Trump's Infrastructure Priorty List (Top 50 Projects) Leaked

[texaskdog]

Why would the US spend money in CA?  After all they want to secceed so bad.

Invest in liberalism go broke oh well

[SectorZ]

I'd like to know what national security or safety emergency requires the Green Line extension to be built through Medford and Somerville, Massachusetts

A federal judge demanded it be built, so let the feds pay for it. There are no national security or safety reasons, it was to 'offset' the additional pollution from cars caused by the Big Dig. Ironically, there is probably lot less pollution from cars since the days of the old central artery due to advancements in emission control systems.

[Pete from Boston]

Why would the US spend money in CA?  After all they want to secceed so bad.

Invest in liberalism go broke oh well

Doomsday clock on the thread inches closer to midnight...

[Pete from Boston]

I'd like to know what national security or safety emergency requires the Green Line extension to be built through Medford and Somerville, Massachusetts

A federal judge demanded it be built, so let the feds pay for it. There are no national security or safety reasons, it was to 'offset' the additional pollution from cars caused by the Big Dig. Ironically, there is probably lot less pollution from cars since the days of the old central artery due to advancements in emission control systems.

What federal judge demanded it be built?

[kalvado]

I'd like to know what national security or safety emergency requires the Green Line extension to be built through Medford and Somerville, Massachusetts

A federal judge demanded it be built, so let the feds pay for it. There are no national security or safety reasons, it was to 'offset' the additional pollution from cars caused by the Big Dig. Ironically, there is probably lot less pollution from cars since the days of the old central artery due to advancements in emission control systems.

What federal judge demanded it be built?

http://archive.somervillema.gov/departments/ospcd/green-line-extension    

OSPCD - Green Line Extension

History

The idea of extending the Green Line to Somerville is by no means a new concept. As early as the 1920s the Metropolitan Planning Commission considered the possibility. Numerous studies promoted the plan over the next decades. In 1990, Massachusetts agreed to extend the Green Line to offset the pollution increase within Somerville caused by the Big Dig. Despite this legal commitment, however, the Green Line Extension project lagged far behind schedule, prompting the City of Somerville and the Conservation Law Foundation to file a lawsuit to keep the project moving. In 2006, this litigation, with the help of community support and advocacy groups such as Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership (STEP) and the Union Square Task Force, finally brought about a multi-million dollar state investment in the Green Line extension from Lechmere Station into Somerville and Medford.

Looks like promised multiple times on different levels, but unfunded commitment.
And, just for reference, another federal funding pledge from 2014:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/12/02/federal-officials-pledge-nearly-help-extend-green-line-into-somerville-and-medford/WstVh8YwfH6dbL6toVIWNI/story.html

[Pete from Boston]

I'd like to know what national security or safety emergency requires the Green Line extension to be built through Medford and Somerville, Massachusetts

A federal judge demanded it be built, so let the feds pay for it. There are no national security or safety reasons, it was to 'offset' the additional pollution from cars caused by the Big Dig. Ironically, there is probably lot less pollution from cars since the days of the old central artery due to advancements in emission control systems.

What federal judge demanded it be built?

http://archive.somervillema.gov/departments/ospcd/green-line-extension

OSPCD - Green Line Extension

History

The idea of extending the Green Line to Somerville is by no means a new concept. As early as the 1920s the Metropolitan Planning Commission considered the possibility. Numerous studies promoted the plan over the next decades. In 1990, Massachusetts agreed to extend the Green Line to offset the pollution increase within Somerville caused by the Big Dig. Despite this legal commitment, however, the Green Line Extension project lagged far behind schedule, prompting the City of Somerville and the Conservation Law Foundation to file a lawsuit to keep the project moving. In 2006, this litigation, with the help of community support and advocacy groups such as Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership (STEP) and the Union Square Task Force, finally brought about a multi-million dollar state investment in the Green Line extension from Lechmere Station into Somerville and Medford.

