Re-Think New York City La Guardia Airport Expansion Into The South Bronx Proposal

An intriguing idea to expand La Guardia Airport with expanded runways achieved by new landfill displacing Rikers Island, with a new set of entryways in the Port Morris area of the South Bronx, accompanied by upgrades to the passenger rail system- all well and good.

http://www.rethinknyc.com/

Would establish new supplemental entryway to La Guardia in the South Bronx, thus traffic from the north would no longer need to cross the Triborough or Whitestone Bridges, with access to the rest of the airport via a dedicated rail loop

 

 Would expand runway capacity via new landfill displacing Rikers Island

 Would connect with all three northern radial Metro North Railroads, thus travellers from the north could arrive by any of the three Metro North railroad lines.   

The train station would include a new stop for Amtrak.

Includes the idea of a new convention center replacing Javits Center.

That's an idea that builds upon late 1800s and early 1900s planning proposals to develop this Port Morris area, such as an 1883 proposal for a new convention center, and latter with the idea of continuing the denser development seen in Manhattan further forth, for which the New York, Westchester & Boston railroad, which opened in 1911 had anticipated.

The Re-Think NYC site notes:

The area north of the convention center would be built at an urban scale.  To the west is the Bruckner Expressway, which prevents connection between Port Morris and neighborhoods to the west.  We would bridge this divide through a proposed new "ambassador" building on the west side of the Bruckner at 142nd Street, which would allow people to enter on that side of the expressway, but the building would also serve as a bridge over the Bruckner that would connect to the entire complex.

This proposal needs further work regarding the highway network, particularly as the Bruckner segment along this area is an unsightly elevated freeway- hence placing a building atop it in this configuration would be ungainly.

Should ultimately include a complete replacement-reconstruction of the southern Bruckner Expressway- an unsightly elevated highway.

http://www.archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=5476#.VsE2t_k9-So

What To Do About The Bruckner Expressway:

This elevated freeway, with 3 lanes in each direction is unsightly, locally divisive, lacks shoulders, lacks access ramps to this proposed airport entryway complex, and is under-capacity for accepting traffic from the northbound Willis Avenue Bridge from Manhattan.

It does provide a fantastic view through the windshield for travellers heading south.

To the west it is paralleled by a 4 lane wide southbound surface Bruckner Boulevard.

To its east it is paralleled by a 2 lane wide northbound Bruckner Boulevard with buildings, from its southern end to 142nd Street, where the railroad then meets it to run immediately alongside.  That railroad is at a lower grade.

Ideally there should be a new line of buildings designed to reconnect Port Morris with the neighborhoods to the west in the place now occupied by the elevated freeway structure, which should be torn down, with new parallel freeway roadways, with either both directions within new cut and cover tunnel(s), or with the northbound direction in a new cut and cover tunnel, and the southbound direction elevated as the roof of a new line of buildings.

Because the existing elevated freeway must remain in operation throughout the construction project, the first stage would be constructing a new cut and cover freeway tunnel beneath the surface road to the west.

As the Re-Think NYC proposal envisions demolishing the buildings already along the Bruckner's eastern (northbound) side, it could likewise construct a cut and cover tunnelway there as well.  To the north of 142nd Street, this could be done via the existing railroad right of way with the tracks relocated eastward, and with this rail corridor planned to be decked over.  The historic New York, Westchester & Boston RailRoad Station at the north side of Hunts Point Avenue should not be demolished but rather propped up with new supports and retained either in its exact same location or slightly re-indexed eastwards.

 http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22862

http://dev.forgotten-ny.com/2001/03/abandoned-railroad-stations-of-the-bronx/

Each of these cut and cover tunnels should ideally be at least the of 4 full width lanes plus shoulders.  This might involve some building removal on a brief section of the north side in addition to that one the south side already envisioned by the Re-Think NYC proposal.  This should likewise be designed to tie into the existing 4 lane short tunnel for Bruckner Boulevard traffic beneath the Bruckner Expressway-Deegan Expressway interchange with the approach to the Triborough "RFK" Bridge.  That tunnel should be lengthened both to the south-west to Brown Place, with local street access and a gentler curve displacing the gasoline station there.  And it should be extended to the north-east, with at least one full lane joining into and continuing via an additional lane of the reconstructed Bruckner Expressway.

