Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
34 user(s) are online (23 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 34

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users






Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4890
Offline
Well that's completely 'back to the future' isnt it? The Port Authority was formed to move away from that particular model by building a Trans Hudson Freight Rail Crossing, something they have neglected to do for a century.

Posted on: 11/10 22:03
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2275
Offline

Yonges Island-based Metal Trades builds its biggest barge

Metal Trades, a family owned shipbuilder on Yonges Island, has launched its largest project to date — a 370-foot-long barge designed to take cargo off highways in the New York area.

The barge will transport rail cars across the Hudson River on a floating barge freight train line connecting Greenville Yard in Jersey City and the 65th Street Yard in Brooklyn. It will be used by New York New Jersey Rail LLC, a short-line railroad owned by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

The vessel is designed to hold up to 18 60-foot-long rail cars filled with cargo weighing up to a combined 5.1 million pounds.

http://www.postandcourier.com/busines ... e7-b43d-4bc944243f4e.html


Posted on: 11/10 21:18
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/12/17 21:57
From Crystal Point
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 713
Offline
Is the Hudson a vital waterway for NJ? Should we build islands like the Chinese to begin to assert our control over the river?

Posted on: 5/9 12:11
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2275
Offline

RFP issued for Cross Harbor Freight Movement Project

A request for proposals (RFP) has been issued for a Tier II environmental study, advanced planning and engineering work for the proposed Cross Harbor Freight Movement Project, which would connect New York City directly to the national freight-rail grid.

The Tier II study will explore the development of a cross-harbor freight tunnel, which was identified in a Tier I environmental study as a way to alleviate severe traffic congestion, reduce dependence on aging roads and bridges, and solve the region's freight problem, according to a press release issued by Gov. Andrew Cuomo's office.

The tunnel would connect an existing rail yard in the Greenville area of Jersey City, N.J., to existing rail infrastructure in Brooklyn, N.Y.

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) issued the RFP, and has committed up to $35 million for the study and has available up to another $35 million for further design and engineering.

New York City is the only city in the world without a direct connection to its national freight-rail network, according to Cuomo administration officials. Without a direct link to the freight-rail network, more than 1 billion tons of freight move through the New York region each year primarily by truck.

Trucks transport 90 percent of the freight, while rail handles 2 percent to 3 percent. Most freight arrives by rail at points west of New York City and relies on trucks to reach its final destinations. The new freight-rail tunnel would remove 1,800 trucks from New York Harbor crossings per day or a half million trucks per year, Cuomo administration officials said.

In the next 20 years, freight to, from and through the region is expected to increase by at least 37 percent — which is beyond the capacity of the region's roadways, they said.

The PANYNJ and Federal Highway Administration completed the Tier I study in 2014, with the record of decision issued in 2016.

http://www.progressiverailroading.com ... t-Movement-Project--51572


Posted on: 5/9 11:28
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3241
Offline
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
T-Bird is effing nutz!! Bike lanes on a future above ground bridge, yes please. But a effing tunnel under the Hudson, along with diesel trains?! LoL!!!! The bar is very low, yet this is even a worse idea than the guy that wanted to run double decker PATH trains on the 33rd line using the existing tunnel. And that was impossible. lol


Ha! The double decker PATH idea/suggestion is definitely one of the dumbest ones we have seen in this board. But, the bridge idea is an equal non starter. There is no way you could build a viable, practical pedestrian bridge to span the Hudson from JC to Lower Manhattan. Such a bridge would have to rise to about 200 feet, so if won't interfere with existing traffic. Now imagine trying to get from 0 to 200 feet by walking up steps or an incredibly steep ramp (you couldn't build a shallow ramp because it would require an insane amount of space to do so) and you will soon realize that such a requirement would preclude most people from ever using such a bridge. Even if you were to use elevators, that could prove impractical as you would have long lines to go up and down. A pedestrian or bike bridge from JC Lower Manhatan is a pipe dream.

Posted on: 2015/9/28 10:11
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 689
Offline
T-Bird is effing nutz!! Bike lanes on a future above ground bridge, yes please. But a effing tunnel under the Hudson, along with diesel trains?! LoL!!!! The bar is very low, yet this is even a worse idea than the guy that wanted to run double decker PATH trains on the 33rd line using the existing tunnel. And that was impossible. lol

Posted on: 2015/9/28 7:45

Edited by JCGuys on 2015/9/28 8:06:57
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/11/9 23:48
From Chilltop, Chilltown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 313
Offline
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:

T-Bird, get over it. Billions will NOT be spent to allow a few people to pedal across the Hudson. Take the bike on a ferry or bus, or move to Brooklyn if this is at the top of your list.


What the hell are you talking about? I'm not suggesting spending billions of dollars for a bike tunnel. I'm saying I hope someone with half a brain involved in this process stops to think "hey, these two tunnels could be the last crossings built for 50 to 100 years, would it be possible to accommodate bikes?" And not in a riding-with-the-trains kind of way. Segregated but in the same tube. It's done elsewhere and you are mistaken if you think only "a few people" would use something like that.


Where do diesel trains and bikes share tunnels? How does the ventilation work? I'm pretty sure there won't be ventilation shafts popping up every couple hundred feet under the harbor. We have to maintain a navigable channel, after all. How do you ventilate a miles-long tunnel that diesel trains use to a degree that cyclists would be comfortable breathing the air? I'm not an engineer, but would be interested in hearing about examples.

