New Hope For Cross Sound Link

New engineering report released.

Western: I-287/I-95 interchange to Route 135
Hybrid: I-287/I-95 interchange to Sunken Meadow/Sagtikos Parkway
Central: I-95 near Route 8 to Sunken Meadow/Sagtikos Parkway
Eastern: I-95 near I-91 to William Floyd Parkway

In recent months, NY Gov Andrew Cuomo pleasantly surprised countless people by publicly endorsing the addition of a fixed road crossing of Long Island Sound, to finally provide such somewhere to the northeast of the Throggs Neck Bridge.

This is the first major initiative for such a crossing since the 2007 "Cross Sound Link" proposal by developer Vincent Polimeni, for a highway tunnel connecting the eastern end of I-287 in Westchester County at the Rye/Port Chester line, to the existing stub of Route 135 in Nassau County..   As mitigating, the cut and cover transition to 135 would have expedited the construction of the lid with new park facilities in place before the completion of the underground highway underneath. According to the multi-million dollar engineering study that Polimeni organized, the project was estimated to cost $16 billion, and would have had a $25 toll.

2007 Vincent Polimeni Cross Link Tunnel

This Cross Sound Link would consist of a trio of drilled tunnel tubes, with 3 lanes in each of the 55' diameter outboard tubes, flanking a middle 38' diameter tube for a service-way. 

55' outer tubes each with single deck with 3 lanes flanking 38' center tube

It would have flanking connections with I-287 to the west of the I-287/I-95 interchange, perhaps with portals in the vicinity of South Ridge Road.

I-287/I-95 interchange with Cross Sound Tunnel connections

It would have passed under Grace Church Road and the shoreline, and the Port Chester Harbor south of Byram Point and north of Manursing Island and beneath the Sound roughly paralleling the New York-Connecticut line, before turning more easterly to veer entirely east of Cove Neck to land at Laurel Hollow, turning southwesterly and continue about 1 1/2 miles to connect with existing Route 135.

It was to be drilled deeply beneath the Sound and a portion of its land segments to thus significantly reduce impacts to the surface.

It had the support of then N.Y. Governor Spitzer, who took office, January 1, 2007, who was felled March 17, 2008, in a sex scandal involving his patronage as "Client #9" of a brothel apparently established to service the politically powerful - the "Emperor's Club", though notably no other such clients were publicly exposed, and at least one established news source would speculate openly that this expose was meant to derail the Cross Sound Link project, which I reported here.  Spitzer's successor, David Peterson, who served through 2010 supported it, and there was some talk of expanding it to accommodate adding a rail component, but it nonetheless stalled.

The last major study upon the idea of a new vehicular crossing of Long Island Sound was in 1979, initiated by then N.Y. Governor Hugh Carey.  It was confined to possible links between Long Island and the State of Connecticut, plus one to Rhode Island.

1979

A- Port Jefferson Route 112 to Bridgeport CT I-95 near Route 8
B- Wading River (Shoreham) William Floyd Parkway to East Haven CT I-95
C- Riverhead extension from existing I-495 terminus to Gilford CT
D- Old Saybrook extended I-495 to East Marion I-95 near Route 9
E- Orient Point to Watch Hill, Rhode Island Route 78

The 1979 study neglected consideration of any new link further west; however such had been the focus of the previous planning direction, with the idea of connecting Long Island with Westchester County, with three options enumerated in a 1972 Environmental Impact Statement, and with this planning being truncated with N.Y. Governor Nelson Rockefeller June 1973 cancellation of the option found as having the greatest feasibility and benefit: the link between I-287 and Route 135. 

The two other options so considered were a connection from I-287 southward through Rye to Glen Cove Long Island, and another from New Rochelle to Sands Point, owing to matters of fit and feasibility potential with the existing road network, in other words the placement and importance of the area's higher capacity connecting roads.  All three options would include land approaches to connect with the existing such roads.

All three options would ultimately connect I-95 with I-495, each which extended outwards away from New York City, and connect with such by highways that served as circular routes: the Cross County Parkway and I-287 in Westchester County, and the Meadowbrook State Parkway and/or the Wantagh Parkway in Nassau County.  Of these, I-287 is the most important, and extends closest to the shoreline, with its terminus at its interchange with I-95.

I-287 is a major road that extends west through Westchester and beyond to cross the Hudson River via the Tappan Zee Bridge, multiplexing with I-87 to Suffren where I-287 turns southward into New Jersey and I-87 turns northward , an interstate highway with 6 or more lanes total, with its eastern terminus/interchange with I-95 within 300 feet of the shoreline.

The Cross County, Meadowbrook and Wantagh Parkways are important roads, though more locally regional then trans regional, with each confined within its respective county, and each disallowing commercial traffic, hence not serving trucks.


Both the Meadowbrook and the Wantagh are easily connectable to I-495, with an easement in place for the latter and an actual connection already existing for the former.

However, none are relatively accessible to the shoreline.

The Meadobrook and Wantagh would both require lengthy tunnels for the land approach, about 1.7 miles and  4.3 miles respectively, and another 5.3 to extend under the north south length of Hempstead Bay before reaching the mainline Sound. 

The Cross County meanwhile ends about 2 miles inland with its easternmost terminus at the Hutchinson River Parkway, and would require a drilled tunnel of more than 1 mile to connect with I-95 where there is already some space owing to the existing interchange, and where the route would continue towards the shore turning more southerly to pass through the former Sears site and then under the muddy inlet between the Sutton Manor neighborhood and the park.

Long Island's Route 135 is similarly stranded from the nearest shoreline.  Yet it is a more important road.

It has a terminus about 4 miles from the nearest point with the Oyster Bay shoreline; however it has an already assembled land corridor, which then extended about 3 miles northerly, though curbing northwesterly to require continuing about 2 or 3 miles along the Mill Neck peninsula, with this northwesterly portion of this reserved right of way since sold and thus with this strip cut back to about 1 1/2 miles).

Yet it is a modern 6 lane freeway essentially built to interstate highway specifications with 12 foot wide travel lanes with 10-12' right-hand shoulders and approximately 5 foot left-hand shoulders, and can hence accommodate trucks.  It extends southward connecting with I-495 (the Long Island Expressway), and with Route 27, which becomes a freeway about 3 miles east of its interchange with 135.   Unlike the parkways it does not need the same degree of reconstruction.

Hence, connecting I-287 with Route 135, with the latter likelier to thus be re-designated as I-287, is the best option.

Westchester County (mainland)

I-287/I-95 interchange with I-287 Sound Bridge route options

Nassau County (Long Island)

Sound Bridge approach route options

However this plan ran into serious opposition, particularly in Rye and in Bayville.

As a method of thwarting this link, the Bayville area would be re-designated as a nature preserve.

And years later, in 1991, so was the area immediately north of the Playland amusement park, where 3 out of 4 of the officially considered route options would have passed through, as the Edith Reed Nature Sanctuary.

In light of this history, the new for 2018 report adopts significant modifications to the land and shoreline area approaches as compared to those from previous studies..



This report explores three basic options from the mainland to Long Island:

"Western Alignment": Rye/Port Chester, Westchester County, NY I-287 to Oyster Bay Nassau County Route 135, which was planned to extend to the Wantagh Parkway which ends at Jones Beach.  Options of Bride, All Tunnel, and Bridge/Tunnel combo.