Once the new cut and cover tunnels are in place, the elevated Bruckner should be demolished, and replaced with a line of new buildings.  Optional would be the idea of an elevated roadway upon its roof; as the purpose of that would be to continue the tradition of the southbound vista through the windshield, this might done only for the southbound direction.  A variation of this would be to have an arial tunnel within one of this structure's upper levels, ala the "Choppway" proposal a few years ago for the replacement of Seattle Washington's elevated double decked Route 99 Freeway.

http://crosscut.com/2008/09/frank-chopps-megaduct-comes-out-hiding/

However, because of the need to retain the existing elevated freeway throughout the reconstruction, this project would have to include at least one cut and cover tunnel on one or both sides of the existing structure- a basic design configuration furthermore favored by the practicalities of establishing on ramp and off ramp access.   Also, the construction could be staged to add an additional cut and cover carriageway between the two new outboard tunnelways once the existing elevated Bruckner is removed.

To the north, the new cut and covers could do wonders for removing the blight of the existing roadways at the mouth of the Bronx River, for both the continuation of the Bruckner and for its connections to the Sheridan.  

Such a cut and cover tunnel Bruckner Expressway reconstruction should extend to Boynton Avenue, thus eliminating the elevated berm segment to the west, meeting the existing Bruckner corridor where the freeway is at ground level, and has the option of transitioning to the service roads to access the Bronx River Parkway.

Such a cut and cover connection for the Sheridan should extend to Westchester Avenue, which is build-able via re-indexing the adjacent railroad to the east.  Further north, portions of the Sheridan should be decked over taking advantage of the topography of the hill to its west to better connect that area with the Bronx River waterfront, such as between E 172 and 173rd Streets.

The new Bruckner Expressway would of course have greater capacity than the existing 3 lane in each direction facility.  The new set of outboard cut and cover tunnels with 4 lanes apiece flanking an inner set with 2 lanes per direction built after the demolition of the elevated structure would provide an upwards of12 lanes, thereby accommodating continuous on lanes for traffic from the northbound Willis Bridge and to and from the new airport access ramps.  Of this, 8 lane would continue to surface at Boynton Street, with a lane apiece to and from the service roads, the remaining 6 lanes with the 6 lane surface Bruckner Expressway, and 4 lanes to the north for the Sheridan.  Providing this extra capacity would allow more traffic to be underground, thus allowing for a more pedestrian friendly Bruckner Boulevard.

With this thought, the project should include such ramp connects into the Hunts Point Market.

Other Ideas:

With the additional of such a significant amount of landfill displacing Rikers Island, another idea comes to mind- what about taking advantage of that to create new roadway crossings between the Bronx and Queens?  

With the Triborough "RFK" Bridge heavily used, even though the "Re-Think NYC" plan would divert some of its traffic by no longer requiring its use from the north to access La Guardia Airport, it would be prudent for long term planning to ultimately seize the opportunity provided by the landfill for the new runway space.

Regarding highways, two ideas come to mind:

- extending the Bronx River Parkway

- extending the Deegan

The logical place would be the area of the Grand Central Parkway-Brooklyn Queens Expressway interchanges.  

Not simply as the junction of these two highways, both of which are heavily used.  

But because that's the location of a rail corridor that has already been studied and proposed as the location of a new interstate highway running roughly north-south between the two roughly parallel highways of the BQE and the Van Wick Expressway.  As planned during the 1960s it was to be known as the Interboro Expressway, and would connect directly with  the contemporaneously planned Cross Brooklyn Expressway.

For a good historic overview of the previous planing for the Interboro Expressway, see the account by NYC Roads Steve Anderson:

http://www.nycroads.com/roads/queens-interboro/

Accordingly it was canceled by 1973.  As planned during the late 1960s-early 1970s it would have included reconstructing a portion of the existing elevated IRT as a subway with the below ground level freeway.  As I have not seen any detailed plans, I don't know if any of the latter planning included any segments as coverways (cut and cover tunnels), rather than simply as an open depressed freeway.

A revival of the Interboro Expressway has been proposed by Peter Samuel's via his publication TollRoads.

As it is a relatively narrow railroad corridor that is generally below grand level, passing through residential area, it would have to be constructed primarily within a tunnel box, and covered with new linear parkland.

Connecting with a Cross Brooklyn Expressway likewise built primarily by tunnelways, this Interboro Route would provide a valuable link into Brooklyn and towards Staten Island and Long Island.

