New York Underground

Getting in or out of New York via the Hudson River can be a traumatic experience for drivers and train passengers alike. While the roads are congested, the rail service is often disrupted by delays, which is hardly surprising considering the number of riders has quadrupled to 44 million from just 10 million in 1984. To make matters worse, the only passenger tunnel under the river is nearly 100 years old and only has two tracks – one in, one out.

The solution of adding extra train tracks seems obvious, especially if it means commuters not having to change trains to reach New York. Not only would it improve the commuters' rail experience, it would also encourage more people to ditch their cars.

"One of the biggest criticisms of the ARC project is that it does not go far enough, either metaphorically or physically."However, since New Jersey Transit (NJT) and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) announced their $7.6bn plan to do just that by building a Trans Hudson Express [THE] tunnel, criticism of the proposals has been fierce. Under the banner of Access to the Region's Core [ARC], the project to date has been beset by problems.

One rail advocate described it as a "fiasco, boondoggle and pork barrel" and in October all 17 Republican members of the New Jersey senate signed a resolution to challenge the legality of one of the tunnel's proposed funding streams.

Problem – solution - problem

So how has such a seemingly straightforward solution to an increasingly troublesome problem become mired in controversy? More importantly, what does it mean for the future of the project?

One of the biggest criticisms of the ARC project is that it does not go far enough, either metaphorically or physically. When the feasibility of the project was being studied one of the proposals put forward, known as Alternative G, had twin tunnels connected directly to Penn station, added tracks within the station and tunnels connecting the system to Grand Central.

At the time Alternative G was overlooked in favour of the chosen proposal, known as Alternative P, which lacked the Grand Central connection.

"New Jersey Transit's project would not improve trans-Manhattan mobility for either residents of the greater New York area or for Amtrak intercity train passengers."But now rail advocates, including the independent not-for-profit Regional Plan Association, are calling for the extension to the ARC project tunnel to allow New Jersey commuters to reach Grand Central station, in-line with Alternative G.

"As proposed, New Jersey Transit's project would not improve trans-Manhattan mobility for either residents of the greater New York area or for Amtrak intercity train passengers," says retired transportation planner Howard Harding.

"The original intent of the ARC project was to permit through-running of regional and intercity trains across Manhattan via Penn and Grand Central Stations.

"These through routings would vastly improve the efficiency and convenience of existing services and reduce congestion within Manhattan, making it easier for both stations to handle greater train volumes.

However, by only connecting to a new small station deep below Penn Station, the new tunnels would exclude intercity trains from their use while precluding extension of tracks to Grand Central Station on Manhattan's east side. The through-running could therefore not occur."