I read yesterday that a new rail tunnel will be built under the Hudson linking Penn Station to NJ.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Please do not hold breath. This proposal has been kicking around for years, and actually was almost a go until the NJ Governor decided it cost too much. Eventually yes.
I believe that the tunnel will be built. The current tunnels into Penn Station are over 100 years old and in bad shape according to press reports that I have read. They will either deteriorate to such an extent that they can't be used or they they will fail completely. Hopefully the new tunnels will be built before any of this happens.
A similar situation happened in the SF Bay Area. The Bay Bridge is the main bridge linking the East Bay with SF. It is much more important to the SF Bay Area economy than the much more famous Golden Gate Bridge.
Part of the east span failed in the 1989 earthquake and several people were killed. The failed sections were patched up and the bridge was reopened. It was apparent that a complete new east span would be needed before the next earthquake. A complete new bridge was built and the old span was removed. The project was delayed and several billions of dollars over budget. There were major issues with the construction quality that are being corrected.
It is unfortunate that we can't get going on major infrastructure repair and replacement projects until tragic events force us to take action.
NH Joe
Maybe it might be a good commute for Amazon employees, oh I guess not.
And the Cross County Line, you know, the one that is to use the Trenton Cutoff right-of-way is also to be built. Again, it's one of those don't hold your breath proposals. Every so often a hearing is convened to do whatever it is they do at these hearings.
The catenary came down along with it's support masts soon after Conrail abandoned electric locomotives. That was back in the mid '80s. With so many people working in the five counties and living in them, it would make sense to be able to take the train across the counties, rather than having to take the train into Philly and back out again.
Below is a map showing the Trenton Cutoff.
Attachments
Images (1)
You don't cite a link, but I suspect this is referring to the Gateway project, which among other improvements for Amtrak into Penn Station, would include two new tunnels and also replacing an ancient lift bridge that often malfunctions after letting a ship pass (Portal bridge). Right now the funding for this is in limbo, the current administration has held up funding for it. It sounds like the proposal is for NY and NJ to front money to begin the projects, and require the federal government to reimburse them for it (Senator Schumer is trying to spearhead that effort from what I read)....in any event, it is the Gateway project, that has been on the books for a while (not even gonna speculate on how this proposal would work or not work...).
RJR posted:Please do not hold breath. This proposal has been kicking around for years, and actually was almost a go until the NJ Governor decided it cost too much. Eventually yes.
They also should look into the antique swing bridge between Newark and the tunnel. About a year ago, our train to Boston was held up for over an hour because it was stuck in the open position.
hokie71 posted:Maybe it might be a good commute for Amazon employees, oh I guess not.
Interesting to note that GE relocated to downtown Boston. Could have gone where ever they wanted. There is merit to larger cities, New York and LA maybe the largest. Younger tech-ee work force has different expectation of life. IMO, Mike CT. Choose a location, lacking in the resources you need a huge mistake. People, the right people, one of the biggest resources, in a service industry world.
I believe the Gateway Project also includes some kind of new tunnel for the PATH (aka, the "Tubes") which was flooded after the 9-11 attack. That tunnel is also ancient and something needs to be done about it but politician's being politician's they'll sit on their collective tushies until there is (God forbid) an accident at which point they'll declare some kind of emergency and be forced into acting.
You might ask, shouldn't NY/NJ politician's be proactive??? Surely, you jest.
xravizhen: You are being most unfair. Holding a political office is not easy. Many different groups appeal for programs to fund their personal favorites: a new highway, medical assistance for the poor, care for veterans, a new stray cat shelter, a railroad tunnel, a better vote-counting system. The list goes on and on. But the funds available are limited, unless you want to vote for a tax increase, which is always opposed except by those who don't pay it.
You have to balance priorities within the funds and other capabilities available, and if you don't vote for what Mr&Mrs X want, you'll catch hell by all sorts of comments such as you have just made. There are people in NJ & NY who may feel that it is more important to aid the elderly than build a tunnel under the River. That is a perfectly valid position. The essence of democracy is that all of these people have to compromise. President Eisenhower summed it upo when he said words to the effect that there are many valid competing claims for governmental funding, but they cannot all be satisfied.
RJR posted:xravizhen: You are being most unfair. Holding a political office is not easy. Many different groups appeal for programs to fund their personal favorites: a new highway, medical assistance for the poor, care for veterans, a new stray cat shelter, a railroad tunnel, a better vote-counting system. The list goes on and on. But the funds available are limited, unless you want to vote for a tax increase, which is always opposed except by those who don't pay it.
