Study Finds Boats, Rails to Be Best Modes For Easing Congestion at Port of N.Y.-N.J.

This story appears in the Nov. 24 print edition of Transport Topics.

A draft environmental impact study of ways to ease congestion at the Port of New York and New Jersey shows nearly a dozen alternatives that would primarily use boats and rail to reduce truck traffic at the port.

The 10 alternatives range from as much as $600 million in water transportation improvements to a new rail tunnel costing between $7 billion and $11 billion to facilitate the movement of freight across New York Harbor.

It’s the latest step in the port’s yet-to-be-funded Cross Harbor Freight Movement Project, intended to reduce truck congestion at the port and throughout the region.

“With the expected future growth in freight transport, truck vehicle miles traveled would increase and the current inefficiencies of freight movement by truck and adverse effects of trucks would grow,” said the federal environmental impact study released earlier this month.

“Due to the region’s overwhelming dependence on trucking, highway congestion has a tremendous impact on freight movement, increasing the costs and environmental impacts of goods movement, while decreasing reliability and speed of freight delivery and safety of roadways and infrastructure,” according to the study.

The study is funded by the port authority and the Federal Highway Administration.

The rail tunnel alternative, one potential solution, would connect Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island, Westchester County and southern Connecticut to the national freight rail grid, according to Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), a supporter of the tunnel alternative.

“It will remove thousands of trucks from our clogged roadways, and that will reduce pollution, reduce the cost of goods and the cost of doing business, grow jobs, and make us all safer by both ensuring easier movement of emergency vehicles and securing an additional route by which we can get vital goods into the region, should our primary route be compromised,” Nadler said in a Nov. 13 statement.

Regulatory approval and design for the alternatives could take two to four years, and construction could range from two years for the waterborne alternatives to a minimum of eight years for the rail tunnel alternatives, the study said.

Kendra Hems, president of the New York State Motor Truck Association, said that for years New York City officials have talked about removing trucks by using rail and boat, but nothing has transpired.

“While the plan may relieve some truck congestion on the main highways, you still have that last-mile issue,” Hems said. “Regardless of where they bring the freight to, you still need the trucks to pick it up and make the final delivery.”

Gail Toth, executive director of the New Jersey Motor Truck Association, said that so far there has been no decision on which alterative or alternatives might be used.

“One option is to do nothing at all,” Toth said.

Even planned regional highway improvements would address some local constraints but would not significantly alleviate regionwide congestion, the survey said.