Looks like promised multiple times on different levels, but unfunded commitment.
And, just for reference, another federal funding pledge from 2014:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/12/02/federal-officials-pledge-nearly-help-extend-green-line-into-somerville-and-medford/WstVh8YwfH6dbL6toVIWNI/story.html

I am familiar with that backstory, but what I'm saying is, I don't recall that it was ordered by any federal judge.

It's actually a shame that such a thing did not happen. If you look at the ruling on the harbor cleanup under judge David Mazzone, there was oversight with real teeth. The same has not been true of the Big Dig transit commitments, which were a pretty sad afterthought.

The bulk of the line goes through the city of Somerville, which is standing its ground as a sanctuary city as the president threatens to withhold federal monies. Since this is a state project, I doubt it would be impacted, but it is causing some grumbling here.  Folks along the line have seen their property values more than double in the past decade, and are eager to cash in.

[Duke87]

In which states are the following projects?

8. NextGen Air Traffic Control System - various states
  15. Cadiz Water Conveyance Project - California
  16. TransWest Express Transmission - Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and Nevada (would also benefit, but is not physically located in, California)
  44. Huntington Beach Desalination Plant - California
  47. Seattle Airport Expansion - Washington
  49. Energy Storage and Grid Modernization - various states


I do think it's good to see utility infrastructure getting some love here. It's unsexy and the average person takes it for granted (since we only use it indirectly), but it's just as important as transportation infrastructure to the functioning of civilization.

[SteveG1988]

It seems a good number of these road projects are in states where the climate changes on a basis four times a year. Meaning the roads will wear out faster with thermal cycling, in my opinion that is. Plus population density.

[NE2]

It seems a good number of these road projects are in states where the climate changes on a basis four times a year.

Dude. Learn the difference between weather and climate.

[SectorZ]

I'd like to know what national security or safety emergency requires the Green Line extension to be built through Medford and Somerville, Massachusetts

A federal judge demanded it be built, so let the feds pay for it. There are no national security or safety reasons, it was to 'offset' the additional pollution from cars caused by the Big Dig. Ironically, there is probably lot less pollution from cars since the days of the old central artery due to advancements in emission control systems.

What federal judge demanded it be built?

http://archive.somervillema.gov/departments/ospcd/green-line-extension

OSPCD - Green Line Extension

History

The idea of extending the Green Line to Somerville is by no means a new concept. As early as the 1920s the Metropolitan Planning Commission considered the possibility. Numerous studies promoted the plan over the next decades. In 1990, Massachusetts agreed to extend the Green Line to offset the pollution increase within Somerville caused by the Big Dig. Despite this legal commitment, however, the Green Line Extension project lagged far behind schedule, prompting the City of Somerville and the Conservation Law Foundation to file a lawsuit to keep the project moving. In 2006, this litigation, with the help of community support and advocacy groups such as Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership (STEP) and the Union Square Task Force, finally brought about a multi-million dollar state investment in the Green Line extension from Lechmere Station into Somerville and Medford.

Looks like promised multiple times on different levels, but unfunded commitment.
And, just for reference, another federal funding pledge from 2014:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/12/02/federal-officials-pledge-nearly-help-extend-green-line-into-somerville-and-medford/WstVh8YwfH6dbL6toVIWNI/story.html

I am familiar with that backstory, but what I'm saying is, I don't recall that it was ordered by any federal judge.

It's actually a shame that such a thing did not happen. If you look at the ruling on the harbor cleanup under judge David Mazzone, there was oversight with real teeth. The same has not been true of the Big Dig transit commitments, which were a pretty sad afterthought.

The bulk of the line goes through the city of Somerville, which is standing its ground as a sanctuary city as the president threatens to withhold federal monies. Since this is a state project, I doubt it would be impacted, but it is causing some grumbling here.  Folks along the line have seen their property values more than double in the past decade, and are eager to cash in.

My apologies, I misspoke on that. A federal judge did sign off on the settlement between the Commonwealth and the Conservation Law Foundation. Amazingly, how CLF hasn't just sued by claiming Mass has violated the terms of the settlement, or at the very least demanded the judge force enforcement of the settlement, is beyond me.

