# Path Train Extension



## Andrew (Sep 12, 2013)

There has been recent talk of extending the PATH Train to Newark Airport. My question, is, how will this conflict with the Raritan Flyover Project? http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/rapid-transit/path-extension-to-get-new-jersey-nudge.html?channel=62


----------



## afigg (Sep 12, 2013)

With the projected cost of extending PATH several miles to the Newark Airport station now at approximately $1 billion, that likely provides for a route that does not conflict with future upgrade plans for that segment of the NEC. The cost of the PATH extension has taken a big jump from earlier estimates. Maybe the new plan is tunnel under the NEC ROW to get to the eastern side of the NEC tracks and the Newark Airport station? Until the Port Authority provides details on the results of their environmental and engineering study, all we can do is guess.


----------



## Trogdor (Sep 12, 2013)

Unfortunately, from what I understand, it still requires transferring to that godawful monorail at EWR (with cars so small you'd think you were in one of those amusement park ferris wheel pods).


----------



## AlanB (Sep 13, 2013)

I think that there has been talk of extending both PATH and the Newark City Subway to the airport for the last 30 to 40 years. I grew up in Belleville and rode the Newark Subway to college and there was talk of extensions to EWR way back then. The monorail wasn't even a glimmer in anyone's eyes back then, much less a station on the NEC.

So I'll believe an extension of either train to the airport when I see a shovel in the ground and the money to build it.

To answer the question however, it wouldn't have any impact on the Raritan Flyover. There is already a bridge carrying freight trains over the NEC right there. That bridge isn't going anywhere, so PATH's plans must deal with that no matter what. And any flyover will either use that existing bridge or a new one right in the same area.


----------



## Andrew (Sep 13, 2013)

1. But then wouldn't Path Trains interfere with "Westbound" trains heading to Raritan at the Hunter Flyover?

2. What is the actual distance between Newark Penn Station and Newark Airport Rail Station?

3. If the Port Authority tunnels under the NEC to get to Newark Airport Rail Station, what would their method be? TBMs? Cut-and Cover and or Drill-and Blast?


----------



## afigg (Sep 13, 2013)

Andrew said:


> 1. But then wouldn't Path Trains interfere with "Westbound" trains heading to Raritan at the Hunter Flyover?
> 
> 2. What is the actual distance between Newark Penn Station and Newark Airport Rail Station?
> 
> 3. If the Port Authority tunnels under the NEC to get to Newark Airport Rail Station, what would their method be? TBMs? Cut-and Cover and or Drill-and Blast?


1. Why would the Port Authority be allowed to build a PATH extension that would interfere with NEC and NJ Transit plans?2. How about firing up a map program or Google Earth to measure the distance yourself? Not that difficult.

3. A couple of guys with pick axes and dynamite. Good grief, until PATH releases their study on the proposed extension, we don't know what the thinking is on how to extend PATH.

If the price tag is $1 billion, that may keep the project on the, yea, we will build it someday list. Or not.


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Sep 13, 2013)

I'm not at all familiar with this proposed extension or where the money would come from, but that is a billion bucks better spent towards new tunnels under the Hudson.


----------



## afigg (Sep 13, 2013)

The Davy Crockett said:


> I'm not at all familiar with this proposed extension or where the money would come from, but that is a billion bucks better spent towards new tunnels under the Hudson.


The funds would come from the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey  (PANYNJ) which owns and operates PATH, the airports (JFK, LGA, EWR, Teeterboro, Stewart), tunnels, bridges, and ports in the greater NYC region. It is a very large operation with $4 billion in revenue and $3.3 billion in capital spending in 2012*. The Port Authority would almost certainty be a contributor to the Gateway project, but it has a number of major capital projects on its plate in the coming years.

* edit: pulled up the PANYNJ 2012 financial statement and filled in the numbers.


----------



## jis (Sep 13, 2013)

One of its bigger projects at present is raising the Bayonne Bridge in place to allow larger Container Ships to pass under it.

(null)


----------



## Andrew (Sep 15, 2013)

Does the current estimate for the Path Extension to EWR Rail Station include the Hunter Interlocking Flyover?