A could be connected to the Bronx by a curved tunnel contained beneath the Re-Think NYC La Guardia Port Morris facility, directly into the Deegan.  Optionally that could include ramp connects to and from the new Bruckner and the Hunts Point Market.

A tunneled extension of the Bronx River Parkway could connect with the BQE-Interboro-Grand Central Parkway, though its logical connection with the latter as a parkway would be best done in conjunction with a demolition-reconstruction of the western portion of the existing La Guardia complex, owing to the geometry.

Such a connection would thus establish a seem-less link between the southern end of New York's longest Parkway -- the Bronx River - Sprain Brook - Taconic which are all really one freeway from the South Bronx towards Albany -- and the Grand Central - Cross Island - Northern State Parkways.

None of these projects would have to be all built at once or together.

Rather they could be built in stages, starting with the incorporation of their initial segments within the "Re-Think NYC" La Guardia expansion project, and within the reconstruction of the adjoining Bruckner.

Including the tunnel box within the new clearing and landfill would be comparably easy compared to failing to plan them and adding later.  As these would be additions between the existing 8 lane Triborough/"RFK" and 6 lane Whitestone Bridges, they could suffice with a minimum of 2 lanes in each direction apiece.

The Deegan-Interboro Connection would provide a valuable bypass of the Triborough "RFK" Bridge and its antiquated Queens approach.  Of course the Deegan should be rebuilt to full 8 lane specifications, as I have previously written about, and its east west segment from Willis Avenue to at least towards Brown Street, should be decked over.  Serious consideration should be given to reconstructing this freeway further to the east at a lower elevation to be likewise decked over as far as practical for connecting with the Triborough"RFK" Bridge, with new parkland atop, more consistent with the spirit of the 1883 Port Morris planning.

Because of their use of the footprint of the La Guardia expansion project, most of this new tunnel crossing construction would not disturb existing neighborhoods nor traffic.
 

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.

Donald Trump Bridge Disconnect

China's bridges: "China, you go there now, roads, bridges, schools, you never saw anything like it. They have bridges that make the George Washington Bridge look like small potatoes." - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/16/the-many-many-things-that-are-great-according-to-donald-trump/

Yet what has Donald Trump ever said about bridges, in say the metropolitan area of his native New York?   Surely would not such a candidate complain or comment about NY not getting a single new crossing since the completion of the Verrazano Narrow Bridge?

In a radio interview, Trump said he’s convinced the cost of the massive bridge will balloon to $10 billion, a cost he said the state can’t afford. The current projected cost for the new bridge is as much as $4.8 billion, which includes both construction and financing costs.

The state Thruway Authority, which owns the bridge, closed on a $1.6 billion loan from the federal government for the bridge replacement project last week. The better option, Trump said, is reinforcing the current span, which stretches across the Hudson River between Westchester and Rockland counties.

“The bridge is a totally fine structure, but it needs renewal,” Trump told host Fred Dicker on Albany’s WGDJ-AM. “And the renewal can be done for a tiny fraction of the — in my opinion — $10 billion bridge that they’re going to build.”

Trump offered no basis for his $10 billion estimate, aside from detailing his expertise in real-estate development.

The Thruway Authority’s contract for the new bridge pushes much of the cost of potential overruns on the team of contractors building the span, though taxpayers are still on the hook in certain instances, such as if builders encounter hazardous materials or the state decides to add features to the bridge.

Why no mention from Trump about where have all of those toll monies gone?  Such as the toll collected on the Tappan Zee Bridge since it first opened in 1955 or so?

Mike Cape on December 24, 2013 9:51 pm

LOL, the bridge can’t handle the traffic it was not designed for 125 to 150,000 cars a day. The bridge was designed for 50,000 cars a day and is of a design that requires a lot of maintenance, which has not been done. However the bridge was made during a steel shortage and is not constructed of a gauge of other NYC bridges, it was designed with a life span of 50 years. It is made of small box steel girder and truss transfer beams. Take a look at in contract to the steel on other NY area bridges. It needs to go and soon. Trump has likely only flown over it recently, no sweat off his back.

Conscience of a Conservative on December 23, 2013 6:56 pm

Trump is very wrong here, but I suspect he doesn’t care and just wants his daily publicity. The Tappan Zee bridge is in dire need of upgrade as it’s the life-blood for those crossing the Hudson. The State did err, but on the side of not including a light rail option.