[Pete from Boston]

My apologies, I misspoke on that. A federal judge did sign off on the settlement between the Commonwealth and the Conservation Law Foundation. Amazingly, how CLF hasn't just sued by claiming Mass has violated the terms of the settlement, or at the very least demanded the judge force enforcement of the settlement, is beyond me.

The CLF was active in holding the state to this agreement for many years. Then they conceded to sign off on the Commonwealth's reneging about 10 years ago. I do wonder how much of this had to do with Romney having Doug Foy on board, the former head of the CLF.  I know there were people that worked actively with the CLF on this for many years that felt betrayed by that.

[Anthony_JK]

Damn....Mississippi River dredging gets in for LA, but I-49 South doesn't? Sad.

[adventurernumber1]

There's a bunch of good projects on this list. I am excited about them all. Among the most interesting to me are the new Gordie Howe International Bridge, the I-71/I-75 (Brent Spence Bridge) replacement, the high-speed rail from Dallas to Houston, and the improvements to Interstate 95 in North Carolina. I am very glad that some attention is being given to these infrastructure projects. 

[Pete from Boston]

Hilarious direction for the reporting to go, IMHO (NYT, 2/4/17):


As Trump Vows Building Splurge, Famed Traffic Choke Point Offers Warning

"BREEZEWOOD, Pa. – Millions of people who travel between the Mid-Atlantic and the Midwest each year fight through Breezewood, Pa., a strange gap in the Interstate System. A leg of Route I-70 brings drivers north from Washington and Baltimore to plug into the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the great road network that runs west to the heartland cities of Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Chicago.

But no ramps join these two huge highways at their crossing. Instead, drivers travel an extra two-mile loop that takes them out of rural Appalachia and into several suddenly urban blocks with traffic lights and a dense bazaar of gas stations, fast-food restaurants and motels.

"Things that make no sense: Breezewood, Pa. Why does the interstate turn into an interchange?"  Stephanie Wonderlick recently posted on Twitter as she and her family returned home to Washington from Milwaukee.

She is not alone. Many other drivers vent similar – often profane – anger and confusion about this notorious choke point. As a Washingtonian from northern Indiana who transits Breezewood for family visits, I have often wondered the same thing – a question that became more galling after my younger son, jolted by our sudden deceleration into the area's stop-and-go traffic, threw up all over the back seat.

The answer lies at the intersection of politics and transportation policy. At a time when President Trump wants to spend a trillion dollars on infrastructure, the story of Breezewood offers a vivid case study in governance over such projects. It shows how legal quirks, powerful politicians and opaque bureaucratic procedures can influence decisions about how to spend taxpayer dollars.

Full text at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/06/us/politics/a-pennsylvania-highway-town-at-the-junction-of-politics-and-policy.html

[frankenroad]

When I lived in Maryland, and my parents were living in Ohio, I would bypass Breezewood by going through Morgantown on what are now 68 and 79.   This was when the US-48 freeway only went from Morgantown to Cumberland, and you had to take US-40 up over Sideling Hill.   It was still more relaxing than going through Breezewood.  It's totally ridiculous that they won't fix it.

[Joe The Dragon]

Hilarious direction for the reporting to go, IMHO (NYT, 2/4/17):


As Trump Vows Building Splurge, Famed Traffic Choke Point Offers Warning

"BREEZEWOOD, Pa. – Millions of people who travel between the Mid-Atlantic and the Midwest each year fight through Breezewood, Pa., a strange gap in the Interstate System. A leg of Route I-70 brings drivers north from Washington and Baltimore to plug into the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the great road network that runs west to the heartland cities of Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Chicago.

But no ramps join these two huge highways at their crossing. Instead, drivers travel an extra two-mile loop that takes them out of rural Appalachia and into several suddenly urban blocks with traffic lights and a dense bazaar of gas stations, fast-food restaurants and motels.