----------



## PATH user (Nov 15, 2013)

See this thread from flyertalk (which at a first glance doesn't seem to have anything to do with the current discussion),

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileageplus-consolidated/1521593-united-airlines-announces-new-nonstop-flights-atlantic-city-n-j-ord-iah.html

but if you look closely

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/21785183-post26.html



> A Wall Street Journal article in September 2013 indicated that the NJ Gov Chris Christie had requested that United launch flights from ACY to a host of cities in exchange for directing the Port Authority of NY/NJ to start work on the PATH rail extension from Newark Penn Station directly to Newark Airport.
> 
> United reportedly refused the first time around, but I wonder if with this announcement, an announcement on the PATH extension will follow.
> 
> Here's a link to a Google search on the topic, click the first link to pull up the WSJ article to avoid the paywall: https://www.google.com/search?q=Mixe...to+the+Airport


It's still a speculation at this point.


----------



## jis (Nov 15, 2013)

Indeed, when the original Christie - UA deal was talked about there was a clear indication of a quid pro quo, since United does not expect to make any money running those two daily flights. They are apparently willing to let them be if they get something out of it for Newark Airport, which they of course care about a lot. A direct PATH train from WTC to EWR would be quite a boon for the UA hub at EWR. So let's see if Christie is able to deliver his end of the deal before he decamps to try to become the President.

As for how PATH will get across the NEC, it will be on an elevated structure akin to the one used by it to get across half the NEC to its yard in NWK. Indeed it will probably be mostly on elevated structure either above the NEC or above McCarter Highway or some combination thereof - hence the seemingly high cost.The Yard will probably be moved from NWK to EWR where there is ample space for such. So any question about what tunneling technique will be used is quite irrelevant. It will also have to fly over the Lehigh Valley CSAO line. Where it will do so exactly will depend on the choice of the actual routing. The PATH station at EWR will be between the AirTrain station and the CSAO leads. There are also proposals floating around to eventually extend it to a centrally located single station in the short term parking lots area with travellators connecting it to the terminals. But that is not part of the current proposals.


----------



## Andrew (Nov 15, 2013)

1. First of all, Christie will not become the President of the United States!

2. What phase of engineering is the PATH Extension in now?


----------



## MattW (Nov 15, 2013)

Question about the potential funding for this. I asked on another forum, but only one person spoke up and while I don't doubt they're correct, I'd still like to hear it elsewhere. If Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) are used to fund the extension to EWR, does that mean that a South Newark station (or any other intermediate station) couldn't even be built on the extension even if all aspects of that station, platform, faregates, escalators, etc. were funded from other sources?


----------



## jis (Nov 15, 2013)

Matt, that is my understanding. First they will have to create a sliver of PA property from the airport property to Newark Penn Station to build the thing on, and then use it only for airport access and nothing else. OTOH, like they di in Jamaica they could use it as an excuse to pour all sorts of money into Newark Penn Station. 

As for stage it is at stage zero, only talks and speculation. No funding yet so other than some preliminary design work done in the past there is nothing.


----------



## MattW (Nov 15, 2013)

Frankly, that's insane. To me it sounds like the only way to get any intermediate station in a project such as this is to fund from NWK to the intermediate's platform edge through some other means, then fund the rest of the extension through the PFCs, but given where the rumored/wanted/proposed station would be, that's already a third of the route to EWR. Well, I guess only time will tell how this will settle out. Unfortunately, given current politics as well as history, my guess is that the extension will only ever serve the airport.


----------



## Andrew (Nov 16, 2013)

Why can't PFC's fund the Newark Airport Station Complex, and the Port Authority fund the new station in South Newark?


----------



## MattW (Nov 16, 2013)

I only loosely understand it, but I'll give it a shot. PFCs are regulated by the FAA and apparently, they very clearly state that any use of the funds must support improvement to the airport and nothing else. I.e. they couldn't be used to fund mixed-use development next to the terminal. Where the grey area in my opinion hits is what's considered a benefit from the PFCs. While yes, the extension wouldn't exist without the PFCs being used to fund the entire length, I still think that if the station were funded via other means, that that isn't the PFCs being used to provide an other than airport benefit. Basically, it's coded somewhere in the regulations and best interpreted by a lawyer.