You have to balance priorities within the funds and other capabilities available, and if you don't vote for what Mr&Mrs X want, you'll catch hell by all sorts of comments such as you have just made. There are people in NJ & NY who may feel that it is more important to aid the elderly than build a tunnel under the River. That is a perfectly valid position. The essence of democracy is that all of these people have to compromise. President Eisenhower summed it upo when he said words to the effect that there are many valid competing claims for governmental funding, but they cannot all be satisfied.
I am NOT being unfair! All I'm saying is at some point, if no one does anything, there will be a catastrophic event and then the politicians will be forced to take action. Like the first response to the O.P., I won't hold my breath.
I'm going to uncheck the "follow this topic" thread now.
If Congress throws Billions of $$$ at PTC implementation, there will STILL be catastrophic events. They may (or may not) have a different character, but nothing we make and no activity we undertake is perfect.
The relevant statistic: One of every One person born dies. No amount of money is going to prevent that. That statement is cold, certainly, but it is no less accurate for that coldness.
There is a point of diminishing returns, as has been alluded to above. I have no desire to see my fellow citizens bilked of billions of dollars EVEN IF the next death to happen because of a lack of PTC is my own.
(IMHO) There is certainly fiscal justification for NEC improvements and the Pennsy tunnels and bridges are certainly worthy of expenditure.
The age of the tunnels aside, I've often wondered how simply replacing the two old tubes with two new tubes will improve traffic flow.
It's not like the Broadway is more than two tracks at the Bergen Hill portal.
It may certainly provide an incremental improvement, but I wonder how a one-for-one replacement can provide a significant improvement when there remains so much two track railroad that will limit the improvement.
Again, I understand the age and condition issue. I am just questioning what operational efficiencies will be picked up since the line will remain a two track railroad.
There would be four tunnels in use, not two, after completion, along with new trackage leading to the new tunnels, under the Gateway Program.
https://nec.amtrak.com/project/the-gateway-program/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...(Northeast_Corridor)
The current tunnels will need repairs and maintenance, so traffic can use two or three of the tubes while work is being done. Currently, if one tube it out of use, it's a one-track railroad.
That's my understanding, anyway.
David
RJR posted:xravizhen: You are being most unfair. Holding a political office is not easy. Many different groups appeal for programs to fund their personal favorites: a new highway, medical assistance for the poor, care for veterans, a new stray cat shelter, a railroad tunnel, a better vote-counting system. The list goes on and on. But the funds available are limited, unless you want to vote for a tax increase, which is always opposed except by those who don't pay it.
You have to balance priorities within the funds and other capabilities available, and if you don't vote for what Mr&Mrs X want, you'll catch hell by all sorts of comments such as you have just made. There are people in NJ & NY who may feel that it is more important to aid the elderly than build a tunnel under the River. That is a perfectly valid position. The essence of democracy is that all of these people have to compromise. President Eisenhower summed it upo when he said words to the effect that there are many valid competing claims for governmental funding, but they cannot all be satisfied.
The thing is, this is not a zero sum game. Lets aid the elderly AND build two more tunnels into the City. These are both initiatives that would benefit millions of people, some directly and more indirectly, some economically and others with quality of life. We are the richest nation there has ever been and we can assuredly do better with these types of Public issues.
There is serious thought that if one of the present two tunnels goes down for more than a few days the economic hit would trigger a recession. The few $Billion it will take to add two new bores and refurbish the present two is a mere drop in the bucket compared with the economic loss that would come with a recession.
Lew
Lew, I am not disagreeing with you at all. I am not taking any position on the tunnel project.
I am just getting tired of hearing the same old claptrap about politicians who don't do anything, are dumb, are crooked, etc. But, guess what happens when you agree to do all of the needed improvements, and then seek to increase taxes. NJ and NY already have among the highest tax burdens in the US, so that businesses are leaving (we in VA are grateful), which will aggravate the NJ/NY financial situation even more.
I don't see any of these critics running for office so they can have the pleasure of sitting through endless legislative hearings regarding absolutely essential (to the proponents) projects. Maybe they wouldn't be so quick to criticize.
I read the biggest roadblock (tunnelblock?) is MSG. As long as that arena sits there, major construction at Penn or tunnels connecting to it will never be feasible
Jon1443 posted:I read the biggest roadblock (tunnelblock?) is MSG. As long as that arena sits there, major construction at Penn or tunnels connecting to it will never be feasible
I think you are confusing two different projects.