"Things that make no sense: Breezewood, Pa. Why does the interstate turn into an interchange?"  Stephanie Wonderlick recently posted on Twitter as she and her family returned home to Washington from Milwaukee.

She is not alone. Many other drivers vent similar – often profane – anger and confusion about this notorious choke point. As a Washingtonian from northern Indiana who transits Breezewood for family visits, I have often wondered the same thing – a question that became more galling after my younger son, jolted by our sudden deceleration into the area's stop-and-go traffic, threw up all over the back seat.

The answer lies at the intersection of politics and transportation policy. At a time when President Trump wants to spend a trillion dollars on infrastructure, the story of Breezewood offers a vivid case study in governance over such projects. It shows how legal quirks, powerful politicians and opaque bureaucratic procedures can influence decisions about how to spend taxpayer dollars.

Full text at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/06/us/politics/a-pennsylvania-highway-town-at-the-junction-of-politics-and-policy.html

Breezewood is from the old days of ticket toll roads where direct ramps not really put in and they just used the local roads. Non ticket toll roads did that to a lesser level.

Now they can build some ez-pass only ramps.

[Pete from Boston]

The important part of the article was really about why these things don't get done.  Namely, it's not supported by the locals to do anything about it, so it's unlikely for anything to happen.  If you think people acting in their own best interest is unreasonable, I don't know what to tell you.

[kalvado]

The important part of the article was really about why these things don't get done.  Namely, it's not supported by the locals to do anything about it, so it's unlikely for anything to happen.  If you think people acting in their own best interest is unreasonable, I don't know what to tell you.

Well, some people acting in what they think is their best interest are called criminals (larceny, thief, burglary) - since their actions benefit them at a cost of significant losses for others.
I am not going to call Breezewood folks criminals, but definitely this is not the case of simple "acting in my best interest and doing no harm to others" as well.   

[cpzilliacus]

I am not going to call Breezewood folks criminals, but definitely this is not the case of simple "acting in my best interest and doing no harm to others" as well.   

The recurring crashes on I-70 westbound (really headed north at that point) approaching Breezewood are enough reason to hate the place and avoid spending money there.

[Pete from Boston]

The important part of the article was really about why these things don't get done.  Namely, it's not supported by the locals to do anything about it, so it's unlikely for anything to happen.  If you think people acting in their own best interest is unreasonable, I don't know what to tell you.

Well, some people acting in what they think is their best interest are called criminals (larceny, thief, burglary) - since their actions benefit them at a cost of significant losses for others.
I am not going to call Breezewood folks criminals, but definitely this is not the case of simple "acting in my best interest and doing no harm to others" as well.   

If that's the case, it's incumbent upon state officials to step in and make it happen, but they are not doing that.  Is it really incumbent on local officials to press for a major Interstate highway project, particularly one that will devastate their local economy?

All I'm saying is, no, they are not comparable to criminals because they are elected to protect diverse local interests including businesses and jobs.  You tell the people in depressed central Pennsylvania that elected you that you're going to work against local jobs, and see how it goes.

Yes, I understand it's a safety and regional economy issue.  No, I don't expect Breezewood to advocate for a change in the status quo.
 

[sparker]

The important part of the article was really about why these things don't get done.  Namely, it's not supported by the locals to do anything about it, so it's unlikely for anything to happen.  If you think people acting in their own best interest is unreasonable, I don't know what to tell you.

Well, some people acting in what they think is their best interest are called criminals (larceny, thief, burglary) - since their actions benefit them at a cost of significant losses for others.
I am not going to call Breezewood folks criminals, but definitely this is not the case of simple "acting in my best interest and doing no harm to others" as well.   

If that's the case, it's incumbent upon state officials to step in and make it happen, but they are not doing that.  Is it really incumbent on local officials to press for a major Interstate highway project, particularly one that will devastate their local economy?

All I'm saying is, no, they are not comparable to criminals because they are elected to protect diverse local interests including businesses and jobs.  You tell the people in depressed central Pennsylvania that elected you that you're going to work against local jobs, and see how it goes.