----------



## Andrew (Nov 16, 2013)

Why not update these regulations?


----------



## jebr (Nov 16, 2013)

Andrew said:


> Why not update these regulations?


Have you seen Congress lately? If it's something set in law, good luck getting it changed.


----------



## Andrew (Feb 4, 2014)

Folks,

Some good news coming out of the Port Authority...

http://online.wsj.com/article/APe2fd3951353943e0925450f2990d411a.html?mod=WSJ_NY_LEFTAPHeadlines


----------



## jis (Feb 4, 2014)

Yup, it will be extended to the EWR Rail station.


----------



## afigg (Feb 4, 2014)

Andrew said:


> Folks,
> 
> Some good news coming out of the Port Authority...


Whether it is good news depend on your point of view. While extending PATH to the Newark Airport stop adds utility to PATH providing a direct connection between the PATH stops in Manhattan and EWR, $1.5 billion is expensive for a 1 stop extension. The extension will also drive up the operating costs of PATH with an additional station, more track miles to maintain, and more rolling stock to maintain service frequencies. I am not saying it is a bad idea, but it is a lot to spend for an airport stop that already has direct service from NYP via NJT.

Also, allocating $1.5 billion to the EWR extension means that money won't be available for other capital projects in the coming years, such as .... dare I say it, NEC Gateway.


----------



## Andrew (Feb 4, 2014)

Well, $7.9 Billion is going to get allocated for PA Bridges and Tunnels:

$1 Billion for Bayonne Bridge Replacement

$1.5 Billion for Goethels Bridge

$1.2 Billion for George Washington Bridge modernization

What's the rest of the $4.2 Billion?


----------



## afigg (Feb 5, 2014)

Andrew said:


> Well, $7.9 Billion is going to get allocated for PA Bridges and Tunnels:
> 
> $1 Billion for Bayonne Bridge Replacement
> 
> ...


Read the draft 2014-2023 Port Authority Capital Plan which has been posted on the PANYNJ Corporate Information webpage to find out. Press releases usually will list the high profile projects, not the less sexy nuts and bolts projects.

The question is why does the extension cost $1.5 billion? Has the PA released feasibility and engineering studies? How much will the PA need to set aside to spend on legal representation to deal with the supoenas and investigations in the wake of Bridge gate and lots of questions suddenly being asked about how the NJ side of the PA is being run? Stay tuned.


----------



## Andrew (Feb 5, 2014)

Why not use the money that is going to get used for the Path Extension and the Newark Airport Upgrade for Gateway?!


----------



## jis (Feb 5, 2014)

Newark Airport Upgrade money may not be available for use on anything but airport since some of it may be coming from air passenger charge funds. I am actually curious to see if they will play the sort of games they played with the JFK Airtrain to figure out a way to fund the PATH Extension out of air passenger funds too. But probably not since then they will have to most likely commit to never operate a through PATH train from EWR to anywhere beyond Newark.

PANYNJ will have to find the money for Gateway from its Bridge and Tunnel funds which is essentially funded from real estate and from bridge and tunnel tolls.

I personally would not trade Newark Airport Improvements with Gateway. Both are necessary and it is not an either or proposition at all. Fortunately EWR Improvement has a captive source of funds. Unfortunately Gateway at present does not.


----------



## Fan Railer (Feb 5, 2014)

Andrew said:


> Why not use the money that is going to get used for the Path Extension and the Newark Airport Upgrade for Gateway?!


Your obsession with Gateway is bordering on unhealthy.


----------



## Andrew (Feb 5, 2014)

jis said:


> Newark Airport Upgrade money may not be available for use on anything but airport since some of it may be coming from air passenger charge funds. I am actually curious to see if they will play the sort of games they played with the JFK Airtrain to figure out a way to fund the PATH Extension out of air passenger funds too. But probably not since then they will have to most likely commit to never operate a through PATH train from EWR to anywhere beyond Newark.
> 
> PANYNJ will have to find the money for Gateway from its Bridge and Tunnel funds which is essentially funded from real estate and from bridge and tunnel tolls.
> 
> I personally would not trade Newark Airport Improvements with Gateway. Both are necessary and it is not an either or proposition at all. Fortunately EWR Improvement has a captive source of funds. Unfortunately Gateway at present does not.