"Central Alignment": Bridgeport or Devon, Fairfield County CT Route 8 to Kings Park Suffolk County Sunken Meadow (Sagtikos) Parkway, extends south to Robert Moses State Park  Options of Bridge and Bridge/Tunnel combos for Bridgeport, and later for Devon.

"Eastern Alignment": I-91 to William Floyd Parkway (New Haven or Branford CT to Shorham LI).  Options of Bridge or Bridge/Tunnel combo.

It also gives preliminary to a "hybrid" alignment respectively combining the Western and Central Alignments'  mainland and Long Island connections, aka connecting I-287 with the Sagtikos Parkway.

Some key facts:

The Western and Central Alignment would have the highest revenue generation potential: 86,400 and 87,600 vehicles daily versus 55,500 for a New Haven area crossing.

The predicted constructions costs are:

- Western- $8.49 to $55.4b:

$8.49b bridge,
$33.4b tunnel with single 58' tube with 2 lanes upon 2 decks,
$55.4 tunnel with twin 58' tubes with 3 lanes upon a single deck,
$43.5b bridge/tunnel combo with twin 58' tubs each with 3 lanes upon a single deck.

- Central- $13 to $31b: 

$16.5B for a bridge (Bridgeport);
$22.7b for a bridge/tunnel combo (Bridgeport);
$16.5b bridge (Devon);
$31.2b bridge/tunnel combo to Devon;

- Eastern- $15.7b to $32b:

$15.7b bridge to New Haven,
$32b bridge/tunnel combo to New Haven,
$15b bridge to Bradford,
$28b bridge/tunnel combo to Bradford.

The tunnel configurations would all have a 58' bore, either proving 2 lanes in each direction with two levels in a single tube, or 3 per direction each with a pair of tubes.

All of the bridge/tunnel combinations indicated would have a pair of 58' bores each with 3 lanes upon a single deck.

The only scenario given cost figures for a single 58' tube with 2 lanes each upon 2 decks is such an option for the Western alignment (I-287).

No figures are given for an all tunnel option for either the Central or Eastern Alignment.

 All of the alignments, Western, Central and Eastern would connect I-95, which runs paralleling the northern shoreline of the Sound, and essentially the major freeways which have interchanges with I-05 and which extend inland, with the north-south freeways in Long Island, each of which have interchanges with I-495 (the Long Island Expressway).  Of these connections north of the Sound, the interchange with I-287 is the closest to the shoreline.  To the south of Sound, the north south freeways extending closest to the shoreline are the Sagtikos Parkway and the William Floyd Parkway- each as "parkway" thus requiring some degree of reconstruction to accommodate commercial traffic such as large trucks, at least for their segment extending to their respective interchanges with the LIE.  Route 135, the north south freeway on Long Island that the Western Alignment would connect with I-287 is already an interstate specification highway that accommodates such commercial traffic and would be re designated as a part of I-287.  But it only extends north to about 3 miles from the shoreline, thus necessitating a lengthier land extension that is seen as most politically feasible as a tunnel.

Regarding each of the three main alignments, Western, Central and Eastern:

Western:

This is the one that is most widely believed which would receive the greatest traffic use, an estimated 86K vehicles daily with a $20 toll or 113k with a $7.50 toll) connecting the existing I-287 terminus at its interchange with I-95, with Long Island Route 135, which would in turn be re-designated as a continuation of I-287.

-  the basic alignment that I have long advocated for the Westchester County side, that avoids the Playland area and skirts the northern edge of Rye.  In other words, it abandons the previous route options that would turn to the south to go through the area just north of Playland (through what has since been designated the Edith Nature Preserve- showing such only as a stub), which were previous options W1, W2 and W3, but rather confines itself to essentially the route through Port Chester Harbor previously known as option W4.

- However, for the Long Island side, it adopts a new alignment to the east of the previously considered options that went through Bayville, though not as far east as that shown in the 2007 Polemeni tunnel proposal that went beneath Laurel Hollow.  This new alignment which would run roughly parallel to Steamboat Road, would run under Oyster Bay to and past Center Island Peninsula and then Turtle Cove before entering the Sound.  This routing would thus clip a corner of the Sound portion of Connecticut, but would be ideally located to permit adding a rail connection from the LIRR rail terminus near the Oyster Bay Marine Center.


- Though including the option of a Sound Crossing via a bridge, this latest study report includes the options of a tunnel as well as a combination bridge - tunnel that would cross the Sound mainly via a bridge, but place the land approaches as well as the shoreline crossing within tunnel, with transition points via newly created off shore islands.

I have long favored the idea of this Westchester approach routing, as well as the idea of a combo bridge-tunnel with the shoreline approach areas within tunnel where the need for mitigation is the greatest.

For the Western alignment, the report recommends against an all bridge option [$8.49b] as politically infeasible, and recommends further study of the options of a bridge/tunnel combo ($43.5b) and and all tunnel ($55.4) options.


Central:

With regards for the Central Alignment connecting Connecticut at Bridgeport or Devon with Long Island's Sagtikos Parkway, which according to this report would receive the greatest traffic demand at 87.6K daily with a $20 toll and 108K with a $7.50 toll).

It gives an option for Bridgeport connecting to I-95, which parallels the shoreline, about a mile from the I-95 interchange with the southern terminus of the nearest freeway that extends inland, Route 8, in order to utilize existing more open space via the right of way of an existing surface road through a largely industrial area, versus a straight-line to Route 8 which would go through the University of Bridgeport and then through Shoreline Park.   This routing would have traffic to and from the bridge with I-95 and provide access to and from Route 8 essentially by adding at least one additional lane to I-95 to the interchange with Route 8.  For this routing the report gives all bridge and bridge/tunnel options.

It gives an option for Devon, immediately to northeast of Bridgeport, with a landing that would transverse a residential area to connect with the existing Devon interchange with I-95, and gives all bridge and bridge/tunnel combination options.

For the Central alignment the report recommends further study of the all bridge ($16.5b) and the bridge/tunnel combo ($22.7b) for Bridgeport and the bridge/tunnel combo ($31.2b) for Devon.
Eastern:

This is the one, which would connect I-95 in Connecticut with the William Floyd Parkway in Long Island.

The connection with I-95 would be in the vicinity of its interchanges with I-91, which extends north, and with Route 34, which points to the west, that was long planned to eventually extend west to the Bear Mountain Bridge and hence the NY Route 17 Quickway (which is being re-designated as I-86), but which has been stymied by a horrifically misguided plan to block its underground extension beneath the Yale area "Air Rights" garage (which had been designed to accommodate this freeway's extension underground) for an ill advised real estate development scheme to further truncate this freeway and channel its traffic loads upon its existing parallel service roads, altogether overlooking the benefits of at least continuing this freeway a few additional blocks beneath any such new buildings in order to better disperse its traffic.

As such, this crossing could serve to extend I-91 to and into Long Island, with the William Floyd Parkway reconstructed as such at least to its interchange with the I-495 Long Island Expressway.
I do not understand the consideration of either the Devon nor Branford options.  Both the Bridgeport and New Haven alignment would each respectively work better with reduced costs.  IMHO either would be fine as bridges.  I would though explore the idea - not mentioned in the report - of an above ground or shallow "tunnel" (enclosed roadway) for the approach om Bridgeport between the bridge and near I-95.  That area is industrial and could conceivably adopt to perhaps even such an enclosed roadway of the existing grade of 113 (Lorship Boulevard) between perhaps from Access to Honeywell Roads, with the adjacent areas built up with landfill and or even new real estate development for what would be a relatively low cost tunnel segment involving no new excavation (or limited excavation with a shallow tunnel).