Posted on: 2015/9/27 22:51
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4890
Offline
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:

T-Bird, get over it. Billions will NOT be spent to allow a few people to pedal across the Hudson. Take the bike on a ferry or bus, or move to Brooklyn if this is at the top of your list.


What the hell are you talking about? I'm not suggesting spending billions of dollars for a bike tunnel. I'm saying I hope someone with half a brain involved in this process stops to think "hey, these two tunnels could be the last crossings built for 50 to 100 years, would it be possible to accommodate bikes?" And not in a riding-with-the-trains kind of way. Segregated but in the same tube. It's done elsewhere and you are mistaken if you think only "a few people" would use something like that.


Do you have any notion of how expensive "roadbed" in a tunnel is? I'm not talking about the pavement but the width you need to provide the lanes you're talking about. These tunnels aren't flexibly sized, you don't just say "add another 12 ft please". Assuming a 2 track tunnel you're essentially asking for capacity for another track, a 50% increase of capacity. This is not a "while you're at it..."

What do you think the market for this is? The Brooklyn Bridge only has about 1550 cycle commuters, we would have a small fraction of that, few people would cycle over one of the Hackensack River bridges to get to this tunnel. As I've said before, it would be cheaper to provide free helicopter service. But what should happen is more subsidy to ferries. It's disgusting that our ferries cost $8 and the Staten Island Ferry is free. There's political pull for you. The PA should be using tolls and train fares to subsidize ferries taking pressure off the trains, not building big dicks in the sky or fixing a skyway that any responsible state government would have fixed itself.

Posted on: 2015/9/27 20:31
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/18 21:18
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1506
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:

T-Bird, get over it. Billions will NOT be spent to allow a few people to pedal across the Hudson. Take the bike on a ferry or bus, or move to Brooklyn if this is at the top of your list.


What the hell are you talking about? I'm not suggesting spending billions of dollars for a bike tunnel. I'm saying I hope someone with half a brain involved in this process stops to think "hey, these two tunnels could be the last crossings built for 50 to 100 years, would it be possible to accommodate bikes?" And not in a riding-with-the-trains kind of way. Segregated but in the same tube. It's done elsewhere and you are mistaken if you think only "a few people" would use something like that.

Posted on: 2015/9/27 19:24
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/11/9 23:48
From Chilltop, Chilltown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 313
Offline
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
I wonder if there's a way to incorporate bicycle access either in this tunnel, if it gets built or the eventual Amtrak tunnel. A bit unorthodox, perhaps, but probably won't be another opportunity for a very long time.


Speaking only for myself, I would not want to bike through a tunnel full of diesel freight trains.

Posted on: 2015/9/26 23:34
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/5/27 20:34
From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 689
Offline
What a cool project! I wonder if there is anyway to include this project with the planned $20 billion tunnel for Amtrak.

Posted on: 2015/9/26 18:36
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4890
Offline
Amazing. An entire century later, the PA is back to addressing the Hudson freight rail crossing, the reason it was created. A mission it forsook to assemble an empire of lucrative crossings, airports and office towers.

Anyone who's really interested in how we got to this point in our transportation infrastructure needs to read The Power Broker about Robert Moses (Pulitzer winner), and Empire on the Hudson about the PA. The latter is not as critical a look as the former but still very interesting.

T-Bird, get over it. Billions will NOT be spent to allow a few people to pedal across the Hudson. Take the bike on a ferry or bus, or move to Brooklyn if this is at the top of your list.

Posted on: 2015/9/26 18:23
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/18 21:18
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1506
Offline
I wonder if there's a way to incorporate bicycle access either in this tunnel, if it gets built or the eventual Amtrak tunnel. A bit unorthodox, perhaps, but probably won't be another opportunity for a very long time.

Posted on: 2015/9/26 6:49
Print Top


Re: The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/13 21:38
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3340
Offline
aw shucks! spend the money on the tunnel and finance it with 100 year bonds. what would happens to barges if/when there is a storm or the river freezes. better yet ....add passenger rail and have a fork into lower manhattan.

Posted on: 2015/9/25 23:44
Print Top


The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2275
Offline

The $7.4B freight tunnel that could ease tri-state area traffic

By Steve Strunsky | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com The Star-Ledger
on September 25, 2015 at  3:20 PM

JERSEY CITY — A freight rail tunnel that would cost at least $7.4 billion is one of two final options being considered by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to cut pollution and reduce congestion by taking trucks off the region's roads.  

An environmental impact statement released by Port Authority today identified a tunnel across New York Harbor between Jersey City and Brooklyn as one of two "preferred alternatives" for its Cross Harbor Freight Program. The program is intended to reduce the number of trucks that now carry shipping containers between the two states, mainly from terminals in Newark and Elizabeth to New York City, Long Island, and other other points east and north.

The Port Authority held public hearings on the cross harbor program in February, when the agency was still weighing ten proposed alternatives, including five tunnel options with costs ranging from $7.4 to $10 billion. The tunnel option chosen in today's report, which would carry rail cars only would be at the low end of that cost range. More expensive tunnel options included one that would accommodate truck traffic as well as rail.

The other preferred alternative named in today's environmental report is a so-called enhanced rail car float operation, which would carry rail cars across the harbor on barges. The Port Authority already operates a rail float facility between Brooklyn and a rail head at the Greenveille Yard in Jersey City, though capacity is limited.

Read more:  http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2015 ... i-state_area_traffic.html


Posted on: 2015/9/25 17:40
Print Top








[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017