The Access to the Region’s Core project (ARC), a tri-partite study by the MTA, the Port Authority and NJ Transit to explore options for providing additional rail access across the Hudson River, is completing the second phase of its work.  A draft environmental impact statement is expected to result soon.

At a recent Citizens’ Advisory Committee, ARC’s study manager described the three “build” alternatives. They each include construction of a new rail tunnel under the Hudson.  Alternative “G” would continue the new line to Grand Central Terminal with the potential to operate NJ Transit trains to the east side and Metro North trains to Penn Station.  Alternative “P” would end the line in a new terminal below Penn Station.  Alternative “S,” after stopping at Penn Station, would continue the new line in a new East River tunnel into Queens at Sunnyside Yard to provide storage capacity for NJ Transit trains.

Unfortunately, each of these three raises serious issues that weaken their prospects.  In the case of “G,” there is concern about its impact on Metro North operations and of its constructability, among other issues. It would divert the largest numbers of passengers from the overcrowded exclusive bus lane leading to the Lincoln Tunnel and from autos, but would add the least number of new peak hour train “slots” for NJ Transit.

Alternative “P” would require a deep terminal under Penn Station platforms 1-4, presenting steep access and additional crowding issues.  It would not provide direct access to the east side where the concentration of jobs is high. “S” would also fail to provide direct access to the east side and would require the use of a portion of Sunnyside Yard by NJ Transit in an area also coveted by New York City Transit for trains for Second Avenue subway trains and other operations. 

Both “P” and “S” would add capacity for a significant number of new peak hour trains that could be used for new services from New Jersey, including the West Shore line.

It is unfortunate that ARC, after at least four years of study, has not found a solution without major operating or construction stumbling blocks that would get New Jersey riders to the east side and add substantially to peak hour capacity.  One of the reasons for this failure has been the rejection of alternatives that do not pass through Penn Station. But the strong interest in systems redundancy in light of last year’s terrorist attacks should re-open the issue of a tunnel and rail line removed from the Penn Station complex that could be extended to the east side along a more northerly alignment. In light of the absence of a clear winner, ARC should go back to the drawing board. 

ARCwebsite: www.accesstotheregionscore.com/

Access to the Region's core website

Saving Regional Rail From its Own Success (Aug. 7, 1998)

MTR search facility and back issues:

Search our database of all past issues of Mobilizing the Region since Fall, 1994.

Go to index of all Mobilizing the Region back issues