1)Penn Station in NYC once upon a time was a big, above ground station, that the Pennsylvania Railroad in its death spiral sold to developers, who tore it down and put up a new Madison Square Garden and several office towers, and Penn Station basically became this underground rat maze. At the time they probably figured that rail travel was dying, but what they left out was Penn Station was becoming one of the most used transit stations around because of commuters from Long Island and New Jersey (made even worse when NJ Transit's Morris and Essex lines started going into Penn Station).
There has been talk for years of a new Penn Station, one current project is converting most of the old Farley Post office across 8th avenue from the Garden/Penn Station site, into a new station (architecturally it is similar to the old Penn Station, designed by the same firm), which would be used by NJ Transit mostly. The other would be to take down MSG and build a new station that is above ground as part of a redevelopment project. A couple of years ago the city extended MSG's lease for only 10 years, with the idea clearly being allowing once the lease is up building a new station after razing MSG. The Dolan family that owns both MSG and the NY Knicks and Rangers that play there, and they would be a massive obstacle to a new Penn Station ever being built, they have a lot of clout.
2)Penn Station is currently fed by two tunnels under the East River, built in 1909, fed by a double tracked Amtrak line that also carries NJ transit trains from all over the state. The tunnels themselves are outdated and worse were heavily damaged during Sandy in 2012, salt water flooded the tunnels and accelerated the concrete disintegrating, plus it rusted out conduits and the cabling in the tunnels and the like. With the tunnels so heavily used, it is next to impossible to shut them down any length of time,even on weekends, with the flow of Amtrak and NJ transit trains. Also, the tracks feeding the tunnel have some pretty rickety infrastructure, including the Portal bridge over the Hackensack river, that is forever opening to allow a boat to go through then gets stuck, needs to literally be knocked back into place.
The Gateway project as currently designated is supposed to replace several of the bridges involved, and also build 2 new Tunnels under the Hudson. This would allow among other things, shutting down the old tunnels on weekends and off hours to allow them to be rehabbed and brought up to snuff, and eventually would mean having 4 tunnels to handle the traffic that 2 basically can't handle very well, and allow shutting down tunnels for maintenance which can't be done now.
RJR posted:Lew, I am not disagreeing with you at all. I am not taking any position on the tunnel project.
I am just getting tired of hearing the same old claptrap about politicians who don't do anything, are dumb, are crooked, etc. But, guess what happens when you agree to do all of the needed improvements, and then seek to increase taxes. NJ and NY already have among the highest tax burdens in the US, so that businesses are leaving (we in VA are grateful), which will aggravate the NJ/NY financial situation even more.
I don't see any of these critics running for office so they can have the pleasure of sitting through endless legislative hearings regarding absolutely essential (to the proponents) projects. Maybe they wouldn't be so quick to criticize.
The problem isn't local politicians with the Gateway project, NJ and NY have allocated money to help pay for the project. Gateway is being held up at the Federal level, which it is mostly going to be because Amtrak owns both Penn Station and the tracks leading to it, and they would be a major beneficiary of it. The real problem is on a federal level you run into a lot of conflicts, there are those who still think that the only form of transportation that is valid is the car, those who think if you don't build new infrastructure for mass transit jobs will miraculously move to their area, others who look at spending 15 billion on a transit project in the NYC area as unfair but don't look at economically the ROI on that and how their own area benefits from that, others who who are doing it out of basically spite (I am deliberately not mentioning names with this deliberately).
As far as local politicians go, if they look at something like the Gateway project and argue that it is money spend better elsewhere, they are just as short sighted,because improving mass transit like this would likely drive increases in economic activity and allow paying for other projects, there is a tangible ROI with this as well. I am old enough to remember when some people questioned spending money on the space program back in the day, how it was wasted money (I still hear that), but the space program to put a man on the Moon helped create a revolution that is still paying dividends today and has, in things ranging from material science to technology to health care.
By the way, before we blame politicians, we also should look in the mirror as a people, because if politicians act shortsightedly and parochially, it often is because they reflect the views of their constituency, the excuses they give for not funding transit, for not doing infrastructure, often reflects the views of the people who elected them, we talk about politicians as if they act in this bubble of corruption and greed, but fail to recognize that a lot of the time the politicians simply are giving in to what they hear from their constituents, so we can't claim it is all corruption and stupidity, at least not the stupidity of the politician only.Edmund Burke 250 years ago or so wrote 'a representative owes their constituents not just their diligence, but their judgement as well'. Or to quote POGO, we have seen the enemy and it is us *shrug*.