But Gateway funding was not presented within the Port Authority's recently listed 10 year Capital Plan. Does this mean that--besides the both phases of the tunnel box and the Portal Bridge Replacement Project--that Gateway will not begin major construction until 2024?!


----------



## jis (Feb 5, 2014)

PANYNJ is not the only source of funds for Gateway, and also funding plans never stay the same over a 10 year period at PANYNJ. It blows with the wind depending on who the Governor of the two states are and what else comes to pass.

But let me remind you that I have said all along that the construction of Gateway is not imminent. It is you that suffer from these odd fantasies and lose sleep over it.


----------



## Andrew (Feb 5, 2014)

jis said:


> PANYNJ is not the only source of funds for Gateway, and also funding plans never stay the same over a 10 year period at PANYNJ. It blows with the wind depending on who the Governor of the two states are and what else comes to pass.
> 
> But let me remind you that I have said all along that the construction of Gateway is not imminent. It is you that suffer from these odd fantasies and lose sleep over it.


So maybe in a few years after the Geothels Bridge gets replaced and WTC construction gets completed and the Bayonne Bridge gets raised that the Port Authority will commit funding for Gateway?


----------



## jis (Feb 6, 2014)

It might. Then again it might not. It all depends on the two Governors involved. PANYNJ in and of itself will do nothing since they have no revenue stream that would accrue to them from Gateway.


----------



## Andrew (Feb 6, 2014)

Well, hopefully at some point in the future, the Port Authority will fund more transportation improvements--such as Gateway--from their capital plan as the WTC Construction concludes.

From http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2014/02/port_authority_capital_plan_unveiled.html

"another $4.9 billion is set aside over the next five years to complete the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site, an achievement that Rechler said would then allow the agency to focus on its core mission of enhancing transportation and economic growth in the bi-state region".


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Feb 9, 2014)

Andrew said:


> Well, hopefully at some point in the future, the Port Authority will fund more transportation improvements--such as Gateway--from their capital plan as the WTC Construction concludes.
> 
> From http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2014/02/port_authority_capital_plan_unveiled.html
> 
> "another $4.9 billion is set aside over the next five years to complete the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site, an achievement that Rechler said would then allow the agency to focus on its core mission of enhancing transportation and economic growth in the bi-state region".


Or, if we are really lucky, Gateway in its current form will join ARC in the list of bad ideas never built, and the Raliegh-Clift proposal will actually be built. Or even better, they could just use the Reverse Kearny connection the way I envisaged and save a large number of zeros.


----------



## PeterKsfo (Feb 25, 2014)

I would go for just more NJT service from EWR to NYP - and also a savings of the "user fee" for the airtrain from the terminals to the EWR rail terminal too.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Dec 2, 2017)

We're finally taking baby steps....almost 15 years after the completion of the link.

http://www.northjersey.com/story/news/new-jersey/2017/11/28/proposed-path-extension-newark-airport-goes-before-public/903469001/



> NEWARK — The public was to get its first detailed look at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey's $1.7 billion plan to extend PATH train service to Newark Liberty International Airport, a project that has engendered debate inside the agency over whether it should be shelved in favor of other initiatives.
> 
> The public comment session scheduled Tuesday night was to be the first of two in New Jersey's largest city, signaling the beginning of a mandatory environmental permitting process expected to take about 18 months. After that, construction is expected to take several more years.


----------



## neroden (Dec 4, 2017)

This shouldn't be that expensive. Even being almost entirely elevated, with some underpasses, and electrification and so on, this is blatantly overpriced.

It needs some aggressive rebidding, such as happened on Boston's Green Line extension. Once it was made clear that the first builder was price gouging, and once that builder was fired, the rebidding came in at half the price.

I can only assume that mobbed-up New Jersey construction companies are the problem -- or perhaps grafting Port Authority commissioners. There's no other explanation I can think of.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 5, 2017)

Its New Jersey, which makes the Daley machine look like choir boys. I dont bother commenting on the price, so long as it is built well enough to work.


----------

