Will the New York Subway come to New Jersey? Railway Age Editor Douglas John Bowen says the question isn’t will it happen but when will it happen. The idea is now supported by the Real Estate Board of New York. While many New Yorkers wonder why they should pay for a subway that runs to New Jersey that question could be answered if New Jersey agrees to come up with part of the money. There is one opponent, Joseph J. Lhota who right now is a candidate to be the next Mayor of New York. But even if he is elected there is still a possibility that eventually the train could get here. Here is a link to Bowen’s column:
As a Jersey guy I don’t see my own Governor, Christ Christie, supporting this. Christie vetoed a new tunnel for New Jersey Transit to Manhattan claiming it would be too expensive so why should he be inclined to support this tunnel? Christie is up for reëlection next November but right now he is overwhelmingly popular.
Back when the New Jersey Transit was going on (and it actually began before Governor Christie stopped it) there was no issue of Port Authority control. However, the Port Authority had committed a significant amount of money to paying for it.
Whether or not the Port Authority would have jurisdiction over a subway tunnel operated by the Metropolitan Transit Authority I don’t know.
Of course, New York promised us they were going to send a branch of the IND over the George or Martha Washington Bridge – I don’t remember which, but I saw the actual engineering blueprints for some of the track structure involved – and it’s interesting to consider where it would have gone (Hackensack, I think) and what it would have connected to on the way. I’d have loved to see the viaducting down the valley that contained NJ Route 4… this is long before it was ‘opened up’ for the I-95/80 megaplex… and seen the effect on traffic for, as an example, the Northern Branch of the Erie. I believe the Depression killed it.
I’d have to wonder whether there would be adequate capacity opening up in the ex-PRR Hudson River tunnels (which do have third rail in them that could be made compatible with subway standards) once Amtrak gets their ‘new’ Hudson River Tunnels done. Surely it makes better sense to have the subway connection go directly to someplace like Secaucus than wander across to access some light rail with multiple stops to actually get someplace; this is a bit like a slugs-despising-the-worms remix of the NYW&B debacle…
Gets you around a GREAT deal of the ‘orthodox’ GCT-to-Penn confusion, too, if you extend the 7 line over to tie into the old West Side line (that is now the Empire Corridor) and then make a little modification to allow trains to turn into the Hudson bores as well as toward the Penn Station platforms…
Yes, it was planned when erected that the G.W. Bridge would have tracks, but I’m not sure how firm the concept was.
I commented to Railway Age similar to comments I’ve made on these posts over time that PATH should be the builder/operator of any such trans Hudson crossing. First it is the purview of the Port Authority and as such all legal crossings of state lines, etc. are cleared. Second, PATH could extend north and west from 33rd St going into NJ and then turn south toward Hoboken, Journal Square, or Newark (and Newark Airport)…this could be straight line or loop. Third, PATH could also take advantage of abandoned railroad rights of way and lines and extend into upper Newark, Bloomfield, the Oranges, etc. Fourth…how many people in Flushing want to go to NJ and vice versa? The 7 train’s route would only scantily viable if it included LaGuardia and could connect to Newark Airport in a once seat ride. Politically and socially the concept of the MTA or anything NYCity intruding on Jersey soil would not sit well with many on both shores of the North River. And this service would not be heavy commuter rail but more local rapid transit. All realities and sensibilities and legalities lead to PATH being the agency with the best abilities and least problems in providing rapid transit between the shores of NJ and NY.
Your thinking is way ahead of my own here, Henry. My own thought was that a direct connection to the New York Subway System in New Jersey would be desirable.
You point out that the Port Authority could do a lot of other desirable things for the whole area. Also, the Port Authority is in a much better political situation to accomplish these things and that is very important.
I recall discussing the possibility of extending the PATH to Newark Airport and that the Port Authority is studying this so they seem to have some interest in that part of the plan. Is there any reason to believe the Port Authority would be willing to take on the rest of it?
My point is that if you want something to happen, PATH is ahead in the game with authority to bridge over and tunnel under the Hudson. If you want to drag things out for another 100 years while the State of NJ battles the State and City of New York and other fiefdoms including the Port Authority, then, yeah, have the MTA do it…but my great, great, grandkids as grandparents themselves might be the first riders.