"By the way, before we blame politicians, we also should look in the mirror as a people, because if politicians act shortsightedly and parochially, it often is because they reflect the views of their constituency..."
Very well said, Bigkid. I remember some decades ago, when X was President, someone saying: "X is no fool. If the people wanted integrity, he'd give them integrity."
The tunnel will be built. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but it will be built. How long did it take to get a third set of locks in Panama? The set has been built. By the Chinese, but built. All NY had to do was add the tunnel into the contingencies for the Amazon deal. The big project in Boston has been completed for how many years? A big concept, a big budget and big project - but it has been completed. Without going into politics, the money is there, it is just a question of priorities. Like the family budget - you could buy a $5,000 brass engine tomorrow if you'd prioritize your spending. But perhaps you foolishly think heating your home, feeding your children and funding their education is more important. John
As someone who lives in New Jersey I have to chime in on the NJ governor shut down the project comment. The original plan morphed into what was known as the tunnel to Macy's basement, a stub terminal without a yard or service facilities that connected to nothing. Amtrak would not have been able to use it for through trains, it would have served NJT only because New York essentially bailed out on the project. It became a dumb plan that deserved to be cancelled because it would have been a bad plan that solved nothing except to place New Jersey deeper in the financial hole. What is needed in the NYC metro area is additional access to Penn Station from both sides, a new portal bridge, and if the money tree sprouted a direct rail connection to Grand Central Terminal. The metro area suffers from a lack of regionalization due to the simple fact competing railroads built their own infrastructure back in the day. If Hurricane Sandy hadn't happened this would not be on the table at all, perhaps it was a blessing in disguise.
Farmer Bill, that poster doesn't look right. I rode the ferry many times, and it was the 125th Street Ferry, also called the Electric Ferries. In contrast to the steam ferries used by NYCRR downstream, these were diesel-electrics. The park was in full operation, with a flashing sign saying, "C'mon Over." The trolley line running up the hill was gone by the time I rode those ferries.. Te roller coaster was right atop the Palisades, making it seem even higher. Unfortunately, I wasn't allowed to ride it. :-{
There are bridges. Sunday morning early, there is a good chance the GW bridge and access to I80 west is all yours. Truck traffic reminds you a lot of trains. One truck after another, kind of tough to fit the car between all the trucks. IMO. EZ pass and elimination of the toll booths, has streamlined access, traffic at times still beyond comprehension. Tis a big city, access because of the river(s), Manhattan is an island, not fun. Again IMO. Is it easier/cheaper to build a tunnel or more bridges?? GW is two levels, at one time one level was dedicated to trucks, I'm not sure that is still the case.
necrails posted:As someone who lives in New Jersey I have to chime in on the NJ governor shut down the project comment. The original plan morphed into what was known as the tunnel to Macy's basement, a stub terminal without a yard or service facilities that connected to nothing. Amtrak would not have been able to use it for through trains, it would have served NJT only because New York essentially bailed out on the project. It became a dumb plan that deserved to be cancelled because it would have been a bad plan that solved nothing except to place New Jersey deeper in the financial hole. What is needed in the NYC metro area is additional access to Penn Station from both sides, a new portal bridge, and if the money tree sprouted a direct rail connection to Grand Central Terminal. The metro area suffers from a lack of regionalization due to the simple fact competing railroads built their own infrastructure back in the day. If Hurricane Sandy hadn't happened this would not be on the table at all, perhaps it was a blessing in disguise.
Don't Let the Perfect Be the Enemy of the Good.
Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
Penny wise and pound foolish.
Issues with connection to the present system would have been dealt with. Instead the NJ governor managed to throw out the baby with the water. BTW, NJ went in the hole and spent the $$ anyway on some poorly planned highway projects. New tunnels are needed because increased traffic because more jobs in the City because increased economic activity. Also when one of the two present tunnels fails, (and I say "when", not "if" because of damage done by Sandy), the economic damage caused by lack of access to the City will dwarf the few Billion$$ needed for the project. Penny wise and pound foolish.
Retired and living in small-town New England I have no personal skin in this game but the NE Corridor big picture is clear and obvious: Build it and they will come (actually they are coming anyway because jobs). Every study ever done has shown that rail beats highway wrt mass transit many times over and better transit always partners with economic growth.
Just my dos centavos worth from my ivory tower
Lew
ARC as it was being built was a colossal waste of money. Christie was right to cancel it. However that good was negated by his re-direction of those funds. Stupid.
