As New Jersey conducts its review of the now-frozen $8.5-billion ARC Tunnel project, more details about the state’s plan for the $3 billion it has committed to the project are coming to light. As Max Pizarro of Politicker NJ reported yesterday, the state is considering taking its $3 billion contribution to this rail project and redistributing it to the nearly-depleted state Transportation Trust Fund. “There have been those discussions” about shifting the funds, NJ Transit Executive Director James Weinstein said after facing questioning by local New Jersey officials, “but no decisions.”
For rail proponents, a move such as this one would represent a huge blow to the access to the region’s core. “Taking money from Arc Tunnel to replenish the Transportation Trust Fund is a short term gimmick and would hurt the region’s mobility for generations to come,” TSTC’s Zoe Baldwin said. Furthermore, although the TTF is in charge of maintaining and upgrading New Jersey’s rail infrastructure, the vast majority of funds go toward road maintenance and construction instead, and the fund is nearly empty because Gov. Chris Christie (and many before him) have refused to raise New Jersey’s gas taxes. At 10.5 cents per gallon, the gas is the third-lowest in the country and hasn’t been increased since the years of President George H. W. Bush.
State officials are calling upon Christie and his administration to continue the project, but the New Jersey Governor is wavering. He said, obviously enough, that the project would get the green light if the feds were willing to cover more costs, but Washington is already paying $5.5 billion to the project. Local politicians just want to see the investment realized. “We need to find the money for this project,” Ed Potosnak, a Democratic congressional nominee, said. “For every $1 in New Jersey taxpayer funds, we can leverage $2 of federal and Port Authority funds. I will make sure our dollars come back to our communities. Two plus two does not equal four; it actually equals a lot more.”
27 comments
Just to represent what could be called the “anti-ARC rail advocates”:
http://www.nj.com/news/index.s.....hudso.html
The project is definitely not perfect, but right now, it’s better than the alternatives. I’m not quite sure how to reconcile those two positions other than to fight for the ARC Tunnel money now and hope to gain some design modifications later on. That’s probably not a realistic solution but it might be the most practical one.
Well, the design already had connections to Penn Station… reinstating them and suspending the 34th St Basement would save about $3 billion dollars on the project…. one could advocate for doing exactly that and NARP is.
The project really should connect to Penn. I was surprised to read that it wouldn’t. What’s the point of a major railroad station unless it serves all its trains?
Anyway, so we see the Republican small government, less spending gimmick. Just like that guy in Nassau, cut funding and ask someone else to pay instead. Wait a second, isn’t that called being irresponsible?
Gov. Christie is my new hero. Luvin’ that low gas tax too. Sometimes I drive to NJ just to tank up. Filled up my whole tank for $28 this weekend, a good $10 cheaper than Staten Island.
As for rail tunnel, this project has “boondoggle” written all over it, and Christie was right in questioning the efficacy of the whole scheme. Wish we had a Gov with balls on this side of the Hudson.
How does doubling the rail capacity of the Hudson crossing count as a boondoggle? It’s expensive beginning digging a pair of tunnels underneath a body of water is expensive, but this isn’t a project that’s going to waste time or money in the end.
Doubling rail capacity is awesome. Budgeting it at $8.7 billion before construction begins isn’t. Costs exceed benefits.
The problem then doesn’t lie in the concept, it’s the terrible execution of the concept.
I’m pleasantly surprised that there’s someone in government who hasn’t bought into the cost-is-no-object mentality. The problem isn’t that ARC is being canceled; it’s that the money is redirected to roads and not to a better-designed ARC.
Ugh. I meant to post this comment in response to your original post. I don’t know why it got threaded here.
“Gov with balls”? Right, it takes real balls to cave in and walk away from an essential investment in the region’s transit and economy by chickening out of a tax raise that might be slightly unpopular. Now that’s courage.
That aside, I don’t understand the decision not to connect to Penn station either. But if you don’t think that more rail capacity is desperately needed, you clearly haven’t ever had to commute through Penn. It can’t come soon enough, regardless of the specifics.
A governor with balls for brains, maybe.
As a New Yorker, I don’t see what benefits this project would bring for us. It would cause Manhattan to siphon more jobs to New Jersey commuters who will take the wealth to their home state.
I would much rather see the Feds and Port Authority contribute their billions toward projects that more directly benefit the city and state, such as the Second Av Subway, 7 line extension, Fulton Transit Hub,East Side Access or Metro-North to Penn Station.
The Port Authority of New York AND NEW JERSEY has nothing to do with any of the projects you mentioned, except the Fulton Transit Hub.
Well the Feds can contribute to the projects I mentioned, which still aren’t fully funded. And the Port Authority can contribute to Moynihan Station and building a bus garage near the Manhattan end of the Lincoln Tunnel. These are projects that would be more of a benefit to New Yorkers.
IF the NJ governor boondoggles this opportunity because of short-sightedness toward mass transit (and that’s a big IF because I doubt Christie is that dumb), then NY pols better hustle for that floating transportation money to more fully fund our big projects.
Just like they chased down the federal funding for congestion pricing. Not with this motley gang, sorry.
Port Authority’s mandate is to manage the crossings between New York and New Jersey, the seaport, and the airports. Its mandate does not include giving Amtrak more money or delivering pork to Manhattan.
“As a New Yorker, I don’t see what benefits this project would bring for us. It would cause Manhattan to siphon more jobs to New Jersey commuters who will take the wealth to their home state.”
I guess you’ve never been around Canal Street & Varick, 42nd & 9th or 181st and Broadway or tried to go west of Manhattan before? This project has enormous benefits for Manhattan for traffic congestion and retaining jobs in Manhattan.
As it is currently designed it would not benefit New Yorkers much. If it were reconnected to Penn Station (and the engineering designs and most of the environmental work is already *done* for that) it would benefit everyone by improving Northeast Corridor capacity for New Yorkers to get to popular locations like Philadelphia and DC.
On second thought, I’m not even sure the Port Authority has anything to do with Fulton Street. I was thinking about the World Trade Center PATH station.
This whole thing is incredibly short-sighted. Surely Christie isn’t blind to the future benefits of doubling rail capacity between New Jersey and Manhattan, even if it ends up costing more than expected?
Somehow I expect Christie *is* blind to the benefits. He *is* a Republican, after all, and they’ve been deliberately turning themselves into the party of Know-Nothings recently.
Politics aside, the cost of this project IS a bit eye-opening, considering the benefits gained. As is pretty much any commuter rail project, really. I just don’t see how the benefit justifies the cost. Knock a few billion off the cost, then maybe.
Why couldnt they add a third bore at the existing location for extra train capacity now but yet allow it to branch off (by constructing bell mouths) to a potential lower level platform or through routing to GCT instead at some future date. Then add bore #4 and extra platforms and/or a connection to GCT later on. Why wouldnt an incremental approach work here? Would save some money.
The cost of a single-track bore isn’t much lower than that of a double-track bore. For a given choice of design, the cheapest way to build it is all at once.
The stated reason for not building the new tunnel right next to the existing one is that they’re afraid the construction will damage the old tunnel. (Before you start thinking this is reasonable, ask yourself how the Hudson Tubes managed to dig one track at a time without disturbing the adjacent track, using 110-year-old technology.)
MOYNIHAN STATION MUST GO TOO! NY does not need a 5 billion dollar train Hall!
[…] project, and by September 21, it seemed clear that New Jersey would takes its tunnel investment and siphon it into its transit fund with a heavy emphasis on road spending. That’s exactly what appears to be […]