The report recommends against a Western All bridge option ($8.49b), and all of the Eastern Alignment options ($15.7b and $32b respectively for bridge and bridge/tunnel options with New Haven, and $15b and $28b bridge and bridge/tunnel options with Bradford.

It recommends further study of the Western Alignment options of an all tunnel ($55.4b for a 3x3 tunnel) and bridge/tunnel combo ( $43.5b), and of the Central Alignment with Bridgeport as a Bridge ($16.5b), Bridge/Tunnel combination ($22.7b), and with Devon as a bridge/tunnel combo ($31.2b).

The recommendation are basically sound, though there are clearly outstanding issues that would further this process, as well as provide a direction for further refinement.

Manhattan Institute Panders To Princess Atop Pea Opposition To New Road Tunnels

image from: http://onceuponapea.blogspot.com/

The Manhattan Institute Outs Itself as catering to 'princess atop a mattress atop a pea" mentality for the affluent to block new road tunneled in their areas thus forcing a greater traffic burden upon the less privileged.

To his credit, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo recently publicly announced his support for a highway tunnel link connecting I-287 in Westchester County with Long Island's Route 135 that would logically once then receive the I-287 designation.  Such a proposal surfaced in 2007, promoted by a Long Island real estate developer Vincent Polimeri:

http://cos-mobile.blogspot.com/2007/12/build-cross-sound-tunnel.html

"The Manhattan Institute", a private foundation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Institute_for_Policy_Research

The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (renamed in 1981 from the International Center for Economic Policy Studies) is a conservative American think tank established in New York City in 1978 by Antony Fisher and William J. Casey. The organization describes its mission as to "develop and disseminate new ideas that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility". Its message is communicated through books, articles, interviews, speeches, op-eds, and through the institute's quarterly publication City Journal. According to the 2014 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report and Policy Advice (Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program, University of Pennsylvania), the Institute is number 39 of the "Top 60 United States Think Tanks".^[2]

About Antony Fisher:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Fisher

Sir Antony Fisher (Antony George Anson Fisher, also nicknamed AGAF) (28 June 1915 – 8 July 1988) was a British businessman and philanthropist. He participated in the formation of various libertarian organisations during the second half of the twentieth century, including the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Atlas Network. Through Atlas, he helped establish up to 150 other institutions worldwide.

About William J. Casey:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Casey

William Joseph Casey (March 13, 1913 – May 6, 1987) was the Director of Central Intelligence from 1981 to 1987. In this capacity he oversaw the entire United States Intelligence Community and personally directed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

This is their web site url:

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/

This is their self description:

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/about

The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research is a leading voice of free-market ideas, shaping political culture since our founding in 1977. Ideas that have changed the United States and its urban areas for the better—welfare reform, tort reform, proactive policing, and supply-side tax policies, among others—are the heart of MI’s legacy. While continuing with what is tried and true, we are constantly developing new ways of advancing our message in the battle of ideas.

The Manhattan Institute has a magazine publication "City"

http://www.city-journal.org/

One could imagine this Institute and publication to be a sounding board for improved long term planning.  And in particular, be opposed to the sort of trendy 'environmentalist' dogma that presumes that the highway network must never be added to, nor even simply improved with replacing outdated somewhat blighting elevated freeway segments with poor geometric standards, lacking even shoulders nor proper merge lanes, with modern spec replacements, even those that would replace an elevated segment with one within tunnel box beneath new parkland.  For we must somehow reject any projects ever for accommodating the general public's automobiles.

I myself had encountered City in bookstores during the 1990s, and read it with interest, particularly its inveigling against planning paralysis.  Naturally, I searched for what they would have published concerning the Westway Project, on the planning books from 1974 to September 1985, and found this within a Spring 1996 City article "The Wasted Waterfront" by Kenneth Silber:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/6_2_the_wasted.html

"... An ever-expanding range of federal and state environmental regulations, for land and water, began to complicate waterfront development further. Political and community opposition began to form toward projects deemed too large, too commercial, or too environmentally insensitive. And more and more waterfront property fell under public-sector ownership, where all too often it would lie dormant.

The most ambitious proposal to transform New York’s waterfront—one whose failure would have lasting repercussions—was Westway, the highway and development project announced in 1974 by state and federal officials for Manhattan’s West Side. Originally conceived by the Regional Plan Association, a private group that studies land-use issues, Westway was a truly visionary idea: a highway running through a tunnel under 181 acres of new landfill in the Hudson River; on top, there would be development sites and ample parkland extending to the water’s edge. The cost: $2.3 billion, to be paid by the federal government.

Yet Westway drew growing resistance from a coalition of West Side residents, environmentalists, and community boards, who opposed everything from the noise and disruption of construction to the impact of new landfill on the Hudson’s aquatic life. Westway’s opponents seized upon the presence of striped bass in the river as a means of stopping the project, arguing that the removal of deteriorating piers would deprive the fish of needed spawning grounds and “rest stops” for their annual migrations. This dubious argument—which sidestepped the question of how the fish survived in the millennia before the piers were built—succeeded in killing the project.

The law held Westway’s planners to an almost impossible standard: they had to prove that the project would not damage the striped bass population. In 1985 after more than a decade of litigation, a federal judge ruled, unsurprisingly, that they had failed to do so. The following year, with endless delays in sight and with Congress poised to withdraw funding, Governor Mario Cuomo and Mayor Edward Koch abandoned the project..."

A good piece. And likewise, the habitat was along an already artificially expanded waterfront, with the fish attracted there from along the length of the long Hudson River by a sewer outlet.

http://cos-mobile.blogspot.com/2008/07/westway-manhattan-prologue.html

City blames excessive regulations, though Westway was defeated in a law suit owing to the USDOT authorities not sufficiently addressing the matter in the Environmental Impact Statements.

Nevermind that the fish habitat could have been simply relocated with the coastline, even enhanced with underwater structures to compensate for any aquatic changes from the narrowing of the Hudson River.

In a 1992 City article "Planning With Vision" by Nathan Glazer:

http://www.city-journal.org/story.php?id=1549

"...But we have suffered costs as a result of this higher density. I have been trying to make a case for physical planning, major public intervention for the common good. Yes, New York’s economic development is hampered by far too much regulation: The newspapers tell the sad story of projects—public facilities, office buildings, apartment complexes—that cannot make it through the regulatory maze or, if they do, can only do so by being saddled with enormous additional costs. One is reminded of the exclamation of Senator Moynihan, contemplating the debacle of Westway: “How did we ever manage to build the George Washington Bridge?” New York’s development must be unshackled, for it is far too bound by rule and regulation. But the unshackling should be combined with a vision of a better way of life. Unleash the productive forces, but govern them by a larger sense of the common good...."

I could have imagined City not only further pointing out these absurdities of the Westway cancellation, but as well show infrastructure projects from around the world featuring new highway tunnels, to show how reactionary such local "progressive" politics had become, and making suggestions applying such concepts to New York City.

I would be disappointed.

