Two visions proffered for single regional rail plan

By Chris Lombardi

George Haikalis, a member of Com-munity Board 5’s Transportation Com-mittee, gave a shy smile under his white beard as he looked across the room on Wednesday night. “We are at a unique moment,” he said quietly. “We have two new governors who can join hands to make this a priority.”

Haikalis, a committee member and veteran of the Tri-State Regional Planning Commission, wasn’t talking about the World Trade Center site. He was talking about changing the way tens of thousands of people enter New York City every day.

According to New Jersey Transit, some 70,000 people stream across the Hudson River from New Jersey daily on New Jersey Transit and Amtrak, emerging just north of Chelsea. More than 40,000 of them jam Penn Station during rush hour, before hustling to their offices elsewhere in Manhattan. And the jam is only bound to increase. By 2020, New York City is slated to grow to 9 million people, while by 2030, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, New Jersey’s 2000 population of more than 8 million is projected to increase by 16 percent, to nearly 1.4 billion.

Transit agencies and advocates in both states agree that a new tunnel with extra train tracks is necessary to handle the projected passenger-load increase, and this week New Jersey Transit announced progress on its new Trans-Hudson Extension Tunnel, conceived in 2003, which will add two tracks to transport twice as many trains into New York City every day. The plan also includes a second mini-Penn Station on 34th St., under Macy’s, to accommodate the extra passengers.

But transit advocates like Haikalis, backed up by the Lackwanna Coalition, which represents New Jersey commuters, were at C.B. 5 this week questioning the Penn Station mini-terminal and urging a solution known as “regional rail.” Their proposal would create an interconnected rail network among the four railway systems that now serve the tri-state area and Manhattan’s two train terminals. Advocates claim that such a broadly conceived system could alleviate auto-traffic congestion and increase convenience, while stimulating the economy and fostering more sensible development.

For at least five years, transit agencies have been working on ways to increase rail capacity across the Hudson River — a project they call Access to the Region’s Core. The Federal Transportation Administration, which administers federal mass-transit funds, recently green-lighted the release of an environmental impact statement on the Trans-Hudson Extension Tunnel and permitted New Jersey Transit to start the design process.

The project is “going forward at a rapid pace,” according to New Jersey Transit spokesman Dan Stessel, with an “unprecedented level of support” from elected officials. “Governor Corzine says he’s determined to get shovels in the water” as soon as possible, added Stessel, who said that federal funds could then cover as much as half of the estimated $5–7 billion cost.

But Haikalis and local engineer Joe Clifton, a fellow board member of the Regional Rail Working Group, offered C.B. 5’s Transportation Committee a different vision — one that had already been outlined by NJ Transit itself, which considered tunneling east of Penn Station and Macy’s and sending a third of its trains directly to Grand Central Station, where 40 percent of passengers are currently headed.

Clifton, a lanky engineer with an untended mustache, spoke on behalf of that concept, as well as the group’s “regional rail “ approach.

“East Side Access” (ESA), as they call it, would eliminate both New Jersey Transit’s planned new terminal and the Long Island Rail Road’s current plans for a similar terminal at Grand Central Station, instead making better use of existing tracks,” he said, adding that tracks and terminal space would be freed up by letting the more than 12,000 passengers going to the East Side (40 percent of the total) avoid Penn Station entirely.

The result would cost less, increase capacity and “and get people where they actually want to go,” said Clifton. He set the cost of the East-West tunnel at $6.2 billion, versus approximately $21 billion for both the Penn Station and Grand Central mini-terminals.

After Clifton’s presentation, some committee members were unimpressed. Committee chair John Mills said, “Penn Station certainly doesn’t seem under-utilized to me…it’s always packed.”

Clifton smiled. “What if half the LIRR passengers disappeared?” he countered. “Remember, they’re gone, with [the] East Side Access [plan]. They’re on their way to Grand Central.”

Despite the board’s skepticism, the advocates said the strongest barrier to the activists’ vision will be getting three transit organizations to agree to coordinate. But now that all three agencies have new directors, “a push from the top” — like Corzine or Spitzer — would get more response.

Chelsea residents will have a chance to compare the two visions in the next few months. An exhibit sponsored by the Durst Organization called “Making the Connection: Moving Forward on Regional Rail” opens Feb. 8 at the Condé Nast Building at 4 Times Square.

Meanwhile, a public hearing is scheduled for March 27 at F.I.T. on the New Jersey Transit proposal’s draft environmental impact statement.

New Jersey Transit spokesman Stessel, who called its terminal “essential,” sounded weary of the advocates.

“Respectfully…they need to get over it.”