It was explained to me, repeatedly, in the '70s that the Port Authority and PATH were two very, very different things when it came to bridges/tunnels for the Hudson (this being in connection with my involvement in the 125th-street Trans-Manhattan Viaduct project at that time)
The very stringent clearance restrictions on the old H&M make design of PATH-compliant equipment restricted in a number of respects. That is true in both gage/‘plate’ restrictions and length.
The whole point of the 7 line is not that it’s coming from Flushing; it’s that it’s crosstown through Grand Central toward the West Side, in the immediate vicinity of (1) 42nd Street area, (2) the PA bus terminal. This would be like saying that very few people are going from Inwood to the Rockaways as a justification not to build the IND!
I find it very unlikely that H&M anything is going to be extended to GCT area, and its lines in lower Manhattan are much the same ‘might as well be on the Moon’ for many commuters as would access to the Lincoln Tunnel from downtown in the absence of the 31st street connector…
I, personally, would expect there to be relatively little run-through from NJ out to Flushing on the “7 line” project; much more likely that it would act like a shuttle from GCT to NJ. I of course like the idea of a one-seat TRAIN ride between LaGuardia and Newark; I would even use transfer to an expanded version of the Q10 if that’s more cost-effective to access the various terminals and services at LaGuardia and the time of the rubber-tired loop service could be held to a consistent minimum.
In case you hadn’t remembered, there has been “MTA encroachment” on Jersey soil for quite some time now, even extending to MTA ownership of locomotives and cars. Does Suffern ring a bell? There’s no reason whatsoever to think that MTA and NJT don’t, let alone can’t, have working relationships … or that the PA
But MTA Subway is not in NJ, MTA’s MNRR is. As far as difference between PATH and Port Authority is that the Authority owns and operates PATH. PATH holds the franchise for crossing the Hudson, not MTA, not MNRR, not NJT in the sense of rapid transit. The time and bloodshed it would take for MTA or anybody else to get the authoritative ability to do it will take decades. So why play the game? Use the cards PATH is holding. And then expand on it…
As I say, Henry, your thinking her is ahead of mine.
But I have heard that for the Port Authority the PATH is a money pit and they would dump it if they could. Is there any real reason to think they would expand a money losing operaton?
Technical only. And I suspect, less than defiinitive in the sense you want it to be. MTA is the entity that deals with PA, and almost certainly with PATHC on the administrative level where those things matter.
Now, I’m going to go out on a limb here, and ASSume that you are conflating the Corporation with the existing “PATH” rail system itself. The PA was not particularly interested, let alone happy, to take over the H&M services, as I recall. Only in the negotiations over the WTC did PA agree to take over what are now called the PATH services. Not exactly a situation where mother dog will fight anyone attempting to come to the manger, is it now/
Just exactly what ‘franchise’ would you have this be, post the transfer from H&M ownership? Do you have legal cites that back up an actual exclusive franchise for the Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation? If so, please provide them for me.
It’s a good thing you put in that qualifier about ‘rapid transit’ because I was going to ask what the MTA agency of record involved in the proposed Tappan Zee rail connector (which last I looked was still ‘crossing the Hudson’) was going to be … (hint: not the Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation).
I would tend to call ‘wack’ on this. Look no further than that recent open letter by Kingsberry in which
Overmod. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey owns and operates PATH. (Port Authority Trans Husdson) as a successor to the Hudson and Manhattan Railroad. Whether they wanted to or didn’t want to, they do. The Port Authority also owns and operates the George Washington Bridge, the Outer Bridge, the Goethals Bridge, and the Bayonne Bridge, plus the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels. They have the authority and expertise in trans Hudson infrastructure and transportation projects. Neither the MTA nor NJT have any input or control over it. MTA and MNRR own and operate only in New York City and State and contract with NJT for crews and operating trans above the NY/NJ border and don’t have any authority over PATH (or the PA) in any way nor do they have any authority to do anything trans Hudson. or interstate. So, rather than have a national debate, interstate and regional squabbles and tantrums, and fiefdom wars, etc. and waste the time to go through all that, just have the Governors of the two States (who “control” the PA board and managers by selection) push the idea. The Port Authority is already in place with the powers to do it without all the hullaballo which would ensue. And the ferry company is a private enterprise not regulated by the Port Authority and can enter into any contract it wishes with whoever it wishes; in the Sandy emergency, it probably would not have mattered anyway. The Tappan Zee project is going through the State of New York Department of Transportation with MNRR having some input.
