paying attention to impact it would be in that area. It's probably in the intertidal zone and likely would be considered salt water marsh. Amtrak has known this from the very beginning and along with the state partners I'm sure they are already considering how to compensate for any impact. That would be a potentially very productive opportunity for organizations that can help provide solutions for impact. For example they could support or suggest locations that would benefit from new wetlands construction or locations that could be bought and placed in conservation.