This is a pretty massive project that deserves its own thread.
QuoteNEWARK BAY-HUDSON COUNTY EXTENSION WIDENING AND RECONSTRUCTION
Location: Hudson and Essex Counties
Description: The Newark Bay-Hudson County Extension will be reconstructed and widened from two lanes in each direction to three or four between the mainline of the Turnpike at Interchange 14 and the Columbus Drive Exit. Nearly 80 percent of the 8.1-mile Extension is carried on bridge structures. Those structures are nearing the end of their design service lives and now require regular, significant, and costly maintenance. What's more, traffic growth and substantial port-related heavy truck activity have degraded operating conditions in the corridor. Significant congestion and delays are a daily occurrence and have contributed to the poor condition of the roadway pavement and bridges. This widening and reconstruction program will include the replacement of several bridges, including the Newark Bay Bridge.
Schedule: Environmental studies and preliminary engineering began in 2021. Final design is expected to begin in 2023. Construction is expected to begin in 2026. The duration of the full program is expected to be 10 to 15 years.
- https://www.njta.com/capitalprojects
Here's a direct link to the fact sheet with a map of the project broken down into sections: https://www.njta.com/media/6807/newark-bay-hudson-county-extension-fact-sheet_updated-5_27_22_v4-002.pdf
Could this eventually result in the Holland Tunnel being widened someday down the road?
Here's an article from World Highways that doesn't have too much additional information:
QuoteUpgrade and improvement works are being proposed for the famous New Jersey Turnpike in the US. The budget for the work has been set at US$4.7 billion.
Widening and improvement works would be carried out along a 13km stretch connecting the New Jersey Turnpike with the Holland Tunnel. The plan would also see the replacement of the Newark Bay Bridge.
Those in favour of the scheme say it would reduce delays for drivers, while boosting capacity for the large numbers of heavy transport trucks using the route. Safety would also be improved.
However, there are some in the area who object to the plans, pointing out that this will increase pollution and disturbance. Moreover, the objectors point out that the capacity of the Holland Tunnel will not be increased, resulting in tailbacks at its entrance.
There are also concerns as to where the funding for the proposed road widening scheme would come from and that local taxpayers would end up footing the bill.
- https://www.worldhighways.com/wh10/news/new-jersey-turnpike-development-proposed
I don't see the Holland ever receiving additional tubes, nor the Lincoln. Despite how obviously useful they would be. I myself would want to see twin bores from NJ to Long Island tunneling way under Manhattan, and those could come from either approach, but that's never happening either.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 30, 2022, 11:24:17 PM
Could this eventually result in the Holland Tunnel being widened someday down the road?
So unlikely that it isn't worth even fathoming. One, that would be a Port Authority thing and they have their own agenda. Two, the cost is fairly extreme. Third, you would basically have to do a ton of land acquisition and reconfiguring of the road grid on the Manhattan side, and even if the costs were feasible, there's probably 20 years of lawsuits right there.
So, basically, no. This is just about getting traffic from the Turnpike to the tunnel entrance in a better fashion.
Quote from: Alps on August 31, 2022, 11:02:35 PM
I don't see the Holland ever receiving additional tubes, nor the Lincoln. Despite how obviously useful they would be. I myself would want to see twin bores from NJ to Long Island tunneling way under Manhattan, and those could come from either approach, but that's never happening either.
Doing a tunnel under Manhattan along the I-78 corridor would not only allow that to properly extend into NY (I could see it overtaking I-278 to the Bruckner interchange), it would also provide a much-needed bypass of the triple cantilever section of the BQE.
I highly doubt any new freeway tunnels will be constructed under Manhattan, let alone anywhere in New York City. Replacing the Gownaus Expressway with a Gowanus tunnel was killed in 2011, and bypassing the existing Brooklyn-Queens Expressway with a tunnel (the segment between the NY 27 Prospect Expressway and the Flushing Ave. interchange) would have been nice, given how difficult it will be to reconstruct the double-decked portion underneath the Brooklyn Heights Promenade. I could dream up a million other things, such as building a tunnel to connect the end of the New Jersey Turnpike-Newark Extension with the Holland Tunnel, bypassing the signaled intersections on 12th and 14th Sts. in Jersey City.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 01, 2022, 06:41:28 PM
I highly doubt any new freeway tunnels will be constructed under Manhattan, let alone anywhere in New York City. Replacing the Gownaus Expressway with a Gowanus tunnel was killed in 2011, and bypassing the existing Brooklyn-Queens Expressway with a tunnel (the segment between the NY 27 Prospect Expressway and the Flushing Ave. interchange) would have been nice, given how difficult it will be to reconstruct the double-decked portion underneath the Brooklyn Heights Promenade. I could dream up a million other things, such as building a tunnel to connect the end of the New Jersey Turnpike-Newark Extension with the Holland Tunnel, bypassing the signaled intersections on 12th and 14th Sts. in Jersey City.