In judging the fiscal soundness of the project the State should be thinking about the increased productivity of residents on both sides of the Hudson, along with increased tax revenue by making Rockland more desirable http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2013/12/23/donald-trump-tappan-zee-replacement-state-will-never-able-afford/

Actually the State did more than err in not including the light rail, or rather the provisions for such, but more broadly the provisions for rail in general.  After all the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement was long projected to include a heavy rail component of a new Metro North passenger rail line from Suffern to Rye/Port Chester, later truncated to White Plains and than to Tarrytown.

Such was projected to be carried by a lower deck- a feature included in the George Washington and Verrazano Narrows Bridges.  Yet one in-explicitly dropped, even as the EIS left that option out of its cost benefits analysts a logical basis for a law suit that was never brought about.

What happened to all of the liberal-left "progressive" support for expanding rail transit?

Come to think why do we hear so much about Trump, yet so comparatively little about other NY area developers that HAVE proposed new crossings, such as that who proposed the Cross Sound Tunnel?

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?)

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.

Additional Long Island Evacuation Routes: Now More Then Ever

'710'

The July 10, 2009 fire and reduction of the Throgs Neck Bridge a wake-up call?

to the public, probably yes, with a Newsday poll showing 85% support for a tunnel connection Long Island with I-287

What happened ...

A stubborn fire under the Throgs Neck Bridge Friday shut down traffic between Queens and the Bronx, leaving thousands of morning commuters in a bumper-to-bumper nightmare, officials said.

The 5 a.m. blaze began on construction materials and later spread to scaffolding, officials said.

Nearly 140 firefighters have been battling the three-alarm blaze.

Two firefighters suffered minor injuries and were taken to New York Hospital in Queens, fire officials said. There were no injuries to contractors, who were working at the site.

The blaze was still going at noon.

Engineers were at the scene to determine the cause of the fire and the extent of the damage to the bridge.

Traffic was diverted to the Whitestone and RFK Bridges, according to the MTA.

more to come ...

Homeland Security Goal would be better served by reviving Interstate 70 South through northwest Washington

excerpt from comments of Mark Robinowitz for the DEIS of the ICC, a circumferential highway miles outside northern Washington, D.C.

http://www.permatopia.com/icc/icc-deis-2005-comments.pdf

(excerpt- at page 15)

If the ICC is truly intended to boast "Homeland Security", then additional analysis (in a SDEIS) is needed to determine the feasibility and need for reviving the 1950s era proposal for extending Interstate 70 South (the original name or I-270) inside the Beltway to downtown DC. This proposed road would run through Northwest Washington, near the new headquarters of the Department of Homeland Security (at the former Naval Security Station, next to American University).

1959 Friendship Heights

That was the radial highway that would have passed through Washington's wealthiest, whitest area, taking fewer homes than either the corresponding NCF or NE Freeway as shown in the 1959 Mass Transportation Plan, about 74 from the Maryland line at Friendship Heights to the north head of Glover Archibold Park to continue there south as a parkway, with the 1959 plan featuring a split to an I-70 continuation that would have displaced a few dwellings at the northern edge of the Cleveland Park neighborhood before crossing Rock Cree Park to a continuation through the Mt Pleasant neighborhood that would have displaced far more dwellings to an interchange with the I-66 North Leg of the Inner Loop.

1959 Cleveland Park
(dashed lines indicate tunnel segments)

1959 Mt. Pleasant
(no tunnel segments in less affluent areas)

1959

The cancellation of the NW Freeway led to the 1962 JFK Administration proposal of replacing the 1959 plan for three separate northern radial freeways with a 2 into 1 "Y" Route upon the B&O Metro Branch RR-industrial corridor that runs next to the campus of Catholic University of America. This was to occur with essentially the rail transit network that was built for WMATA.

1962

That plan would be effectively undermined politically via the subsequent 1964 North Central Freeway reports' failure to follow the JFK plan with up to 37 studied routes largely nowhere near this rr and with a recommendation running along the rr in some areas only to deviate significantly directly through old neighborhoods with far far higher local impacts -- 471 free standing dwellings for the 1 mile segment through Takoma Park, Maryland upon a route not only far more destructive but longer and less direct then JFK's B&O "Y" route.

1964

Veers about 1/2 mile away from the B&O railroad on new swath through old neighborhoods in Takoma Park, Maryland, taking 471 houses for the 1.1 mile segment, before rejoining the railroad immediately north of New Hampshire Avenue.

