• Amtrak Gateway Tunnels

  • This forum will be for issues that don't belong specifically to one NYC area transit agency, but several. For instance, intra-MTA proposals or MTA-wide issues, which may involve both Metro-North Railroad (MNRR) and the Long Island Railroad (LIRR). Other intra-agency examples: through running such as the now discontinued MNRR-NJT Meadowlands special. Topics which only concern one operating agency should remain in their respective forums.
This forum will be for issues that don't belong specifically to one NYC area transit agency, but several. For instance, intra-MTA proposals or MTA-wide issues, which may involve both Metro-North Railroad (MNRR) and the Long Island Railroad (LIRR). Other intra-agency examples: through running such as the now discontinued MNRR-NJT Meadowlands special. Topics which only concern one operating agency should remain in their respective forums.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, nomis, FL9AC, Jeff Smith

  • 2142 posts
  • 1
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • 137
  • 138
  • 143
  by Rockingham Racer
 
Don't think it's about just the locals, i.e. commuters. Amtrak passengers moving through the tunnel, over and above commuters, might have a different view of its need and reliability. I am one of those.
  by eolesen
 
Rockingham Racer wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 6:43 am Don't think it's about just the locals, i.e. commuters. Amtrak passengers moving through the tunnel, over and above commuters, might have a different view of its need and reliability. I am one of those.
Again, relatively small numbers compared to 310M+ taxpayers who don't live in the NYC Metro area.
  by Backshophoss
 
It would help if portal and Gateway were considered as 1 complete project. Both will improve thruput and capy at the same time.
Both are related projects.
  by east point
 
When Gateway is finished it will increase capacity much more if at least one of the present tunnel bores can remain open. Until Portal bridge location has more than 2 tracks in operation the additional capacity from Gateway will be wasted.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Somewhere within this "epic", I've previously expressed this thought, but here goes again.

A new tunnel, especially a railroad tunnel simply does not afford the visibility, and less ribbon cutting opportunities, that new terminals at JFK and LGA will provide.

Any infrastructure project, such as a new sewer system, simply does not score well on the above. Well until after a rain storm, there is raw sewage floating in the street, as was the case in my municipality some years ago.

So long as the existing North River tunnels don't spring a leak, and NJT/Amtrak passengers get there more or less on time, then who cares?

Well, until.....
  by mtuandrew
 
Yet somehow the Swiss and Italians seem to get plenty of photo opportunities when they build one :wink: I guess Murphy, Cuomo, and Chao will need to get creative with their groundbreaking ceremonies, if that’s the sole thing holding up the stakeholders.

(Or they’ll have to dust off the old Pennsy plans for a cross-Hudson bridge :P )
  by EuroStar
 
eolesen wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:25 am Yes, I'm sure folks within 100 miles of Manhattan might think Gateway is the most important issue facing the country as far as infrastructure goes, but there folks in 46 other states who might see their own projects as more worthy...

New York has invested $13B in terminal improvements at JFK alone, yet can't seem to find anything for the Gateway?

Just this week it was another $3.8B for JFK: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/govern ... mation-jfk

If NYS can find $13B for airport improvements, maybe it's time to hold Cuomo accountable and stop waiting for the Feds to pay up for rail.
NY and NJ are definitely not going to pay 100% for an asset that is controlled by Amtrak (read the Feds). It is just how the power struggles in politics work. They are more likely to agree on building a separate terminal and tunnel elsewhere than pay for 100% for this one. It is more likely that the states pay for extension of the 7 subway to Secaucus than paying 100% for an asset that they cannot use exclusively. Even if the tunnel caved or sprang a leak tomorrow, the states will not pay for the repair unless they gain 100% control of the tunnel. Let's hope that the existing tunnels have been much better maintained than the Hoosac tunnel and have much time left before the need total overhaul because federal money is not coming to NY/NJ for rail projects any time soon.
  by Bob Roberts
 
eolesen wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:27 am
Rockingham Racer wrote: Fri Feb 14, 2020 6:43 am Don't think it's about just the locals, i.e. commuters. Amtrak passengers moving through the tunnel, over and above commuters, might have a different view of its need and reliability. I am one of those.
Again, relatively small numbers compared to 310M+ taxpayers who don't live in the NYC Metro area.
The tunnels are are core part of a regional economy (NY metro) which produces nearly 10% of US GDP -- the number is over 20% if you include the remainder of the corridor. I doubt tunnel failure would only be a small impact on our economy.
Last edited by Bob Roberts on Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:11 pm, edited 5 times in total.
  by mtuandrew
 
Perhaps Amtrak, NJT, and PANYNJ or MTA could build a five-tunnel bundle: two Amtrak/NJT, two PATH or subway, and one emergency access. Would be nice to have PATH North for people up along the Palisades, as well as the Secaucus route.
  by Wash
 
It's really frustrating that Amtrak, a railroad that's designed in such a way as to be accountable to "The People", is engaged in a petty dispute with state governments that's busily delaying one of the most important infrastructure projects in the entire country over...not being accountable enough to the people.

I'm not familiar enough with politics in the tri-state area, but is there a political solution to this problem? If New York felt that Amtrak would listen more closely to their needs, could they accept some level of Amtrak ownership of the new tunnels/station? If Amtrak could be reassured that New York wouldn't bully them into making their service worse just so New Yorkers would benefit, could Amtrak accept partial state ownership?

Or, could the federal government just (theoretically) throw up their hands, say "a pox on both your houses", declare that Gateway/existing tunnels/Penn Station/surrounding infrastructure is owned by the Federal Government, and start building Gateway on their own?
  by DutchRailnut
 
it shows your not familiar with project, its feds that keep shutting it down not the states or Amtrak.
  by Greg Moore
 
Ayup, the states, Amtrak, and the Feds actually had pretty much come to an agreement until our current President decided to set different priorities.
  by eolesen
 
Build it without the Feds and charge Amtrak a toll.

Sent from my SM-T290 using Tapatalk

  by Backshophoss
 
It has become a 4 way circus NJ,NY, congress critters,And the current occupant of the White House who keeps killing both projects.
Link both projects together to raise them higher on the list so it can't be ignored,the Congress critters overrides the White House.
and Amtrak and the Port Authority jointly run the design/build on both projects.
What stinks is the politics have made a total mess of these projects.
  by gokeefe
 
The longer this goes on the more it makes me think that the federal government really does feel this should be paid for by New York and New Jersey.
  • 1
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • 137
  • 138
  • 143