Actually issues with connections to the current system was not in the cards. The original ARC proposal was comprehensive and shared costs with the feds NY and NJ. Then the political process took hold and what remained was something only Rube Goldberg would have been proud of. Then then gov made a decision that was seized upon by his political opponents and some allies. It was easy to do given his larger than life persona. It certainly wasn't "penny wise" given the billions at stake. No one disputes new tunnels are needed for the North East, a proper, timely and on budget build out is required however. I suspect the existing tunnels will fail in my lifetime, I doubt replacements will be built in the same time frame. Even if they are, the existing tunnel will still probably fail and we will be left with the same condition as now, 2 tubes into the city.
Mike CT posted:There are bridges. Sunday morning early, there is a good chance the GW bridge and access to I80 west is all yours. Truck traffic reminds you a lot of trains. One truck after another, kind of tough to fit the car between all the trucks. IMO. EZ pass and elimination of the toll booths, has streamlined access, traffic at times still beyond comprehension. Tis a big city, access because of the river(s), Manhattan is an island, not fun. Again IMO. Is it easier/cheaper to build a tunnel or more bridges?? GW is two levels, at one time one level was dedicated to trucks, I'm not sure that is still the case.
You obviously don't drive into NYC much, at least not during the week, Sunday morning early doesn't represent the real world. Even if they eliminated toll booths (which they should, the TBTA is already doing that) the real problem is that traffic into NYC is saturated, the highways themselves are congested (I commute by bus into NYC, and route 3 both ways is congested up to the wazoo, not to mention the perpetual construction zones on it), and traffic in NYC is literally almost at the halting point. Building more bridges would only create more traffic, traffic that the city itself can't handle. One of the things that has been proven time and again with road traffic is that when you do things to alleviate congestion, widen roads, build more highways, more bridges/tunnels....the traffic only gets worse.
Building new bridges is like putting in a larger diameter pipe to carry more water, and having it terminate in a much smaller pipeline, the flow rate is determine by the slowest link in the chain.
necrails posted:Actually issues with connections to the current system was not in the cards. The original ARC proposal was comprehensive and shared costs with the feds NY and NJ. Then the political process took hold and what remained was something only Rube Goldberg would have been proud of. Then then gov made a decision that was seized upon by his political opponents and some allies. It was easy to do given his larger than life persona. It certainly wasn't "penny wise" given the billions at stake. No one disputes new tunnels are needed for the North East, a proper, timely and on budget build out is required however. I suspect the existing tunnels will fail in my lifetime, I doubt replacements will be built in the same time frame. Even if they are, the existing tunnel will still probably fail and we will be left with the same condition as now, 2 tubes into the city.
It was seized upon pretty much by everyone (and I live in NJ) because it was patently obvious what he was doing. He could have halted the project (it was in preliminary work on the NJ side) and wanted it redone with connections to Penn Station, rather than stopped it completely, or could have noted what Amtrak was doing and suggest that the money and time be spent on that (which would have made sense, far as I know the Gateway project by the time ARC was canned was already in the planning stages).
The problem was he didn't can the ARC project because it was a tunnel to nowhere, he canned it because he claimed 'based on his own figures' (his exact words), that there would be massive cost overruns and NJ would have to pay for it (a claim that several agencies and independent groups looked at, and said wasn't true, that he basically pulled that out of thin air).....and then not to mention his true intention was seen, when he (supposedly even before he cancelled the project formerly) took 500 million the feds already allocated for the tunnel and tried to shift it to road projects, which among other things violates federal rules and he was required to pay it back. Worse, when asked about the state of the current tunnels, his response was "well, they can always move to NJ". What it showed was he had no interest in building a new tunnel in the first place, but rather saw this as an opportunity to fund roads and also try and poach jobs to NJ. He was right to question the design of it, few people argue that, but what they question is he basically killed the project without even attempting to change the nature of it and used a justification that was basically a lie. Shouldn't come as that big a surprise, he forced the Port Authority to pay for the rehab of the Pulaski Skyway,on the grounds it was an approach to the Holland Tunnel, when the Pulaski Skyway is several miles inland from the tunnel and who is not in service primarily to feed the tunnel.
Bidkid, having lived in Hudson County until 1958, I would disagree as to the Pulaski Skyway, at least then. It came in from Newark, plunged into a trench near Hudson Boulevard, came out near Palisade Ave., and dropped to the tunnel. Before the NJTP extension, it was the way to the Tunnel. As to Mr. Christie's motives, I think you are correct. But, since that tunnel would only "serve Macy's basement," the decision was correct.