It was pointed out in another thread that the Port Authority’s monopoly only extends up the Hudson so far, and that the Tappen Zee bridge was built at that location because it was just beyond PA’s control.
Why do you think they called it the PORT Authority!
Seriously though, I only brought that up because Henry phrased his claim in terms of any crossing of the Hudson, not just those involved to ‘Greater New York’.
Yes, the ‘logical’ way to handle the matter is for PA to have authority and control over the tunnel (consider it like any other of the Hudson River vehicle crossings, with similar bounds on approach ownership and administration, even though rail-only), MTA to have authority over the buiild and operations on the New York side, and NJT on the other (it’s probably very, very unlikely that any operations of the ‘subway extension’ would then go back into New York west of the Hudson, or to Pennsylvania! But (1) that wouldn’t put the Port Authority in charge of the whole schmear, and (2) the PA wouldn’t be in the position of expanding its rail operation … well, let’s go ahead and say it, net operating deficit … to run even the part of the extension within the tunnel and approach confines. That would just add to the cost to the PA, which would already be looking at the net cost of all tunnel construction and maintenance cost, bond- and toll-financed though those might be.
I consider it fairly obvious that the PA would be “interested as could be” in maximizing its use of OPM and minimizing its exposure to railroad operations. Somebody will need to make a VERY convincing argument, direct from Kingsberry or someone similarly empowered in the PA administration, that the situation would or even should be different.
Evidently none of you know what the Port of Authority of New York and New Jersey is. It is a legal and political entity agreement between the two states to administer to the operations of the Port. The bridges, tunnels, and PATH, and certain piers, properties, and waterways come under its jurisdiction. It was born so as to overcome the conflicting laws and domains of the two states and to work for the good of the Port… Both states adhere to this entity in dealing with matters as defined by its charter. In effect, it is a separate state or sub state or what ever you want to call it, that acts as the agent for the two states within the Port area. You can hypothecize and claim whatever you want, but it is what it is and has first authority on the inter state or trans Hudson transportation infrastructure. It is real, it is legal, it is the Authority. The board is comprised of appointees from each of the states with the governor of both states ex officio memebers.
Henry6 ias absolutely correct. Here is the only scenereo that might take a New York City subway line to New Jersey. The PA owns both the 41St and 8th Avenue and the Washington Heights bus terminals. These sit on valuable real estate. Obviously , the Port Authority could realize a large fortune by developing both properties for business and commercial-retail use. If the buses did not have to cross the GW bridge, there would more than enough reduction in traffic to allow the two rapid transit lanes that were unused for anything through WWII to be converted back to rapid transit from roadways, and the IND connection would be feasible, with a new bus-subway transfer station on land in Edgewood that is available and convenient to highways. And most of the bus passengers transfer to the IND subway now anyway, so the transfer would just occur at a different place. If the 7 were extended to Secause in it own tunnel (give up any idea of it using any Amtrak tunne, a rediculous idea, on the way a Meadows NJT-PA bus terminal would be built, and the buses that now go into midtown Manhattan would drop their passengers at the new No. 7 transfer station. They could then go to Manhattan and Queens on the subway, or back track one stop for convenient connections to NJT trains at Secaucus. Both scenereos are doable and I think fundable because of the valuable real estate now occupied by bus terminals.
Dave: DUH! I have been so tied to the rails I didn’t think to think of bus terminals in NJ instead of rail connections or a one seat rapid transit line! Thank you for jogging my brain away from the train!
A comment on the discussion of the Port Authority’s juristinction; recently (2010-2011?) the Port Authority was directed to assume control of Steward Airport in Newburgh NY by the Governors of NY & NJ. Both state’s legislatures immediately passed bills modifying the PA’s “charter”.
Obviously, the “Port” aspect in Port Authority is no longer the focus. The PA is now involved in anything that the two governors decide that it will be.
I forgot about Stewart. But the point is underscored that the Authority an entity which wields great power and jurisdiction under the whims of the governors of the two states.