New York

[Roadgeek Adam]

Whoops. Known to happen. There were still loose exit NXX signs on I-190.

[Buffaboy]

I found a few maps from 1990 in my basement. Here's the cover of one:

[Plutonic Panda]

^ You really don't understand Long Island if you think this is going to happen.

I don't but I'm being optimistic here. Maybe eventually politics will change and this could be built despite opposition. We need to stop letting the few negatively impact the mass.

[Mergingtraffic]

Thoughts on whether this should be replaced or not.  lol

[Roadgeek Adam]

^ You really don't understand Long Island if you think this is going to happen.

I don't but I'm being optimistic here. Maybe eventually politics will change and this could be built despite opposition. We need to stop letting the few negatively impact the mass.

You don't understand the power of the few here. The power of the few in the northeast probably has more sway than it does anywhere else in the country

[Alps]

Thoughts on whether this should be replaced or not.  lol

No. Our precious.

[SignBridge]

Roadgeek Adam, you're right about the concentrated political power on the North Shore of Long Island but even within that realm things do change over the years.

As an example, in 1938 when Northern State Pkwy was being built, (before my time LOL) the old money on their estates in Old Westbury were able to get Robert Moses to divert the Parkway literally around their village which is why it bends south in Roslyn and then east again in Westbury.

But by about 1958 when the Long Island Expwy was coming thru, those people no longer had the clout to stop the Expwy from being built straight thru their village which you can see on the map today. I'm sure there was plenty of bitterness and consternation at the time. They did get certain concessions like no exits or entrances on the three mile stretch thru Old Westbury and a slight change of alignment to spare a large pond. And who knows what else behind the scenes?

So you see that in twenty years, the balance of power had shifted. Some day, probably not in my lifetime, the same thing could happen on the North Shore and you might yet see a bridge or tunnel across LI Sound. Let's hope so. Never say never.........

[Roadgeek Adam]

Listen, I'm from New York City, lived in Jersey most of my life. I've given up the hoot that freeway expansion in the northeast is going to happen. And honestly, NJ and NY need to focus on restoring what they have.

[Plutonic Panda]

Listen, I'm from New York City, lived in Jersey most of my life. I've given up the hoot that freeway expansion in the northeast is going to happen. And honestly, NJ and NY need to focus on restoring what they have.

It is important to restore what we have, yes, but that isn't fixing another–arguably equal–problem which is managing congestion. Mobility is important and while improving mass transit and bike/pedestrian infrastructure will play an important part, increasing freeway capacity and adding new connections is a must!

[froggie]

increasing freeway capacity and adding new connections is a must!

Not when you can't afford it.  Even if there was local support for a Long Island Sound crossing, $55 billion (yes, with a B) is no small chunk of change.  And to pay for that, the jurisdictions involved would have to give up on restoring what they already have for a number of years.  There's no way tolls would be sufficient enough to cover that level of cost.

Nevermind that "adding new connections" when you can't even maintain what you already have is ludicrous.  And in part why this nation has gotten into the infrastructure mess it's in.  This is something that far too many roadgeeks fail to understand.

[Beltway]

Not when you can't afford it.  Even if there was local support for a Long Island Sound crossing, $55 billion (yes, with a B) is no small chunk of change.  And to pay for that, the jurisdictions involved would have to give up on restoring what they already have for a number of years.  There's no way tolls would be sufficient enough to cover that level of cost.

That was dishonest how the state marketed that figure.  The whole idea was to discredit the project from the get go.  I read the official report from 2017, and that $55 billion appeared to be a figure for a tunnel between I-95/I-287 and I-495 on the western (NY to NY) corridor.

The figure for a highway and a bridge was $7.8 billion.  While that is a lot of money that is in the realm of affordability.  It also would carry 80,000 to 100,000 AADT, so the demand is there.  What the state should have done is to publicize that alternative and try to build consensus over time to get that approved.

[vdeane]

The bridge alternative was considered dead on arrival.  People on the north shore don't want to look at one.

[Beltway]

The bridge alternative was considered dead on arrival.  People on the north shore don't want to look at one.

The only thing that is dead is the imagination and initiative of the state and local officials that studied the crossing.

[Rothman]

The bridge alternative was considered dead on arrival.  People on the north shore don't want to look at one.

The only thing that is dead is the imagination and initiative of the state and local officials that studied the crossing.

