http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/189491/314/Legislature-asked-for-300K-for-East-West-highway-study
This massive $2 billion project has been talked about before, but seems more likely now. It would connect from New Brunswick, through Calais, junction with I-95 north of Bangor and west towards Coburn Gore, at the Quebec border.
I say why not? People say this would only help Canada, but really, most of central and northern Maine is isolated from the rest of New England as it is.
Peter Samuel of TOLLROADSnews has written about this from time to time, most-recently in 2010.
Maine lobby group argues for expanded Turnpike and privately financed east-west highway (http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4997)
The biggest 'wild card' in this, IMHO, would be the border-crossing situation. The hassles that we are seeing nowadays may not be worth it for those who would be using such a road to simply transit Maine between southwestern Quebec and the Canadian Maritimes as opposed to adding the couple of hours needed to go around the top without crossing it those two times in fairly quick succession. This is similar to the converse, using ON 401 or 402 and the QEW to drive between the upper-midwestern USA and upstate New York and the rest of the northeastern USA.
If/when the border checkpoints disappear, then that road would be a 'no-brainer' (eastern I-94 or I-96?).
There also used to be a VIA Rail passenger service that used a mainline that transited northern Maine on roughly the same routing. Yes, there were hassles crossing the border for the transit.
Mike
Would I-98 be available? Sorry, I've never been further north than Bangor and know almost nothing about Maine after that point.
Quote from: mgk920 on February 15, 2012, 10:47:57 AM
The biggest 'wild card' in this, IMHO, would be the border-crossing situation. The hassles that we are seeing nowadays may not be worth it for those who would be using such a road to simply transit Maine between southwestern Quebec and the Canadian Maritimes as opposed to adding the couple of hours needed to go around the top without crossing it those two times in fairly quick succession. This is similar to the converse, using ON 401 or 402 and the QEW to drive between the upper-midwestern USA and upstate New York and the rest of the northeastern USA.
If/when the border checkpoints disappear, then that road would be a 'no-brainer' (eastern I-94 or I-96?).
Strongly agreed regarding border crossings U.S./Canada. Most of it is
our (U.S.) fault, too.
Post Merge: February 17, 2012, 06:13:20 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 15, 2012, 11:13:07 AM
Would I-98 be available? Sorry, I've never been further north than Bangor and know almost nothing about Maine after that point.
Not much there.
In the early days of I-95 (prior to the mid-1970's), it was a "Super-2" highway from Bangor north to the border near Houlton.
It widened out to a four-lane divided freeway at the interchanges, but was otherwise un-divided two lanes, with plenty of signs reminding motorists that they were on a two-lane road.
I'd prefer an east-west route along the US 2 corridor west of I-95. Agree on the routing east of I-95 though routing along I-395 might be more logical if on US 2 to the west.
I'd go so far as to say ALL of the border situation is our fault. I've read that if it weren't for the post 9/11 panic/authoritarianism we'd have no border controls today.
Never mind the fact that our government was in on it. They used 9/11 to suspend my kid from school.
Quote from: texaskdog on February 15, 2012, 01:50:37 PM
Never mind the fact that our government was in on it. They used 9/11 to suspend my kid from school.
did they suspend him from a hovering black helicopter?
The helicopters were all in use for bombing the Pentagon.
I know the short I-395 connects Bangor and Brewer. Would that short stretch need to be upgraded if this highway were to be built?
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 15, 2012, 07:40:28 PM
I know the short I-395 connects Bangor and Brewer. Would that short stretch need to be upgraded if this highway were to be built?
Yes, to 20 lanes with 85 mph.
Quote from: NE2 on February 15, 2012, 08:06:34 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 15, 2012, 07:40:28 PM
I know the short I-395 connects Bangor and Brewer. Would that short stretch need to be upgraded if this highway were to be built?
Yes, to 20 lanes with 85 mph.
And number it I-366
Wikipedia also mentions a push to get I-395 extended eastwards from Brewer to ME Route 9, but the routing as to where is disputed. I assume it would be in this same East/West corridor?
Quote from: texaskdog on February 15, 2012, 01:50:37 PM
Never mind the fact that our government was in on it. They used 9/11 to suspend my kid from school.
That sounds like the kind of crazy thing that a certain nutjob "bathroom bandit" from the northern part of my state would say.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 16, 2012, 03:08:42 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 15, 2012, 01:50:37 PM
Never mind the fact that our government was in on it. They used 9/11 to suspend my kid from school.
That sounds like the kind of crazy thing that a certain nutjob "bathroom bandit" from the northern part of my state would say.
Your characterization of my friend sounds like the kind of crazy thing that a certain nutjob Repubadub from the southern part of my friend's state would say.
