re: #596 iossarian

I covered that here. NJ simply can’t afford to cover the cost overruns, which might be equal to or exceed the NJ share for the project. And that would include even if NJ raised its gas tax (one of the few benefits of living in NJ is that the gas is cheaper here than in PA or NY). Christie is meeting with LaHood, and I think the result may be that the feds pick up a much greater share of cost overruns or that the project gets combined with an Amtrak proposal to build its own additional tracks into Penn Station.

I find fault with NJ Transit building 2-track tunnel to a separate terminus in NY at Herald Square, which doesn’t provide the kind of redundancy that you would expect with additional tracks. A delay into Penn would still occur with a single disabled train. The same would occur into the new NJ terminus. If the new tunnels went to Penn station, the disabled train would not affect service and would allow Amtrak and NJ Transit to offer much more effective and safe service. That’s how the project was originally pitched until NJ Transit changed their mind over where the tracks would terminate in NY. NJ Transit claimed that the tunnel to Penn Station would undermine the existing tracks and cost more, but that ignores the additional costs of building a whole new station in Herald Square and that they would get an economy of scale by building to Penn Station- rather than duplicating services elsewhere.