In the years since Westway's September 11, 1985 cancellation, a series of other projects have been proposed for reconstructing certain antiquated design highway segments largely or primarily within all new highway tunnels, such as the Gowanus Expressway in Brooklyn, and just to the north, that highway's essential continuation as the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, including the option of a tunnel to bypass the rather artfully done triple level segment to the south of the Brooklyn Bridge retaining it as a local collector distributor, with the mainline relocated into a new tunnel.  The proposed Gowanus Expressway Tunnel received a major public promotion by the Regional Plan Association in 1996-1997, being addressed by NYSDOT with a study, with the proposals for the BQE to the north so addressed by the authorities more than a decade latter.  A new set of tunnels would go far towards relocating much of this traffic flow out of sight, smell and sound while accommodating some useful extra capacity- which I heard opposition from one particular planner who was simultaneously advocating altogether decommissioning or even demolishing the triple level segment despite its architectural significance!  For the BQE, one proposal was for a short tunnel to bypass the triple deck promenade, while another was for a longer tunnel essentially continuing the straight line of the Gowanus Expressway altogether bypassing the approach to the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel.

Another idea more recently heard about, but with no reported official planning study is for a "Big U" landfill with parkland atop an enclosed box tunnel highway around the southern end of Manhattan, promoted as a storm barrier to protect from flooding.  This would relocate a portion of the FDR Drive underground, and would conceivably revive Westway, perhaps with some design variations.

Alas the Obama Administration would deny funding for the BQE project, hence putting it off into the future.

And despite the longer amount of time that we have been hearing about a Gowanus Expressway Tunnel, planning for that appears to have floundered.  No construction project has been started or announced.  And the planning process has dropped all of the route alternatives directly along the existing elevated freeway nor the parallel streets, hence limiting itself to a sole route option directly along the waterfront likely involving some degree of new land-fill, and having me wonder if that is a set up to block it upon the sort of argument used against Westway regarding aquatic life, or perhaps at least drive up its costs, as their appears to be ample space to construct a set of tunnels along the existing highway under 3rd Street.

Nor have we heard any other proposals to at least deck over some existing freeway segments, perhaps the I-87 Major Deegan Expressway in the northern Bronx, nor any planning vision officially or from any funded organizations for reconstructing the segment of the Deegan south of Yankee Stadium within a new modern spec tunnelway, whether or not staged as the Cincinnati I-71 Fort Washington Way depressed freeway designed to be given a roof later.  Indeed, far worse, the authorities have permitted development to encroach upon the lightly developed industrial properties and abandoned railroad right of ways adjacent to these stretches of highway that would be highly useful for such projects, thus locking in antiquated and divisive highway designs for the sake of speeding up short term developer profit.

Nor have we heard anything about reviving the single most important previously proposed highway tunnel proposal that was rashly included in the mass cancellations of planned freeways in 1969 by N.Y.C. Mayor Lindsey who had previously made some excellent suggestions about better reconciling urban highways into the areas with a maximum use of existing corridors and tunnel enclosures- the Cross-Brooklyn Expressway-Linear City that would provide a parallel route to the highly used Long Island Expressway, relieving traffic from that and the connecting segment of the BQE-Gowanus Expressways.

Nor have we heard any serious proposals, only lip service to he much touted concept of decking over portions of the Cross Bronx Expressway, despite the various favorable mention of such by such groups as the Tri State Transportation Campaign.

Rather, the biggest political push within Greater New York City was a recent campaign to remove the Sheridan Expressway in the south Bronx, one which had to retreat owing to the obvious benefit of retaining its underpass beneath Westchester Avenue rather than route such traffic that includes numerous trucks through the traffic light intersection to and from Hunts Point Market.  This campaign is spurred by a desire to improve local access to the Bronx river waterfront.  However it likewise overlooks the topography that would better allow that via a deck atop a portion of the Sheridan.

Within the Greater New York Metropolitan area, the single most significant highway project proposal is the Cross Sound Tunnel connecting I-287 in Westchester County with Route 135 in Nassau County, replacing the Cross Sound Bridge proposal that was actively planned by Robert Moses but canceled in 1973.  That would provide Long Island with a direct access to the mainland that would not pass through New York City.  It would open up a direct access from Long Island towards New England (the current I-287 terminus at its interchange with I-95 is just inside the New York State line with Connecticut, and I-287 connects with the northerly running I-684 which connects with I-84).  And it would divert a significant amount of traffic from I-95 in Westchester and the northeast Bronx, and the connections to and via the Whitestone and Throggs Neck Bridges, plus much of the Long Island Expressway.  It would employ drilled tunnels to avoid the impacts of a bridge, and would construct the 135 extension as a tunnel, with the cut and cover southern end of that beneath new parkland and recreation facilities, rather than simply being an exposed freeway.  This would all address the local environmental concerns while providing what would be a much useful added evacuation route out of Long Island, a particularly logically greater concern since 911.

Nonetheless the Cross Sound Tunnel planning has politically floundered.  Reportedly then N.Y. Governor Elliot Spitzer favored it, and was set to announce his support publicly for a plan that would have funded it via Bears Stear, before being felled by a sex scandal involving his patronage as "Client #9" of a brothel "Emperors' Club", via a barrage of NY Post/NY Daily News tabloid reporting that never bothered addressing Clients #s1-8 nor #10 and higher in what was clearly a brothel catering to politicians and other leaders.  The timing of this questionable publicity and the subsequent collapse of Bears Sterns has been suggested as being meant to thwart the tunnel.  As can be expected, even this tunnel is being opposed by some within the wealthy neighborhoods at each of its ends in and near Rye and Oyster Bay, despite its many differences than the past Robert Moses era proposals.

The Manhattan Institute and its City magazine could be doing far far more to advance ideas as these to get beyond the political malaise of continually neglecting improving the highways- whether operationally or even environmentally via placing more within tunnels to enclose noise and pollution while improving local connectivity.  After all, are not cities all about creating multiple levels of space to accommodate and reconcile greater human activity with in a given footprint.

Alas, to its detriment and that of the greater New York Metropolitan region, "The Manhattan Institute" has gone in the opposite direction by pandering to the same sort of reactionary ideology leaving the authorities to continually, for the sake of catering to a relatively small number of more affluent people in a wealthier area- as evident by their response to Governor Cuomo's support for a Cross Sound Tunnel, via their spokesperson Nicole Gelinas:

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/when-it-comes-infrastructure-cuomo-has-tunnel-vision-8354.html

The New Year has begun, but Gov. Andrew Cuomo evidently did not make an important resolution: stop announcing huge infrastructure projects without a way to pay for them. This week alone, Cuomo unveiled three projects worth billions of dollars, even as nobody knows how to fund last year’s projects. There’s nothing wrong with building infrastructure – in fact, it’s a good thing – but Cuomo has to starting picking his projects wisely, and then put some real cash behind them.

Cuomo’s [Long Island Sound] tunnel idea would inevitably take away money from something else, perhaps something more useful.

Cuomo stakes his legacy on big stuff you can touch. On Tuesday, he cited Robert Moses, New York’s mid-century master builder, in saying that “somewhere along the way, we lost our daring.” The governor said that, like Moses, we have to “think big” and stop it with NIMBY-ism.

It’s true that Moses built some great stuff – but also true that he built some pretty bad stuff, including highways like the Cross-Bronx Expressway, which helped hollow out the Bronx six decades ago.

One marquee project Cuomo announced Tuesday represents Moses’ worst impulses. The governor said that he wants to build a car tunnel underneath the Long Island Sound, connecting the island with Connecticut, Westchester or the Bronx.

Such a tunnel would precipitate a lot of, well, NIMBY-ism – but for good reason. In 1964, around the time Moses was finishing the Cross-Bronx, he proposed a bridge over the Long Island Sound, something he said was a “fetish” for him. (Hey, to each his own.)