I agree. I think the US is generally moving away from mega tunnels like this. The proposed I-287/NY 135 link between Rye and Oyster Bay will likely never see the light of day. The rich and powerful NIMBYs killed it in the first place and it's not anything the State of New York or really any state could afford.
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on September 01, 2022, 06:53:59 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 01, 2022, 06:41:28 PM
I highly doubt any new freeway tunnels will be constructed under Manhattan, let alone anywhere in New York City. Replacing the Gownaus Expressway with a Gowanus tunnel was killed in 2011, and bypassing the existing Brooklyn-Queens Expressway with a tunnel (the segment between the NY 27 Prospect Expressway and the Flushing Ave. interchange) would have been nice, given how difficult it will be to reconstruct the double-decked portion underneath the Brooklyn Heights Promenade. I could dream up a million other things, such as building a tunnel to connect the end of the New Jersey Turnpike-Newark Extension with the Holland Tunnel, bypassing the signaled intersections on 12th and 14th Sts. in Jersey City.
I agree. I think the US is generally moving away from mega tunnels like this. The proposed I-287/NY 135 link between Rye and Oyster Bay will likely never see the light of day. The rich and powerful NIMBYs killed it in the first place and it's not anything the State of New York or really any state could afford.
"The US is moving away from mega tunnels like this" lol well that isn't saying much. As if it ever really did build all that many to begin with. And yes I'm aware of the tunnels that exist in this country.
Anyways, good to know about the Holland Tunnel. Im not too familiar with the NE and I figured maybe that tunnel was under the NJ Turnpike authority for some reason. I can see why it likely won't happen then. Bummer.
Quote from: vdeane on September 01, 2022, 05:45:15 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 31, 2022, 11:02:35 PM
I don't see the Holland ever receiving additional tubes, nor the Lincoln. Despite how obviously useful they would be. I myself would want to see twin bores from NJ to Long Island tunneling way under Manhattan, and those could come from either approach, but that's never happening either.
Doing a tunnel under Manhattan along the I-78 corridor would not only allow that to properly extend into NY (I could see it overtaking I-278 to the Bruckner interchange), it would also provide a much-needed bypass of the triple cantilever section of the BQE.
Likely too deep to connect to existing I-278 - it would come out at least half a mile east.
If the US was Saudi Arabia (or China), tunneling from NJ through Lower Manhattan would be a cakewalk.
Might not be popular to say here but I'm not really seeing the point of this when it's still funneling into the same 2 Holland Tunnel lanes as always, seems like a lot of money for what would really function as extra queueing space... Sure the bridge itself is in need of replacing, but a wholesale widening seems silly when the Turnpike itself isn't even the main bottleneck in the area. If the state is really serious about climate issues and improving cross-bay capacity, something like linking HBLR to Newark Light Rail via the old CRRNJ Kearny Point crossing and an Ironbound tunnel would be a much better use of $5 billion. But I get it's hard for the Governor to go against the wishes of construction unions and the Hudson County machine unfortunately :spin:
Quote from: interstate73 on September 05, 2022, 09:28:05 PM
Might not be popular to say here but I'm not really seeing the point of this when it's still funneling into the same 2 Holland Tunnel lanes as always, seems like a lot of money for what would really function as extra queueing space... Sure the bridge itself is in need of replacing, but a wholesale widening seems silly when the Turnpike itself isn't even the main bottleneck in the area. If the state is really serious about climate issues and improving cross-bay capacity, something like linking HBLR to Newark Light Rail via the old CRRNJ Kearny Point crossing and an Ironbound tunnel would be a much better use of $5 billion. But I get it's hard for the Governor to go against the wishes of construction unions and the Hudson County machine unfortunately :spin:
The NBHCE is the main bottleneck in its own area - packed with trucks that are going to/from NJ 440 at Exit 14A and taking up both lanes moving slowly, quickly leads to long queues for long periods of the day, often well outside the hours Holland Tunnel has delays. It needs to get done and the project will remain 2 lanes each way at the east end, so it's not anticipating any changes in JC.