I am still p[uzzled why the GW Bridge, finished in 1927 with one deck, 6 lanes (and space for 2 more) is still standing and hopefully sound, while the much newer Tappan Zee bridge had to be replaced.
I seem to recall that all of the Hudson & Manhattan RR tunnels (4 tracks) under the River were dug before the PRR tunnels. I had an office at Jersey City Exchange Place in 1959, and that station was deep, dark, and stunk from the homeless.
The H&M tunnels were started before the North River tubes, but a blowout caused work to stop. It was after the PRR finished that the H&M project was re-started and completed.
RJR posted:Bidkid, having lived in Hudson County until 1958, I would disagree as to the Pulaski Skyway, at least then. It came in from Newark, plunged into a trench near Hudson Boulevard, came out near Palisade Ave., and dropped to the tunnel. Before the NJTP extension, it was the way to the Tunnel. As to Mr. Christie's motives, I think you are correct. But, since that tunnel would only "serve Macy's basement," the decision was correct.
I am still p[uzzled why the GW Bridge, finished in 1927 with one deck, 6 lanes (and space for 2 more) is still standing and hopefully sound, while the much newer Tappan Zee bridge had to be replaced.
I seem to recall that all of the Hudson & Manhattan RR tunnels (4 tracks) under the River were dug before the PRR tunnels. I had an office at Jersey City Exchange Place in 1959, and that station was deep, dark, and stunk from the homeless.
The Pulaski today feeds a lot more than the Holland Tunnel, it is a major artery into Jersey City, and feeds the 1-9 highway as well at Tonnele Circle, so arguing it was a tunnel approach was to say the least suspect and likely violated the charter of the Port Authority and its bonding authority, PA funds by law cannot be used on anything but PA projects (there is a reason for this, the PA being multi state could lead to all kinds of abuse, state governments in effect using the PA to bond their projects).
With the Tappan Zee Bridge, It was designed back in the 1950's for a service life of 50 years,it was a partially cantilevered deck bridge on the main span and wasn't exactly built ruggedly, plus it is routinely taking loads it was never designed to take, so it isn't surprising it needed replacing. In general, suspension bridges because of the way they are designed can last pretty much an infinite period of time if they are maintained properly ( a big if) and are taking traffic loads they are designed for.
The George Washington Bridge was designed to handle heavy traffic, when they put a second level on it I don't think they even had to redo the cables, and also was built by an old school engineer who believed in overbuilding, he built to safety margins of roughly 3-1, current standards are like 1.5-1 I hear (I can only imagine what they were on the Brooklyn Bridge, the only reason the Bridge had its cables replaced in the 1940's was because a lot of the wire in it likely was inferior quality, thanks to a shady contractor tied to political figures in Brooklyn and Manhattan, bridge was built to safely handle conventional train equipment, which as far as anyone knows it never did).
Also I believe the original plan for the GW bridge was to have rapid transit on the lower level. If they had done it it would clearly have been better than more car/truck lanes.
PRR Man posted:The H&M tunnels were started before the North River tubes, but a blowout caused work to stop. It was after the PRR finished that the H&M project was re-started and completed.
The North River Tunnels (the Pennsylvania Tunnels) were opened in 1910, the H and M midtown Tunnel (the Morton Tunnel) was opened early in 1908, the downtown tunnels (to where the World Trade Center is) were completed in 1909. The original midtown tunnels were started in 1871, had various failures (including a horrible blowout in 1880 that killed like 20 workers, and bankrupted it), at the time McAdoo and what became the H and M started work again around 1901, the northernmost tube had a gap of like 1500 feet between the two tunnel segments, the south had barely been started. I believe the downtown Tunnels were started around 1903.
The new Penn Station in the Farley Building will be open in two years. They are already installing the glass ceilings. What I wonder is will any of the below ground platforms be enhanced and tracks added?
RJR posted:Bidkid, having lived in Hudson County until 1958, I would disagree as to the Pulaski Skyway, at least then. It came in from Newark, plunged into a trench near Hudson Boulevard, came out near Palisade Ave., and dropped to the tunnel.
Living in Somerset County NJ in the 1950s, I have "fond" memories of the Pulaski. It was our route for visits to 2 sets of grand parents in Queens, NY. Bumper to bumper crawling traffic due to cars overheating, and a few flat tires. The more stopping, the more cars overheated.
Joe, you bring back "fond" memories---of dodging potholes and, before I could drive, going to the Newark Farmers Market at night for fresh vegetables.
