The Hudson Tunnel Projects trims $1.4 billion with new financial plan. The project cost for the construction of a new rail tunnel beneath the Hudson River and the comprehensive rehabilitation of the existing 108-year-old tunnel will cost $1.4 billion less than previously anticipated, resulting in an estimated cost of $9.5 billion for the new tunnel and $1.8 billion for the rehabilitation.
The revised figures are included in an updated financial plan submitted to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The reduced cost results from work conducted at the request of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy to position the project to advance quickly once the federal permits are issued. This work includes a more advanced level of design, and an intensive value-for-money analysis, including analysis of risks and associated mitigations, a more efficient contracting plan resulting in fewer contract packages, and consideration of delivery methods including design-build. The new Hudson River Tunnel’s level of design is now at the 30 percent threshold – the level typically used to move forward to bid for projects of this type.
A little background, this is part of the North Eastern Corridor (NEC) and many parts are in a poor state of repair to the tune of US$42 billion and each year Congress doles out about a quarter of what is needed to start restoring the system to a state of good repair. Over say 11 years the amount needed to reach a state of good repair increases each year.
There is another tunnel two single bores also built just after the American Civil War steep grades and curves 30 miles an hour speed limit. Lots of similar infrastructure needing urgent repair/ replacement. The NEC is intensively used and at peak in parts is effectively at capacity, in this case the need to replace the two existing tunnels is most urgent and very big ticket the tunnels where flooded during cyclone Sandy and have significant damage. There have been frequent problems and delays due to signalling and electrical failures just how long before a major failure is unknown but a matter of when not if.
Closing one single bore tunnel for major reconstruction would reduce capacity by 75% for an extended time. Two new tunnels would provide the original capacity while both original tunnels were rehabilitated – and as a bonus you end up with 4 tunnels at a pinch point.
The boxes through the Hudson Yards is one bright spot these needed to be constructed to take the additional lines as major construction of major buildings is being undertaken in the Hudson Yard airspace.
The funding for this project as urgent as it is has been stuffed around for several years due to politics, there was an earlier scheme that was started and shut down due to costs. If anyone is interested it is quite interesting and searchable on the internet. Currently the funding from the Federal Government appears to be stalled by the current President as hostage for great Mexican wall funding not very statesman like but I leave it there. Sorry the long post but I find the subject fascinating and a lot of countries need to deal with old infrastructure.
Your money goes a lot further if you can do stuff like this at normal cost. New York, like Britain, can’t. The US, especially NYC, is apparently the only place that is even worse, far worse, than Britain for public infrastructure costing far too much.
“[A blogger] … compiled the costs of 19 rail tunnels in the United States, Europe, South Korea, and Japan. … Every tunnel in the United Kingdom or the United States … was more expensive than every tunnel in continental Europe or Asia. And the three most expensive were all in New York City…”
So says (journalistic source):
https://www.city-journal.org/why-cant-new-york-control-its-infrastructure-costs-16036.html
I believe this is the original blog post it is referring to – now somewhat aged:
https://pedestrianobservations.com/2011/05/16/us-rail-construction-costs/
The journalistic article does identify some reasons. The common law legal system complicating contracting is one issue mentioned. Union power resulting in overmanning is not what I would have imagined of the USA, but the evidence is pretty clear. But it is hard to believe that the reasons mentioned suffice to explain the utter disproportionality of it.
Some other articles making similar points:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/05/new-york-infrastructure-costs.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html (registration required)
Alan,
The tunnels under the Hudson that the NEC uses were built between 1903 & 1910, about four decades after the civil war. They were built for the Pennsylvania Railroad when Pennsylvania Station was built. You might be thinking of the first of the “Hudson Tubes”, now used by PATH (not by the NEC) one of the four tubes was started just after the American Civil war, in 1873, although not finished until the 1910 (the company went bankrupt and the tubes set unfinished for several decades).
However, I believe everything else you said about the NEC tunnels is correct.
JOE No I was referring to another set of tunnels (see start of second paragraph), these are the Baltimore and Potomac tunnels currently 144 years old opened in1873 and located in Maryland. These have a new route and doubling to 4 tracks after investigations over several years and look likely to cost $4.5 Billion currently no funding but a ROD ( record of decision) to expedite things when funding is secured. I did not want to go into too much detail or it would be war and peace posting. Nearer the original Hudson river tunnels are another pinch point, Portal swing bridge there is 23 ft clearance and the bridge fails to close properly about 1 in 7 openings (about 104 years old). As this twin track section is at capacity in peak times the rectifications can last into peak when the bridge fails and causes major disruptions. There is a ROD dealing with its replacement with a non opening high level bridge and its ultimate duplication with a similar high level bridge but again no funding.