We've been crossing the bridge for 38 years visiting relatives in Bayonne. My earliest memories of New Jersey was crossing that bridge, and up until about 15 years ago, it was usually smooth traveling. The last few years, we've sat in long queues just to get off at Exit 14A.
Quote from: seicer on September 06, 2022, 10:48:45 PM
We've been crossing the bridge for 38 years visiting relatives in Bayonne. My earliest memories of New Jersey was crossing that bridge, and up until about 15 years ago, it was usually smooth traveling. The last few years, we've sat in long queues just to get off at Exit 14A.
and this whole time you've never tried to visit me despite passing well within 50 miles
QuoteSolomon continued that the project was like lighting "billions of dollars on fire. Every place they spend billions of dollars, traffic gets worse."
- https://hudsoncountyview.com/jersey-city-advocates-officials-denounce-4-7b-nj-turnpike-extension-at-park-protest/
Of course the whiny bike crowd is up in arms. Surprise surprise.
And what is it with these dumbasses who don't understand that these projects won't "fix" traffic but allow for better management in congestion in various ways? They do extensive studies all which show no build alternatives will result in a much higher travel time by 2045.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 13, 2022, 04:53:37 PM
QuoteSolomon continued that the project was like lighting "billions of dollars on fire. Every place they spend billions of dollars, traffic gets worse."
- https://hudsoncountyview.com/jersey-city-advocates-officials-denounce-4-7b-nj-turnpike-extension-at-park-protest/
Of course the whiny bike crowd is up in arms. Surprise surprise.
And what is it with these dumbasses who don't understand that these projects won't "fix" traffic but allow for better management in congestion in various ways? They do extensive studies all which show no build alternatives will result in a much higher travel time by 2045.
Quote
Ironically, Ward D Councilman Yousef Saleh said he was late to the protest due to traffic on the turnpike extension.
This says all that needs to be known about these people.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 13, 2022, 04:53:37 PM
QuoteSolomon continued that the project was like lighting "billions of dollars on fire. Every place they spend billions of dollars, traffic gets worse."
- https://hudsoncountyview.com/jersey-city-advocates-officials-denounce-4-7b-nj-turnpike-extension-at-park-protest/
Of course the whiny bike crowd is up in arms. Surprise surprise.
And what is it with these dumbasses who don't understand that these projects won't "fix" traffic but allow for better management in congestion in various ways? They do extensive studies all which show no build alternatives will result in a much higher travel time by 2045.
Traffic could overall get worse on the freeway, but that'd be because it removes so many more vehicles from surface streets and makes the city better.
Quote from: Alps on November 13, 2022, 09:43:12 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 13, 2022, 04:53:37 PM
QuoteSolomon continued that the project was like lighting "billions of dollars on fire. Every place they spend billions of dollars, traffic gets worse."
- https://hudsoncountyview.com/jersey-city-advocates-officials-denounce-4-7b-nj-turnpike-extension-at-park-protest/
Of course the whiny bike crowd is up in arms. Surprise surprise.
And what is it with these dumbasses who don't understand that these projects won't "fix" traffic but allow for better management in congestion in various ways? They do extensive studies all which show no build alternatives will result in a much higher travel time by 2045.
Traffic could overall get worse on the freeway, but that'd be because it removes so many more vehicles from surface streets and makes the city better.
Right and that's exactly what I mean by managing congestion in various ways. It also manages it off the expanded facility by taking drivers off local streets who now choose the bigger road because it flows better. It could spur new trips but have fun going to the businesses who benefit as a result and tell them how bad the expanded road is lol.
Me not being familiar with this area, does the NJTA usually back down from these sort of protest or is it likely to be built? It'll be interesting to watch either way.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 13, 2022, 09:57:33 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 13, 2022, 09:43:12 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 13, 2022, 04:53:37 PM
QuoteSolomon continued that the project was like lighting "billions of dollars on fire. Every place they spend billions of dollars, traffic gets worse."