This route was longer and less direct.

Route #11 at New Hampshire Avenue, veering away from the B&O railroad into Takoma Park

1964

1966

It was not until 1966 that a "supplementary" North Central Freeway study with the JFK B&O route appeared; it eliminated the separate swath in Takoma Park by "hugging" the railroad's flanks at the edge of Takoma Park, with various sort tunnels to swing the highway to one side or the other railroad, such as alongside Montgomery Community College, with a proposal to effectively do the same alongside Catholic University and Brookland via "air rights" development.

1966

1971

The 1971 plan extends the highway cover southward to Rhode Island Avenue, yet inexplicitly deletes the northern segment alongside the main campus of Catholic University of America, continuing its traditional isolation from the east .

All of this was undermined by various politician's suggestions as late as 1968 in favor of the earlier route from 1964 as "less expensive".

So would a change in the route in the vicinity of Fort Totten to use more parkland, creating a new objection in the 1966-71 plan absent from the 1964 plan.

1964 plan which follows the railroad at Fort Totten

1966 plan which veers to the west at Fort Totten

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/11/ectc-1970.html

So conceivably did the 1971 plan's to bury the highway segment through Takoma, D.C., but with a catch: whereas the 1966 plan flanked the railroad -- that is a 3/RR/RR/3 configuration -- the 1971 plan placed both directions of the highway along the railroad's eastern side, thus placing it in direct conflict with the landmark Cady-Lee mansion on the corner of Eastern Avenue and Piney Branch, necessitating its removal, whereas the 1966 plan avoided this.

1966 I-70S
Cut and cover tunnels
Silver Spring, Maryland
alongside Blair Park/Montgomery Community College

1966 I-70S North Central Freeway
flanks the railroad
in Takoma, D.C.

1971 I-70S North Central Freeway
all on the eastern side of the railroad

No plan was drawn up via the authorities to tunnelize this segment of highway with highway carriageways flanking the railroad to preserve the Cady Lee mansion as well as the houses to the north facing Takoma Avenue. The Cady Lee mansion, built cir 1884, is the northernmost house within D.C. along the railroad's eastern side.

Cady Lee

Why add objections lacking in earlier plans?

Doing so would only continue to undermine this highway's political support, doing so pretty much by the time of the final re-routing with the change of the I-95 Northeast Freeway's route from Northwest Branch Park/Fort Drive, to the PEPCO power line/New Hampshire Avenue route.

D.C. I-95 Northeast Freeway routes
1960-1973

1960 report has I-95 in Maryland via Northwest Branch and entering D.C. passing alongside Catholic Sisters College; that route is openly opposed by the Roman Catholic Church and the adjoining residential areas, leading to its re-routing within D.C. via the Fort Drive right of ay between Galatin and Galloway Streets NE. The subsequent PEPCO Power Line right of route was developed in the 1971 report, replacing the Northwest Branch-Fort Drive route in order to preserve parkland and re-utilize n existing 250 foot clear cut power line right of way extending from outside the I-495 Capital Beltway to some 1,600 or so feet from the Maryland D.C. line alongside New Hampshire Avenue, to then travel about another 1,600 feet to join the B&O railroad corridor.

PEPCO/New Hampshire Avenue
1971- dropped by Maryland July 16, 1973

In my studies of numerous historical information sources regarding this highway planning, I have yet to encounter anything on the Order of the Eastern Star's opinions- for instance did they ever request making the depressed segment through their property as a tunnel to preserve the home's sanctity?

Likewise with that of Catholic University of America- did they for instance object to the proposed highway lid's shortening in the 1971 plan versus the 1966 plan which extended further north alongside the CUA main campus to Taylor Street?

The Washington Post would completely misrepresent this route
in its November, 2000 article "Lost Highways" by Bob and Jane Levey, with this map turning the I-95 Northeast route away from its New Hampshire Avenue routing through the field of the Order of the Eastern Star Masonic home, and upon a highly destructive and fictitious route that appears in no planning documents

No northern D.C. radial highway appears in official planning documents after 1973.

A Future Washington, D.C. Big Dig

North Central Freeway- A Trip Within The Beltway
Northeast Freeway- A Trip Within The Beltway
Northwest Freeway- A Trip Within The Beltway
Evacuation Routes- A Trip Within The Beltway

The Washington Post Lies About D.C. I-95