Nine years later, Gov. Nelson Rockefeller killed the idea. Local residents had for years agitated against a project that, as the New York Times put it, would “overload existing road systems, harm the ecology and the recreational value of (the) Long Island Sound, and destroy the communities in the path of the access roads.”

The residents were right, just as the people who killed the proposed Westway highway project along the Hudson River in Manhattan in the same era were right. We do not solve traffic problems by building more highways; new highways only cause more traffic.

Yes, a tunnel would have less impact on local towns, but it would have some impact. Think of the access ramps and such that the Lincoln Tunnel, Holland Tunnel and Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel need. The worst effect, though, would be more cars on local highways and streets already choked with cars.

Moreover, when Moses proposed infrastructure projects, he found ways to pay for them. Building a tunnel under the Sound would cost billions of dollars. But the governor hasn’t yet proposed how to pay for his existing crossing project: the $3.9 billion Tappan Zee Bridge replacement, under construction north of New York City. This week, the governor did the opposite, proposing to freeze and even reduce tolls on the state’s Thruway system for another five years, at a cost of $1 billion.

Cuomo’s tunnel idea would inevitably take away money from something else, perhaps something more useful. Cuomo’s other major proposal on Tuesday was to build a new, 10-mile track on the Long Island Rail Road. This is actually a good idea. Right now, track constraints mean that the LIRR can run trains only in one direction much of the time, meaning people who would like to take the train have to take a car instead, or wait hours. And here, Cuomo’s policy team seems to have actually thought some issues through: reducing the number of houses the railroad would need to seize, for example, from 200 in an older plan to 50 now, would lower costs and mitigate community opposition.

The problem, of course, is money. A new track would cost well more than $1 billion (anything we do in this state costs at least a billion dollars). Meanwhile, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which would build the project, still has no idea how it’s going to pay for its existing expansion projects, including the $10.2 billion East Side Access project, another LIRR expansion.

One way to fund the new track would be to ask Long Island towns and villages to assess a fee on new apartment developments along the route. This would show that Long Island is willing to increase its density, which is the entire point of building anything at all. But here, too, with the Tappan Zee, expect Cuomo to start building (or at least studying) now and paying later.

- anti Cross Sound Tunnel

- and anti Westway.

- and close minded upon new ways of funding, nor of the potential benefits of perpetual extra property tax revenues- an issue perhaps completely ignored by the great public "debate" over Westway.


Is not it interesting how a supposedly "right wing" think tank spouts the same rhetoric of the left wing 'progressives'?

"... pretty bad stuff, including highways like the Cross-Bronx Expressway, which helped hollow out the Bronx six decades ago ...One marquee project Cuomo announced Tuesday represents Moses’ worst impulses ... build a car tunnel underneath the Long Island Sound, connecting the island with Connecticut, Westchester or the Bronx. Such a tunnel would precipitate a lot of, well, NIMBY-ism – but for good reason. In 1964, around the time Moses was finishing the Cross-Bronx, he proposed a bridge over the Long Island Sound, something he said was a “fetish” for him. (Hey, to each his own.) Nine years later, Gov. Nelson Rockefeller killed the idea. Local residents had for years agitated against a project that, as the New York Times put it, would “overload existing road systems, harm the ecology and the recreational value of (the) Long Island Sound, and destroy the communities in the path of the access roads.”

NYMYISM against a Cross Sound Tunnel would be for "good reason" while mentioning the Cross Bronx Expressway?!  Such a juxtaposition is revealing.

The east-west Cross Bronx Expressway, connects the George Washington Bridge with points east largely , as a segment of I-95, with connections to the Whitestone and Throggs Neck Bridges to Queens County in western Long Island, passes through densely developed areas, and is highly congested.

The approach highways to the Cross Sound Tunnel or Bridge, I-287 and Route 135 are less congested and as they pass through far more lightly developed areas, would be physically infinitely easier to widen that the Cross Bronx Expressway

The Cross Bronx Expressway passes through relatively lower middle economic class neighborhoods, while the areas around the I-287 and 135 and their respective I-95 and I-495 crossroads are relatively highly affluent.

As the Cross Bronx Expressway passes in close proximity to numerous apartment buildings, its lack of enclosure within a tunnelway is infinitely more acute.

The lack of a Cross Sound Tunnel nor Bridge has the primary effect of routing more traffic upon the Westchester and northeast Bronx segment of I-95 and the Hutchinson River Parkway, plus the Long Island Expressway through eastern Queens, and Nassau County

Meanwhile, the lack of an I-95 segment in more rural northwestern from Trenton to I-287 places additional traffic upon the Cross Bronx Expressway- a segment that was canceled in 1982 owing to political opposition from the more affluent towns along and near its route, despite the area being far less dense.   Let us not forget this part of the broader picture.

So what Nicole Geliner is writing is that wealthier areas should continue to get over upon less affluent areas by stopping a proposed highway tunnel, never-mind that they are getting to stop a tunnel, and/or represent an area far far less densely developed, while less affluent areas get more traffic upon highways that are not enclosed in tunnels, even in such less affluent areas that are densely developed as the Bronx.

Disgusting.

Don't forget such opposition is not about deferring such projects as the Cross Sound Tunnel or Bridge, with an argument to building the proposed rail transit projects before embarking upon the Cross Sound Crossing.  Rather, it is to never build the Cross Sound Crossing.

Hence the distraction from any discussion of alternative ways of funding.  And hence the appeal to emotion with the blurring the histories of a conventional surface freeway carved through a densely developed poorer area with some questionable planning decisions as Robert Moses' failure to enclose all but a few short segments within tunnels and a routing through the East Tremont neighborhood rather than an alternative route one block south that would have been far less impactive, with another freeway through a far more sparsely yet wealthier area- even with the latter as a full length tunnel!.

The Manhattan Institute can do infinitely better than continually pandering to this environmental classism-racism.

PIRG's Continuing Reactionary Opposition to Freeway Network Expansion

Places ideology over needs via opposing seriously needed road projects,
such as widening I-95 in Connecticut, and a Tunnel in Pasadena, California
to establish a continuous I-710   

http://uspirg.org/reports/usp/highway-boondoggles-2

The report lists a series of highway projects which it deems as questionable, based more upon ideology against any highway capacity expansion projects than an understanding of local and regional needs.

Two particularly egregious examples of this is their opposition to widening I-95 in Connecticut with one additional lane in each direction from its existing 3 lanes in each direction configuration that it was originally built with during the 1950s, and to the idea of a tunnel to eliminate the I-710 gap in Pasadena, California as the least locally impactive method, following the past rejection of conventions surface and cut and cover designs.

About Connecticut I-95

Connecticut I-95 is that state's sole grade separated open to mixed traffic highway in the densely populated  20 mile wide band along the coastline along the Long Island Sound, with the nearest such parallel highway I-84 being some 20 miles inland, with the 2 lane per direction Merit Parkway (closed to trucks and commercial traffic) some 4 miles or so inland the sole such other grade separated highway option between, and is paralleled by the Northeastern railroad corridor that carries rail cars from New York to Boston.

I-84 would be the physically easiest to widen, but is the furthest from the densely populated coastal area.

The Merit Parkway is significantly closer to I-95, but is politically difficult to widen owing largely to its iconic bridges which would have to be realistically either reconstructed or twinned, and would still not be suitable for large trucks.