- https://hudsoncountyview.com/jersey-city-advocates-officials-denounce-4-7b-nj-turnpike-extension-at-park-protest/
Of course the whiny bike crowd is up in arms. Surprise surprise.
And what is it with these dumbasses who don't understand that these projects won't "fix" traffic but allow for better management in congestion in various ways? They do extensive studies all which show no build alternatives will result in a much higher travel time by 2045.
Traffic could overall get worse on the freeway, but that'd be because it removes so many more vehicles from surface streets and makes the city better.
Right and that's exactly what I mean by managing congestion in various ways. It also manages it off the expanded facility by taking drivers off local streets who now choose the bigger road because it flows better. It could spur new trips but have fun going to the businesses who benefit as a result and tell them how bad the expanded road is lol.
Me not being familiar with this area, does the NJTA usually back down from these sort of protest or is it likely to be built? It'll be interesting to watch either way.
Road projects in general in this area proceed once they get to Final Design. Until that point there's fungibility.
Murphy & state politicians are very on-board with the project. And NJTA is lucky enough that it can basically function autonomously.
The comment about the councilman getting delayed in traffic on the way to the protest is pretty funny. Hudson county politics operate in their own little bubble but I think Mayor Fulop & co. are fully expecting this to go through. He's just trying to win points with a certain crowd. It was the same deal with the new bridge in LSP, he put up a big fight publicly but in reality the project went through just fine.
Only way I see this getting canned is some sort of involvement from the feds. I heard this will need to go through some sort of federal review/approvals (something about the bridge going over navigable waters or something, I'm not an expert on this). The question is will they really put their money where their mouth is with all this highway demolition stuff? The ports in NJ are some of the busiest in the world. I don't think they're dumb enough to put a minority of cyclists over the freight needs of the entire region...
The replacement bridge over Newark Bay requires Coast Guard permits, which it will likely get.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on November 20, 2022, 05:49:49 PM
The replacement bridge over Newark Bay requires Coast Guard permits, which it will likely get.
Coast Guard permits are fairly routine. They want to make sure the bridge will provide the clearance and width needed for navigation, which the transportation agency should've been working with them on already.
That's interesting. Does the Department of Defense still oversee any permitting, or does that now fall strictly under the Coast Guard? It was required for any navigable waters that the War Department be involved and sign off on any bridge plans - but it looks like that responsibility was later delegated to the Army Corps of Engineers.
Depends on the navigable waters. NYSDOT has a bridge project in central NY that will require Coast Guard and Army Corps permits.
Keeping the navigation envelope open as required by the permit can add millions to a project's cost.
Not great: Cost to widen N.J. Turnpike extension to Holland tunnel balloons to $10.6B (https://www.nj.com/news/2022/11/cost-to-widen-nj-turnpike-extension-to-holland-tunnel-balloons-to-106b.html)
QuoteThe cost increase was blamed on inflation and the cost to borrow money to do the project, Turnpike Authority officials said.
"Inflation and rising interest rates have an impact on nearly every project in the NJTA's capital program, said Tom Feeney, a turnpike authority spokesperson. "The impact is greatest on projects like this one scheduled to be built over several many years. It is not unreasonable to anticipate that these estimates will change again as supply change issues normalize over time."
This is already getting pilloried by many, as you might expect. A more than doubling of the costs of a project that is already unpopular and facing a ton of local opposition is not great no matter what way you look at it.
Quote from: storm2k on November 22, 2022, 10:07:41 AM
Not great: Cost to widen N.J. Turnpike extension to Holland tunnel balloons to $10.6B (https://www.nj.com/news/2022/11/cost-to-widen-nj-turnpike-extension-to-holland-tunnel-balloons-to-106b.html)
QuoteThe cost increase was blamed on inflation and the cost to borrow money to do the project, Turnpike Authority officials said.
"Inflation and rising interest rates have an impact on nearly every project in the NJTA's capital program, said Tom Feeney, a turnpike authority spokesperson. "The impact is greatest on projects like this one scheduled to be built over several many years. It is not unreasonable to anticipate that these estimates will change again as supply change issues normalize over time."