Travelling between the Maritimes and Montreal we always took ME9 & US2 to St. Johnsbury then I91 to A55 & A10. It was a nice drive......usually stopping in the White Mountains overnight. Crossing the border you said "just passing through" and weren't even given a second glance......seldom were you even asked for ID. Now you feel like you've done something wrong......almost begging to be admitted. Not a pleasant experience!
Moncton to Montreal via Edmundston is 610 miles and about 10 1\2 hours. This travel time should get a bit shorter when A85 is complete in a couple of years.
Moncton to Montreal across Maine and through Sherbrooke would be about 550 miles and 9 1\2 hours. Now add in the border experience.......it just "ain't worth the hassle" .
Probably wouldn't save any time either given it's only an hour difference.
I'm not sure if this new road should link to A-10. Plus, has the MTQ brought up any discussion of their portion?
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/192903/314/Maine-Senate-OKs-east-west-highway-study-bill
The Maine Senate has given their OK for a study now. I guess that's progress? :)
why not just give it to Canada?
Quote from: texaskdog on March 13, 2012, 03:26:31 PM
why not just give it to Canada?
Why not give Texas to Mexico? :pan:
Quote from: Brandon on March 18, 2012, 03:02:46 PM
Why not give Texas to Mexico? :pan:
But that would solve so many problems! :P
Quote from: Darkchylde on March 18, 2012, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: Brandon on March 18, 2012, 03:02:46 PM
Why not give Texas to Mexico? :pan:
But that would solve so many problems! :P
It's not already? Could have fooled me
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/195080/314/Maine-toll-highway-bill-passes-sent-to-governor
Another step in the process for said road, according to NBC of Portland, ME.
To sound like a nutjob from MY state:
If private developers have the capital to go building this road, THEY can pony up for their darn feasibility studies!
I-395 would not be involved in this corridor. The proposed highway crosses I-95 much farther north, north of Orono.
Quote from: KEVIN_224Would I-98 be available? Sorry, I've never been further north than Bangor and know almost nothing about Maine after that point.
I-98 is not in use anywhere, and
state route 98 is down in Old Orchard Beach. It only seems most appropriate! ;)
But I-98 is supposed to be used for NY's northern tier expressway between I-81 and I-87...
My question of why anyone would need an east-west freeway that far north still stands. They should be building this on the US 2 corridor and meet up with NB 1 and the new border crossing.
Quote from: deanej on April 03, 2012, 12:01:01 PM
But I-98 is supposed to be used for NY's northern tier expressway between I-81 and I-87...
That's just a pipe dream anyway, isn't it?
Sounds like some kinda Hi-Power Wide Watertown-Calais Corridor to me...
Quote from: hbelkins on February 16, 2012, 03:08:42 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 15, 2012, 01:50:37 PM
Never mind the fact that our government was in on it. They used 9/11 to suspend my kid from school.
That sounds like the kind of crazy thing that a certain nutjob "bathroom bandit" from the northern part of my state would say.
If Tim is a "nutjob" what does that make you? Your politics are far more radical and insane than Tim's reasonable politics.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 04, 2012, 12:34:47 PM
Quote from: deanej on April 03, 2012, 12:01:01 PM
But I-98 is supposed to be used for NY's northern tier expressway between I-81 and I-87...
That's just a pipe dream anyway, isn't it?
It's still seriously being talked about. Everyone wants it except two groups: those that oppose greater connectivity in the north country because they feel it would destroy the rural character of St. Lawrence county (to which I would like to point to the I-88 corridor), and those who don't want another freeway near the Adirondacks (to which I say, "let's route it along US 11 east of Potsdam instead of NY 11B").
Quote from: deanej on April 05, 2012, 11:52:51 AM
It's still seriously being talked about. Everyone wants it except two groups: those that oppose greater connectivity in the north country because they feel it would destroy the rural character of St. Lawrence county (to which I would like to point to the I-88 corridor), and those who don't want another freeway near the Adirondacks (to which I say, "let's route it along US 11 east of Potsdam instead of NY 11B").
Is there that much of a need for a freeway along that corridor? Is there really that much traffic between Watertown and Plattsburgh?
Quote from: hbelkins on April 05, 2012, 04:05:14 PM
Is there that much of a need for a freeway along that corridor? Is there really that much traffic between Watertown and Plattsburgh?
I would say no. But I've only driven that stretch of US 11 once.
I drove NY 3 from Plattsburgh to Watertown last fall. It was dusk when I got off I-87 and got dark quickly as I drove through the Adirondacks, but NY 3 was a very easy drive. A couple of bypasses around some of the towns, and it would be a great through route.