The parallel railroad should be upgraded to permit improved rail service. 

But I-95 should still be widened.

Favoring one mode of transport should not mean neglecting capacity improvements to the other.  Highway and rail can relive each other to varying degrees more than they can altogether substitute for one another.  Rail is more adaptable to absorbing longer distance trips, while highways are more suited to many other trips owing to the time savings of direct door to door service.  Expanding both provides for future growth and increased human activity within a given developed area thus somewhat relieving pressures to expand development into more pastoral rural areas.

I-95 in Connecticut should ideally it should be 12 lanes with a 3/3/3/3 or so separate carriageway configuration, akin to that of much of the New Jersey Turnpike, at least from the New York line to past New Haven, as it would accept and distribute traffic to the sole east-west interstate highway just south of the N.Y. line in Westchester County (and conceivably from a bridge and or tunnel crossing of the Long Island Sound to existing Route 135 in Long Island)- I-287.

As such a "duel barrel" configuration would have relatively high right of way requirements, a more feasible option would be widening it from a 3/3 to a 4/4 or 5/5 configuration, designed with a long term staging plan for parallel carriageways, with segments built in spots where more needed and more physically practical in an outboard configuration, designed to be later made continuous with added segments that would tuck underground beneath the existing carriageways to reduce local impacts.  Such a staging would be financially more practical, with the design including the road substructure to permit the later excavation of the underground segments without having to tear out the road.

To further reduce impacts, portions of this widened I-95 should be designed to accommodate various decked segments, with local overpasses made wider to include better pedestrian and bicycling connections, and with some provisions for future air rights development.  Perhaps certain elevated I-95 segments, as that in New Haven could be reviewed for reconstruction in a fashion via enclosures through new buildings, with access ramps reconstructed via a center rather than a side loader configuration for better accommodating vehicular and local pedestrian traffic.
 
To help relieve Connecticut I-95, particularly from I-287 in New York to past New Haven, the eastern portion of Westchester I-287 should be widened to at least a 5/5 configuration to I-684, which itself should be widened from 3 to 5 lanes in each direction.

About CT I-95
http://www.nycroads.com/roads/ct-turnpike/

About Pasadena I-710

This is a longstanding gap in the highway network in need of filling.

It initially resulted form the physical reality that the area of Pasadena, California is largely older more historically significant architecture built well before the mass freeway era, and from poor planning decisions to permit mass real estate development construction in a band to the west, particularly without any consideration there for the idea of doing such atop a cut and cover-box tunneled freeway.

Past plans for a conventional surface cut freeway through the long established Pasadena residential neighborhoods would die political deaths owing to popular revulsion over the demolition and/or moving requirements.  Likewise with later plans for a tunnel via the cut and cover method for that would have likewise involved surface displacement though without such permanently, particularly if the existing buildings were replaced or re-situated atop.

Subsequently, the official planning has turned to completing the I-710 missing link via a tunnel that would be moled (IOW drilled or bored) hence not disrupting the surface for almost all of its length, with the exceptions being for its relatively brief cut and cover transition segments at each of its ends, and for any ventilation components.

Current planning is for either one or two tunnel tubes, each with 2 levels, each with 2 lanes and a shoulder, providing a total of 4 or 8 lanes in total.

The 710 Tunnel project is a vitally important project for Pasadena and for the Greater Los Angeles area, for providing local relief for 710 traffic that must now detour to local streets or to parallel regional freeways as I-5, 170/101, and I-405.  It would be about 4.9 miles long, connecting freeway stubs each with 3 or 4 lanes per direction.  It is estimated to have construction costs of $3.2 to $5.6 billion, and would receive funding from tolls of about $15 for trucks and $5 for most other automobiles while providing savings in time as a relatively continuous high speed route.

LA's north-south freeways are particularly badly congested largely owing to the east-west mountains to the north separating LA from the San Fernando Valley, blocking the construction of capacious parallel routes via the local street grid.

A continuous 710 is particularly important for the port of Long Beach, with 710 already a major truck route.

LA's transportation problems also stem from a lack of a comprehensive passenger rail network, caused by the foolish decision to rip out its rail car transit system during the mid 1900s.  And 710 completion opponents may well be right in their prescription for various additions to the region's sorely in need of expanding rail transit system.  But they are wrong in outright opposing the 710 completion project for a drilled tunnel link, and would be better in asking for a broad transportation planning vision for rail and highways, perhaps one via splitting the 710 project into stages with the initial construction of a single double decked tunnel tube with the extra funds diverted to the transit projects before the future construction of an addition tube or tubes.

Perhaps there might be better economy to replace the double-decked 2x2 tube design with a larger diameter accommodating a 2x3 lane configuration?  Or perhaps one featuring the former to accommodate trucks, accompanied with a lower height version of the latter for accommodating most other vehicles?  Such would provide a total of 10 lanes with 4 for trucks and 6 for smaller vehicles, and should be evaluated together with options for staging either 2x2 or 2x3 double level tunnels so staged to ultimately provide 2 or more separate tubes.

With the LA region so starved for north-south cross mountain road capacity, throwing away any capacity for future additions, whether via highway or via railway should be viewed as criminal.

PIRG would do so much better by eschewing its reactionary ideological opposition to future highway capacity expansion to a more balance view that would instead debate how projects should be staged, permitting some highway expansion together with rail transit additions, rather than simply the latter.

Likewise, various DOTS need to include the idea of future staging into their basic designs allowing future capacity additions with minimal demolition of existing construction.   For instance, the recent I-405 widening project should have been designed to accommodate future capacity additions, if not for continuous outboard or elevated carriageways, should have taken advantage of any space for access into parallel tunnelways, either directly beneath the existing mainline with the necessary substructure to permit excavation beneath without having to rip out the road/and or for such as a moled tunnel.  Consideration of such staging should likewise not reflect the narrow transit only ideology prevalent in PIRG, via not excluding designs to help facilitate adding a future transit line.

Pro I-710 Tunnel Site
http://www.710coalition.com/

Anti I-710 Tunnel Site
http://www.no710.com/

Wikipedia I-710 article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_710

Ending Defeatism in Lower New York

" But the traditional model of urban expansion followed by new roads has created a vicious spiral where new roads beget more cars, which beget the need for more roads." - the typical defeatism that sadly appears in the schedule for the upcoming event -  http://nytenergyfortomorrow.com/agenda.php

What the New York Times and others need to examine.

#1- the lower deck of the replacement spans for the Tappan Zee Bridge.  Scuttled by the Cuomo Administration and by an EIS neglecting even a cursory review of the cost and benefits, the lower deck would potentially serve three separate modes of rail: passenger-commuter, freight, and even light rail at some point in the future with a far more developed I-287 corridor.

#2- the political nonsense stopping the I-287 Cross Sound Tunnel (or bridge with tunneled land approaches), that is wierdly tolerated even after 911.  Must be built with somewhat greater diameter to accommodate adding railway.

#3- the failure to construct the highway and augmented rail corridor for the I-287 link from existing LI Route 135 to the Belt-Conduit Avenue corridor, and onward via a new LIRR Bay Ridge multi-model tunnel across Brooklyn and beneath New York Harbor to New Jersey I-78.  An updated version of the late 1960s proposed Linear CityProject, with the tunneled highway and railway to New Jersey is totally justified.

