Commentary On:
Improving Regional Mobility:

Long-Range Investment Strategies For the Port Authority's Interstate Transportation Network

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, September, 1994

Comments by Daniel Convissor
17 October 1994

An excerpt was printed in the November/December 1994 edition of the Auto-Free Press

As a result, this study glorifies twinning the Goethals Bridge and widening the Staten Island Expressway. This combination got the highest economic and traffic flow rankings because it's the only one providing significant new capacity for passengers and cargo between New Jersey and Long Island (including Brooklyn and Queens). The Cross Bronx Expressway option contains minor capacity enhancements. The new rail line they studied would be a subway- like system from the Meadowlands to eastern Manhattan, so it would NOT: be a new segment of the commuter rail system, go to Long Island or serve freight.

An impressive job was done assembling the data and models. Though the transit and highway models are separate, they are linked. A transit project was modeled to determine how many auto drivers would be lured out of their cars and then the highway model determines the traffic flow consequences. The PA rightly assumes Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is good indicator of regional air quality. They do make an odd projection though, saying vehicular emissions will be reduced if the Goethals/SIE projects are done. Sadly, that projection will prove to be false. As with all capacity expansion projects, VMT will jump due to the project, hence, pollution will increase.

Heaps of delusional prose and environmental window dressing is no surprise in this context. For instance, the study says it "avoids main-line capacity expansion," calling the Goethals/SIE work a "vehicular network investment" that will "support expansion of 'commuting alternatives'." The PA waxes on about preserving open space and meeting the joined mandates of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). These statements show how hollow the CAA and ISTEA really are. The PA, along with transportation providers around the nation, pay lip service to alternative transport, give it a little more funding, then continue the highway business as usual.

Here's the alternatives the study examined:

Goethals Bridge expansion

Twinning the Goethals, making the existing bridge three lanes, plus shoulder, in the westbound direction while the new facility does the same for eastbound traffic.

Trans-Hudson Core Access Commuter Rapid Transit

New rapid rail line from the Meadowlands Sports Complex to Grand Central Terminal, traveling under 49 St in Manhattan. NY stations would be at Rockefeller Plaza (5-6 Av), Times Square (Broadway-8 Av) and Eleventh Avenue. The studied version does not connect to the 63 St Tunnel to Queens, though provisions for that are possible.

Improvements to the Cross Bronx Expressway

Construction of an auxiliary/shoulder lane along the westbound CBE from Sheridan Expressway to Prospect Av, ramp improvements at Third Av and the Sheridan Expressway. Those were included in the highway model. Lighting improvements and incident detection systems would be also be installed.

Goethals Bridge expansion and Staten Island Expressway widening

The SIE expansion would add a fourth lane in each direction.

Goethals and SIE expansions and Trans-Hudson Core Access Commuter Rapid Transit

The PA needs to compare the projects above with additional trans- Hudson alternatives that serve NJ LI trips. Below are some possibilities. While all of these are more expensive than the Goethals and SIE projects, some are likely to generate larger economic and environmental benefits:

• Light Rail from NJ Transit's Main Line station in Patterson to the East New York Station of both the Long Island Rail Road and the Transit Authority; via I-80, the George Washington Bridge, through the Bronx, and over the Hell Gate Bridge.

• Light rail from NJ Transit's Raritan Valley Line station in Cranford to East New York; via the Staten Island Rapid Transit line (on SI's North Shore), across the Verrazano Bridge and upon the Bay Ridge Freight Line.

• Rapid rail passenger & heavy rail freight reactivation from Cranford, through a new tunnel from Saint George, SI to Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. The rapid transit line would then hook into the 4 Av express subway tracks to the LIRR's Flatbush Av Terminal and Manhattan.

• Rail freight tunnel from Jersey City, NJ to Bay Ridge

• Heavy commuter rail from Secaucus, NJ to Sunnyside, Queens, via a new tunnel under the Hudson River and 49 St, utilizing the existing 63 St Tunnel to Queens.

• Heavy rail from Secaucus to Sunnyside, via previous route but using a new East River tunnel, instead of the 63 St Tunnel, to serve both commuter and freight trains.

• Heavy rail from Secaucus to Sunnyside, serving both commuter and freight, plus modifications of Harold Interlocking and adding two tracks from Win Junction to White Pot Junction along the Long Island Railroad main line. The two additional tracks will make the main line six tracks from Harold to the Rockaway Cutoff.

It seems the PA is afraid to put the Goethals Bridge expansion up against these alternatives, fearing it will not come out on top. Only by comparing alternatives that have similar goals can the best project(s) be truly determined.