Not really.  A multi-billion dollar project for a new addition to the system is just fiscally out of the question.

[Beltway]

The bridge alternative was considered dead on arrival.  People on the north shore don't want to look at one.

The only thing that is dead is the imagination and initiative of the state and local officials that studied the crossing.

Not really.  A multi-billion dollar project for a new addition to the system is just fiscally out of the question.

Then get it on a long range plan.  Build consensus.  Maybe it takes 5 to 10 years, maybe more, to get it started.  The important thing is to make some progress even if it moves slowly.

[Rothman]

The bridge alternative was considered dead on arrival.  People on the north shore don't want to look at one.

The only thing that is dead is the imagination and initiative of the state and local officials that studied the crossing.

Not really.  A multi-billion dollar project for a new addition to the system is just fiscally out of the question.

Then get it on a long range plan.  Build consensus.  Maybe it takes 5 to 10 years, maybe more, to get it started.  The important thing is to make some progress even if it moves slowly.

The idea is broadly considered laughable.  Some squeaky wheels got a whole lot of money wasted on this last study, but there is really no political will to see this thing coming to fruition ever, especially when our existing infrastructure is eroding.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[Plutonic Panda]

The bridge alternative was considered dead on arrival.  People on the north shore don't want to look at one.

The only thing that is dead is the imagination and initiative of the state and local officials that studied the crossing.

Not really.  A multi-billion dollar project for a new addition to the system is just fiscally out of the question.

Then get it on a long range plan.  Build consensus.  Maybe it takes 5 to 10 years, maybe more, to get it started.  The important thing is to make some progress even if it moves slowly.

The idea is broadly considered laughable.  Some squeaky wheels got a whole lot of money wasted on this last study, but there is really no political will to see this thing coming to fruition ever, especially when our existing infrastructure is eroding.

(personal opinion emphasized)

So the only goal is to restore what we have while other nations pass us up in creating adequate facilities that handle traffic flow get we're gridlocked because all we did was rebuilt what we currently have?

What we currently have can't handle the demand, even if it is restored to its former glory. It's a goose chase if that's the only goal we have.

[Rothman]

The bridge alternative was considered dead on arrival.  People on the north shore don't want to look at one.

The only thing that is dead is the imagination and initiative of the state and local officials that studied the crossing.

Not really.  A multi-billion dollar project for a new addition to the system is just fiscally out of the question.

Then get it on a long range plan.  Build consensus.  Maybe it takes 5 to 10 years, maybe more, to get it started.  The important thing is to make some progress even if it moves slowly.

The idea is broadly considered laughable.  Some squeaky wheels got a whole lot of money wasted on this last study, but there is really no political will to see this thing coming to fruition ever, especially when our existing infrastructure is eroding.

(personal opinion emphasized)

So the only goal is to restore what we have while other nations pass us up in creating adequate facilities that handle traffic flow get we're gridlocked because all we did was rebuilt what we currently have?

What we currently have can't handle the demand, even if it is restored to its former glory. It's a goose chase if that's the only goal we have.

It is what NY can afford, keeping in mind that a huge chunk of funding for NYSDOT's capital program is now borrowed (I'd estimate about 20% per year now, on average). 

You want additional lanes paved?  Let's fully fund the program to stop conditions from declining first and then get more funding to do so. 

That means stop raiding gas taxes and then probably raising them.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[Alps]

increasing freeway capacity and adding new connections is a must!

Not when you can't afford it.  Even if there was local support for a Long Island Sound crossing, $55 billion (yes, with a B) is no small chunk of change.  And to pay for that, the jurisdictions involved would have to give up on restoring what they already have for a number of years.  There's no way tolls would be sufficient enough to cover that level of cost.


Nevermind that "adding new connections" when you can't even maintain what you already have is ludicrous.  And in part why this nation has gotten into the infrastructure mess it's in.  This is something that far too many roadgeeks fail to understand.

Rebuilding the 495 viaduct costs $90 million. To which I say  , but we'll see just where it actually comes in. And that is being rebuilt with full shoulders - so adding capacity is definitely affordable. Adding new connections, maybe not, but you can add capacity and improve existing connections for relatively cheaper.

[Beltway]

So the only goal is to restore what we have while other nations pass us up in creating adequate facilities that handle traffic flow get we're gridlocked because all we did was rebuilt what we currently have?
What we currently have can't handle the demand, even if it is restored to its former glory. It's a goose chase if that's the only goal we have.