Yes, I understand it's a safety and regional economy issue.  No, I don't expect Breezewood to advocate for a change in the status quo.
 

I suppose -- in that context -- the concept of the greater good is right out the window!  Is it unreasonable to expect the roadside business owners in Breezewood to make plans to do what is necessary to keep at least a portion of their business going (slight nearby relocation, pressing for at least town interchange access to a throughput ramp system on I-70) if & when such nonstop ramps are in place?  Obviously, maintaining a "captive audience" situation is deemed necessary for these subregional endeavors.  But I'll reiterate the oldest cliché in the book:  you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink!  Applied here -- you can make through traffic slog a few blocks down a commercial street, but you can't make anyone buy what you have to sell!  Clearly the town -- and the politicos supporting that stance -- are counting on "opportunities of non-convenience:  a traveler attitude of "well, as long as we're having to put up with this shit, we may as well stop and get a bag of chips/snag a Big Gulp/take a pee/whatever.........!"  I've been through Breezewood three times in my life, and declined to patronize the local businesses/franchises.  And I'll wager that with at least repeat visitors, that inclination outstrips the willingness to stop & buy!   

[Henry]

I wonder how Jersey City would feel if an actual freeway was ever proposed for I-78 (although it would have to be tunneled under that stretch)? Personally, I don't mind Breezewood having the infamous gap in I-70, although it would be nice to have direct connections to the Turnpike for anyone who wishes to completely bypass it.

[hbelkins]

I would think that the number of people who intentionally boycott Breezewood would at least equal those who stop because they are forced to pass through there.

Personally, I don't think that adding a couple of ramps to allow for a through I-70 east-west movement would hurt Breezewood's economy all that much. There are no convenient services southeast of Breezewood until you get to Hagerstown, and even then, most of those are off I-81 and not handy for I-70 traffic. Anyone who needs gas or wants to get a bite to eat will still patronize Breezewood. And if the business owners finally drop their resistance to a couple of direct ramps, they might actually see some increase in business due to goodwill.

And, anyone wanting to make the connection from I-76 west to I-70 east, or I-70 west to I-76 east, would not benefit from a direct I-70 connection if only two ramps were built. They'd still have to go through Breezewood. The big hangup is for through I-70 traffic, and that's what the ramps would need to address.

[Road Hog]

It's almost comical to watch attitudes change on the Texas bullet train. Before the election it was a boondoggle and a waste of money. But now that Trump is for it, those same people in Dallas who opposed it are practically ready to buy Astros season tickets.

[Mapmikey]

Regarding I-95 in North Carolina, there was a report today that widening said Route in South Carolina would cost about $4 billion including necessary interchange reconstruction to make room for the added lanes. I-95 in North Carolina is about ten or twelve miles shorter and has the more modern section near Fayetteville, so it might not cost quite as much, but then on the other hand it has the very problematic section in Lumberton. Can't imagine they could widen it for just $1.5 billion.

In 2012 - the estimate was $4 4 billion. 

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2012/02/i-95-tolling-public-hearing-wilson-nc.html?m=1

Maybe some of the ideas and scope in n the 2012 proposal were cut.  Worth looking into.

Looking at the STI map which shows projects that scored well enough for funding as well as those that did not, here is a breakdown of I-95 widening projects submitted:

SC to I-74 (6 lanes): $306M
I-74 to Exit 22 (8 lanes): $195M
Exit 22 to Exit 40 (8 lanes): $375M
Exit 40 to NC 53 (8 lanes): $305M
NC 53 to Exit 56 (8 lanes): $195M
Exit 56 to Exit 71 (8 lanes): $339M
Exit 71 to I-40 (8 lanes): $217M
I-40 to just north of US 264: No projects listed
just north of US 264 to just north of US 64 (6 lanes): $391M
just north of US 64 to just north of NC 481 (6 lanes): $294M
just north of NC 481 to Northampton/Halifax line (6 lanes): $487M
Northampton/Halifax line to VA (6 lanes): $220M

Total that does not include 40 miles of I-95:  $3.32B