This is already getting pilloried by many, as you might expect. A more than doubling of the costs of a project that is already unpopular and facing a ton of local opposition is not great no matter what way you look at it.
And MultiMillionMiler wonders why they extort tolls from drivers in NJ. :sombrero:
Quote from: storm2k on November 22, 2022, 10:07:41 AM
Not great: Cost to widen N.J. Turnpike extension to Holland tunnel balloons to $10.6B (https://www.nj.com/news/2022/11/cost-to-widen-nj-turnpike-extension-to-holland-tunnel-balloons-to-106b.html)
QuoteThe cost increase was blamed on inflation and the cost to borrow money to do the project, Turnpike Authority officials said.
"Inflation and rising interest rates have an impact on nearly every project in the NJTA's capital program, said Tom Feeney, a turnpike authority spokesperson. "The impact is greatest on projects like this one scheduled to be built over several many years. It is not unreasonable to anticipate that these estimates will change again as supply change issues normalize over time."
This is already getting pilloried by many, as you might expect. A more than doubling of the costs of a project that is already unpopular and facing a ton of local opposition is not great no matter what way you look at it.
$10.6B.....sort of like Boston's Big Dig.
If they do as thorough study on how to spend money as how to protect the environment, they could find ways to do this more reasonable.
Not to be sarcastic either here, but implying my thought here literally. If the Hatfield's and the McCoys would develop a procedure that takes in every factor together, they could save us taxpayers a big bill in the end
Taxpayers have nothing to do with this. The Turnpike Authority runs off toll revenue and not taxes.
And if you're going to bother to mobilize and rebuild the entire bridge and viaduct, it's actually stupid to not spend the little extra to widen it.
The "little extra" is a heckuva understatement.
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 22, 2022, 10:53:19 PM
Taxpayers have nothing to do with this. The Turnpike Authority runs off toll revenue and not taxes.
And if you're going to bother to mobilize and rebuild the entire bridge and viaduct, it's actually stupid to not spend the little extra to widen it.
Never said it did. Responding to the latest troll who believes tolls are way to high in NJ with tolls in PA to be only applied on straight roads and winding freeways should be free, and I-80 needs to end in Providence.
Then the politicians still do have a say in bureaucratic matters which even the NJTA is influenced by politics despite not being state government.
Quote from: roadman65 on November 23, 2022, 06:27:42 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on November 22, 2022, 10:53:19 PM
Taxpayers have nothing to do with this. The Turnpike Authority runs off toll revenue and not taxes.
And if you're going to bother to mobilize and rebuild the entire bridge and viaduct, it's actually stupid to not spend the little extra to widen it.
Never said it did. Responding to the latest troll who believes tolls are way to high in NJ with tolls in PA to be only applied on straight roads and winding freeways should be free, and I-80 needs to end in Providence.
Then the politicians still do have a say in bureaucratic matters which even the NJTA is influenced by politics despite not being state government.
Since the Governor can veto the board meeting's minutes that approve the projects, in a way there can be some taxpayer influence. But this action rarely happens.
Not taxpayer, but political. Two different things. Bureaucrats are very much motivated by politics as much as anyone these days.
Quote from: roadman65 on November 25, 2022, 11:42:35 AM
Not taxpayer, but political. Two different things. Bureaucrats are very much motivated by politics as much as anyone these days.
The point being, the taxpayers can call the Governor's office and try to persuade the governor to veto the minutes to the meeting. It's a route that most people who are against a project have no clue it's an available avenue, and the Governor will probably ignore those that have called, but it does exist as a last-ditch effort.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 25, 2022, 11:35:06 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 25, 2022, 11:42:35 AM
Not taxpayer, but political. Two different things. Bureaucrats are very much motivated by politics as much as anyone these days.
The point being, the taxpayers can call the Governor's office and try to persuade the governor to veto the minutes to the meeting. It's a route that most people who are against a project have no clue it's an available avenue, and the Governor will probably ignore those that have called, but it does exist as a last-ditch effort.
Heh. I am sure that happens all the time.
This project is still pushing forward and scheduled to begin in 2026 and the entire project wrapping up by 2040:
https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/new-jersey-wants-a-nearly-11b-turnpike-widening-from-newark-to-jersey-city/62802