#4- the long over-due modernization of the Cross County Parkway (CCP) from its interchange with I-87, westward to a new bridge crossing the Hudson River, from downtown Yonker's "Bridge Street" to Alpine New Jersey with a cut and cover extension towards the New Jersey Turnpike.

#5- the eastern extension of the Cross County Parkway (CCP) via a tunnel starting beneath Willow Avenue to beneath Rochelle Park to connect with I-95, plus improvements to the CCP east of I-87, at least bringing it up to 8 lanes, and preferably with dropping its grade in Mt. Vernon to make much of its trench into a coverway.

#6- the upgrading of the various tunnel corridors connecting Manhattan to the outside world to 8  lanes, particularly the Lincoln and Holland.

#7- the construction of tunneled replacements for the previous proposals for the Mid Town Manhattan, Lower Manhattan and Bushwick Expressways, combining cut and cover with drilled segments to preserve and enhance areas as historic SoHo and minimize real estate displacement; plus a continuous primarily cut and cover expressway tunnel for the West and East Sides, perhaps as a "Beachway" to provide a much needed pedestrian promenade.

#8- the completion of an I-95 link in western New Jersey to roughly the southwest corner of I-287, to facilitate an around the New York City bypass relief for the Cross Bronx Expressway, which is limited by the capacity of the George Washington Bridge. and the lack of express service roads that in Manhattan would be facilitated by reopening the 178th and 179th Street tunnels.   This failure to complete I-95 is a classic textbook example of environmental fraud by entities as Princeton University against wealthier areas having to share the traffic burden.

#9- Reconstruct the Brooklyn Queens Expressway (including the Gowanus) augmented with tunnels for a minimum of 5 lanes in each direction.

#10- Reconstruct the I-87 Major Deegan Expressway with a minimum of 4 lanes in each direction, except the segment beneath the crossing of I-95 with 3 lanes per direction.  Include extra decking in the northern area- demolish that one particularly stupidly placed building, and construct south of Yankee Stadium segment much like Cincinnatti's I-71 Fort Washington Way with new Cromwell Avenue 'Boulevard' to better facilitate traffic and waterfront development.  Resist short-sighted development plans for new cul de sac style waterfront development.


#11- Spot improvements: such as an extra lane from the southbound Clearview to eastbound GCP, and then the southbound Belt, requiring replacing some overpasses on the latter, but way cheaper than a tunneled extension of the Clearview; and continuing the 4th lane on I-95 past the Pelham Bay Parkway and the HRP to the vicinity of Bartow Avenue at Co-Op city.

#12- Explore light rail extensions from the 'subway' system into Westchester County and elsewhere, including perhaps along the old right of way for the 'NY, Westchester &; Boston railway', Mt Vernon, and even up to Yonkers Raceway, the CCSC and Central Avenue- good for future corridor development densification over the next 100 or so years.  Suitable corridors include I-287 are suitable, given the real estate development potential of the existing footprint of the automobile friendly regional mall and office park for future densification.  What's happening with Tyson's corner just outside Washington D.C. in northern Virginia will happen here to.

Trump Should Call for Inquiry into Tunnel Blockage

Donald Trump shows an interest in infrastructure.

So why does not he call for an inquiry into the virtual stop upon the proposed Cross Sound Tunnel that came with the N.Y. Governor Eliot Spitzer sex scandal?

http://cos-mobile.blogspot.com/2010/07/was-ny-gov-spitzer-felled-for.html

Likewise he should be speaking out against the Obama Administration's contempt for long term planning, lagging behind other nations:

http://cos-mobile.blogspot.com/2011/12/us-decline-under-obama-bqe-eis-stopped.html

After all, both the Cross Sound Tunnel and Brooklyn-Queens Expressway are within N.Y., and Trump himself is a New Yorker...

Tunnel Plan Still Submerged

– By Peter Jovanovich –

With much fanfare late last year, the Long Island commercial developer Polimeni LLC. floated the idea of building a tunnel from Long Island to Westchester, terminating in Rye. To date, the plan has caused barely a ripple in Albany or on Wall Street.

“We’re shopping the project around,” says Michael Polimeni, the point person for the proposed 16-mile tollway under the Sound. He acknowledges, however, the so-called “Cross Sound Link Tunnel” has received no response from any of the executive departments in Albany, such as the Department of Transportation or the Department of Environmental Conservation.

“Realistically,” says Polimeni, “this project only gets off the ground with top-level support from Governor Spitzer.” When contacted last week by the paper, a press spokesman from the Governor’s Office offered “no comment” on the tunnel proposal, saying that this appeared to be a private matter.

As for Wall Street, where the investors in the project would need to raise at least $9-10 billion, Polimeni said that Bear Stearns was “quite comfortable about raising the money once there was regulatory approval.”

What are the prospects of getting approval to dig a tunnel under Long Island Sound? The Rye Record contacted one of the leading project finance experts in the country, and asked his opinion, on background, of the financial feasibility of the tunnel idea.

“If you are 50 or older, you can stop worrying about the tunnel,” said this Wall Street veteran. “You’ll be gone before it’s dug, if ever.” In this expert’s view, the regulatory obstacles are almost insurmountable. Getting approval, and fighting through lawsuits at every turn, would take as long as two decades and tens of millions of dollars – with no assurance of victory.

Long Island State Senator Carl Marcellino plans to hold a hearing on the project in Oyster Bay January 24, post press time. But, as yet, not one of the “powers that be” in Albany has voiced any support for the Cross Sound Link Tunnel. That prospect, according to a source in the Executive Branch, is “highly unlikely.”

Some Highly Needed Freeway Projects: U.S.A.

all new crossings

Cross Sound Tunnel- New York, Westchester County I-287 to Suffox County (Long Island). Proposed as a triple tube (3 lanes each outboard tube; middle tube for emergency access: modified proposal to increase center tube bore for additional lower level railway; added modication to also increase outboard tube bore for 3 lanes atop and 2 below) VITAL potential evacuation route. Although bored rather then cut and cover, it detours unneccessarily to the east of Oyster Bay, yet is apparantly politcally sabataged- aka the scandal of 'Emperors Club' client #9 NYS Gov Spitzer (with scant mention of any other 'emperor' clients!)

Cross Bay/Cross Brooklyn Tunnel- New Jersey I-78 to and through Brooklyn via the LIRR Bay Ridge to Conduit Boulvard- Upgraded Beltway Parkway Corridor. Combines and upgrades the railway only Cross Bay Tunnel with the cancelled Linear City concept. VITAL potential evacuation route

St Louis I-70 Bridge- vital though hardly requires eliminating grade seperation near Arch. St Louis needs to extend the depressed current I-70 alongside the stadium --requiring it to duck beneath the --- RR, which is why its now elevated


Urban Road Tunnels

Atlanta East Tunnel

Chicago Crosstown- not being proposed as a tunnel, but why not?