Let's not bring up the "what other countries are doing" argument.  Many areas in the U.S. are both maintaining and expanding their highway systems.

When it comes to unusually large and complex bridges and tunnels and their connecting highways, the Norfolk/Hampton Roads area recently upgraded and/or expanded 5 crossings (Elizabeth River and branch) at a total of $2.2 billion, has 2 under construction (I-64 Elizabeth River branch and CBBT) at a total of $1.3 billion, and another to be expanded (I-64 HRBT) at $3.4 billion starting in 2019.  The Third Hampton Roads Crossing (I-564 extension) is still in the long-range plan albeit is unfunded.

[froggie]

^ However, the Hampton Roads area and TPTB are utilizing tolls for most of those expansions.  And cost of construction in Tidewater is considerably less than it is in New York.

I would also argue that, in those areas where they're expanding their systems, they've either added taxes or utilized tolls to do so or their existing systems are getting the short shrift.

[Rothman]

^ However, the Hampton Roads area and TPTB are utilizing tolls for most of those expansions.  And cost of construction in Tidewater is considerably less than it is in New York.

I would also argue that, in those areas where they're expanding their systems, they've either added taxes or utilized tolls to do so or their existing systems are getting the short shrift.

Amen.

[Beltway]

^ However, the Hampton Roads area and TPTB are utilizing tolls for most of those expansions.  And cost of construction in Tidewater is considerably less than it is in New York.

The Hampton Roads metro area has 1.6 million population.  New York?  Just the NY portions alone?

The Hampton Roads metro area is a piker in the number of tolls and the size of the tolls, compared to the NYC area.

The $3.4 billion I-64 HRBT expansion has only 5% of the total cost funded by toll revenue bonds.  Only the HOT lanes will be tolled (dynamically), the four general purpose lanes will be toll-free.

I would also argue that, in those areas where they're expanding their systems, they've either added taxes or utilized tolls to do so or their existing systems are getting the short shrift.

Typically added taxes and/or tolls are part of the equation.  Delaying things can be a major part of the problem.  The Elizabeth River Tunnels project was estimated at $700 million in 2000, and the local officials choked at the thought of retolling the tunnels.  When they finally bit the bullet in 2012, it cost $1.4 billion.

[cpzilliacus]

Nevermind that "adding new connections" when you can't even maintain what you already have is ludicrous.  And in part why this nation has gotten into the infrastructure mess it's in.  This is something that far too many roadgeeks fail to understand.

I take it you are opposed to all transit expansion for similar reasons? 

The maintenance backlog on transit in systems like the New York City Subway ($43 billion), the Washington Metrorail system ($7 billion), Amtrak's Northeast Corridor ($38 billion) and BART ($10 billion) is epic.

Outside of New York City and nearby, the time has come to stop building new rail transit and  concentrate  the money on repairs and rehabilitation  of what is already there.

[Plutonic Panda]

So the only goal is to restore what we have while other nations pass us up in creating adequate facilities that handle traffic flow get we're gridlocked because all we did was rebuilt what we currently have?
What we currently have can't handle the demand, even if it is restored to its former glory. It's a goose chase if that's the only goal we have.

Let's not bring up the "what other countries are doing" argument.  Many areas in the U.S. are both maintaining and expanding their highway systems.

When it comes to unusually large and complex bridges and tunnels and their connecting highways, the Norfolk/Hampton Roads area recently upgraded and/or expanded 5 crossings (Elizabeth River and branch) at a total of $2.2 billion, has 2 under construction (I-64 Elizabeth River branch and CBBT) at a total of $1.3 billion, and another to be expanded (I-64 HRBT) at $3.4 billion starting in 2019.  The Third Hampton Roads Crossing (I-564 extension) is still in the long-range plan albeit is unfunded.

I understand there are places in the U.S. that are doing so. It is stil worth mentioning that we are being passed up by other nations or will be passed if we don't do more than we are currently doing.

As a whole, our infrastructure is deteriorating and our cities are becoming grid locked due to lack of capacity and poor facilities. We shouldn't be keeping up with countries, we should be an example, let alone have other countries build projects that seem too ambitious for us such as road tunnels. The few that we have shouldn't be looked at in the negative light they have been. That's all you seem to hear about them is how expensive they were and why you probably won't see anymore anytime soon.

The "many areas"  we have that are investing in freeways and infrastructure isn't enough.