San Francisco 19th Street Corridor Tunnel

San Francisco Central Freeway-Octavia Boulevard Bypass Tunnel

San Francisco Embaradero Tunnel

Washington, D.C. Grand Arc-Eastern Star Tunnel- PEPCO I-95 & Downtown Tunnel Loop

Washington, D.C. Wisconsin Avenue Tunnel- Canal Road Duelization- yes let us not forget west of Rock Creek Park

Urban Freeway Reconstructions

New York City:

I-87 Deegan Expressway- expand to 8 lanes minimum (6 lanes as it crosses beneath I-95), each 12 feet wide, with the idea of relieving the I-95 Cross Bronx Expressway by encourging some shift to the Deegan, including for trucks to Hunts Point and Queens, as well as to the north, with expansion via the parallel abandoned railroad and strip of industrial land, with an expansion of the decking to entirely cover, with some additional capacity overall. Project would include a new waterfront cut and cover tunnel perhaps built incrimentally ala Cincinatti Fort Washington Way in the vicinity of Cromwell Avenue, with a new underground southbound ramp crossing beneath 238th Street (eliminating a major traffic backup), as well as a depressing and covering the parkland segment just before the Bronx-Westchester County line, meeting the existing 6 lane I-87, with the 4th lanes connecting to the service roads. Should be a part of the NYDOT project to reconstruct the Highbridge Interchange/Hamilton Bridge, extended to include a reopening of the 178th and 179th Street Tunnels for relieving the I-95 Trans Manhattan Expressway as passages for Manhattan west side bound traffic.

I-87's Plausible Continuation

Improve the Triborough ('RFK) Bridge Queens approach to interstate specifications with 12 foot lanes, 4 in each direction, with new retaining walls mimicking the 1930s design of the originals, in tandem with the other projects for so improving the entire I-278 Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, including a new 10 lane K Bridge, and new tunnels to augment capacity, such as this, and this, down to the Gowanus Expressway segment, crossing the new Cross Bay/ Cross Brooklyn Tunnel, and connecting with the Verrazano Narrows Bridge.

I-678 Lower Van Wyck Expressway - southward from the Kew Gardens Interchange: expand to 8-10 lanes, with portions decked. Eliminate Robert Moses apsostsy from basic math via his planning for fewer numbers of lanes from more.


Rural Freeways

New Jersey I-95 to the southwestern I-287 for long distance traffic to go through rural wealthier area to more efficently bypass I-95 through Manhattan and the Bronx, serving to relieve the heavily used Cross Bronx Expressway (where are the environmental justice types at Jesuit Fordham University New Urbanist movement on this?)

A Christmas Wish List: Most Needed Road Projects

A mix of needed road projects,

San Francisco:
Strictly Highway
- 19th Street Corridor Tunnel
- Central Freeway Alternative Tunnel
- 280 Embaracdero Tunnel

New York Greater Metropolitan Area:

Strictly Trains- #7 extension to Secuscus
- PA station additional tube
- Upgrade NE Corridor for higher speed to further rail as alternative to flying

MultiModel- Cross Sound Tunnel- I-287 extended to Long Island Rt 135 with extra capacity for RR
- Cross Harbor (New Jersey to Brooklyn RR and vehicular highway tunnel with tunnel extension via Brooklyn to Conduit Boulevard-JFK Airport), with Interboro (Brooklyn-Queens) Tunnel- via concrete box enclosures sunk and buried primarily via existing RR right of way. (Facebook page)
- Replacement Tappen Zee Bridge with twin duel level spans with MetroNorth

Strictly Highway- Cross County 'Parkway' Western Extension to New Jersey as mixed use to I-87
- Cross County Eastern Extension Tunnel to I-95/New Roch City
- Cross County Arterial (former NYW&'Boston' RR through New Rochelle, Pelham and Mount Vernon)
- 178th and 179th Street Recommissioned Local Relief Tunnels, with Alexander Hamilton Bridge Reconstruction Project
- I-87 Deegan Reconstruction to 4 lanes minimum per direction with full 12 foot width lanes and shoulders with waterfront Cromwell Avenue Tunnel, and full cut and cover incorporationing the adjacent right of way now partially encroached upon in the northren Bronx.
- Mid-Town Manhattan Expressway Tunnel, once proposed as alternative to above ground Mid Town Manhattan Expressway
- Mid-Town Tunnel 3rd tube
- Lincoln Tunnel 4th tube, NJ 495 approach reconstruction 4 lanes min. per dir with greater cover and shoulders
- Holland Tunnel Augmentation with Canal and Broome-Delancy Street Bypass Tunnels
- Westway/Westway variant

Baltimore:
Multi-Model:Howard Street Tunnel Alternative, with I-83/MLK 295 Connection
Suggested additions?



Washington, D.C.:
I-95 PEPCO-New Hampshire Avenue-Metropiltan Branch Grand Arc promenade covered multimodel highway-RR tunnel, with K Street-New York Avenue- East Capitol Street Bridge Underground Inner Loop, with reconstruction of SW-SE Freeway underground, with new Washington Channel Tunnel

Was NY Gov Spitzer Felled for Supporting Tunnel?

Gov Spitzer was busted as "Client #9' at an exclusive "Emperor's Club" - a name suggesting a sexual services business for 'emperors' (government officials) - though with precious little attention on any other clients.

Such timing, together with the Pentagon's continuing defferrence to an outmodeled, doctrine against any new urban freeway capacity, suggests a plausible reason that transport subversion emanates from the political pyramid's highest levels...

http://www.lohud.com/article/20080522/COLUMNIST/805220439/Despite-setbacks-would-be-tunnel-developer-remains-optimistic

A funny thing happened on the way to the Cross Sound Link.

Actually, two things happened almost simultaneously in March. One was about greed and the other involved lust.

The first event was the sudden and surprising collapse of Bear Stearns, the Wall Street firm that fell in love with the subprime mortgage market. The second event was the sudden and surprising resignation of Eliot Spitzer, the governor who found love in the arms of prostitutes at 400 bucks an hour.

Both the investment bank and Spitzer had figured in an audacious plan to build the Cross Sound Link, a $10 billion (or more) vehicular tunnel that would travel 16 miles under the Long Island Sound, linking the eastern end of Long Island with Westchester County at Interstates 95 and 287 in Rye. Bear Stearns was going to float the bonds and sell the stock necessary to pay for the project while Spitzer supposedly was going to grease the political machinery to move the project through the approval process, according to the developer, Vincent Polimeni.


"Everything stopped when Spitzer had the disaster, coupled together the same week with Bear Stearns, who were obviously the people who were going to be funding the whole thing and spearheading it," Polimeni told me. "So, I'm retrenching."

Polimeni said the Spitzer sex scandal probably set him back at least two months because Spitzer, with whom he had met, understood the tunnel proposal and was at least willing to take the first steps needed to tests its merits. Now, he said, he'll have to explain the idea to the new governor, David Paterson.

"I know him," Polimeni said of Paterson. "I know all these people and I wanted the dust to settle before I got him into the loop. We'll try to set up a meeting with his people next month, to bring them up to speed with the tunnel.

"I think he'll be completely for it."

Polimeni said he was shocked when he heard the news of the Bear Stearns debacle and the axing of his contacts there. But he remained undaunted because he knew that the high-powered people who were key players in the Cross Sound Link would eventually be recruited by other firms.

Build a Cross Sound Tunnel

across New York's Long Island Sound
connecting I-287 with Route 135

Suggested Tunnel Configuration for I-287 Cross Sound Tunnel connecting Westchester County and Long Island, N.Y.


This would connect existing I-287 with Route 135 in Long Island.



It would be drilled over 100 feet beneath the underwater surface.

Is being proposed by Polimeri International, a family owned Garden City, LI based development company.

It would be built with private funds, and charge a toll of $25 for passenger automobiles and an upwards of $100 for trucks.

It would be a useful evacuation route- a concept that the government has paid lip service.

N.Y. State Senator Carl Marcellino (R- Syosset) has announced hearings to be held on this proposal.


Daily News article
The Cross Sound Link Project