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/196248/314/Gov-Paul-LePage-signs-east-west-highway-bill
Maine governor Paul LePage has given the go-ahead for a $300,000 study of sorts.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 05, 2012, 04:05:14 PM
Quote from: deanej on April 05, 2012, 11:52:51 AM
It's still seriously being talked about. Everyone wants it except two groups: those that oppose greater connectivity in the north country because they feel it would destroy the rural character of St. Lawrence county (to which I would like to point to the I-88 corridor), and those who don't want another freeway near the Adirondacks (to which I say, "let's route it along US 11 east of Potsdam instead of NY 11B").
Is there that much of a need for a freeway along that corridor? Is there really that much traffic between Watertown and Plattsburgh?
I would say yes, at least west of Potsdam. I often find myself in a long line of cars driving 50 mph down that road. There's also the fact that NY won't post 65mph on anything that isn't a freeway. Most of the traffic is going between Watertown and the Canton-Potsdam area due to the four colleges in the area.
Quote from: deanej on April 06, 2012, 10:55:32 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 05, 2012, 04:05:14 PM
Quote from: deanej on April 05, 2012, 11:52:51 AM
It's still seriously being talked about. Everyone wants it except two groups: those that oppose greater connectivity in the north country because they feel it would destroy the rural character of St. Lawrence county (to which I would like to point to the I-88 corridor), and those who don't want another freeway near the Adirondacks (to which I say, "let's route it along US 11 east of Potsdam instead of NY 11B").
Is there that much of a need for a freeway along that corridor? Is there really that much traffic between Watertown and Plattsburgh?
I would say yes, at least west of Potsdam. I often find myself in a long line of cars driving 50 mph down that road. There's also the fact that NY won't post 65mph on anything that isn't a freeway. Most of the traffic is going between Watertown and the Canton-Potsdam area due to the four colleges in the area.
Would a four-lane divided highway be sufficient? I know NY doesn't do them very often.
That would take care of the traffic, provided that Gouverneur, Canton, Potsdam, and Malone are bypassed.. I'd be fine with it if NY could be bothered to post 65mph on non-freeways if conditions allow for it; currently they don't.
NY seems to be making more of these roads more recently. NY 332 is just like what you propose and it drives like a freeway. NY 104 east of Webster would as well if the lights were timed more favorably.
If this were to have been build prior to 9/11, you could have an argument of the use of the road. As a formor truck driver, I would say, In-Transit traffic (traffic, IE trucks who's Freights origin and destination are within the same country but cross international boundries.) would be little if at all. The Import/Export laws after 9/11 have changed to the point of almost eliminating In-Transit traffic. One only needs to look at a once well traveled route from Sault Ste-Marie, ON to Emerson, MB via US-2. Most In-Transit trucks that travel the route now are usuall empty trailers heading for winipeg or Toronto. If Maine is serious about constructing such a route, then this barrier will have to be relaxed to attract the traffic levels to warrent the construction. At most they can hope for is holiday travelers heading to "The Rock" (Newfoundland) or the Maritimes.
Quote from: aridawn on June 12, 2012, 12:41:55 AM
If this were to have been build prior to 9/11, you could have an argument of the use of the road. As a formor truck driver, I would say, In-Transit traffic (traffic, IE trucks who's Freights origin and destination are within the same country but cross international boundries.) would be little if at all. The Import/Export laws after 9/11 have changed to the point of almost eliminating In-Transit traffic. One only needs to look at a once well traveled route from Sault Ste-Marie, ON to Emerson, MB via US-2. Most In-Transit trucks that travel the route now are usuall empty trailers heading for winipeg or Toronto. If Maine is serious about constructing such a route, then this barrier will have to be relaxed to attract the traffic levels to warrent the construction. At most they can hope for is holiday travelers heading to "The Rock" (Newfoundland) or the Maritimes.
In my opinion, much of the "security" imposed around international borders entering the United States is little more than
security theater.
Canada (especially) as a nation has no more tolerance for terrorism and terrorists than the United States does (contrary to what an assortment of U.S. politicians and "commentators" say).
Both nations (thanks to the U.S., using the attacks of 2001-09-11 as an excuse) waste
enormous amounts of money on
security theater at land border crossings and at airports. A tolled freeway across Maine from Québec to New Brunswick makes plenty of sense - it would save
time and
fuel for Canadian truckers (which translates into
money) - and in my opinion, there is
no reason that Canadian citizens (or U.S. citizens) should need to show a passport when crossing this border.
I think they're "securing" the northern border mainly to distract from the fact that it's impossible to have a 100% secure southern border.
Quote from: deanej on June 12, 2012, 03:34:52 PM
I think they're "securing" the northern border mainly to distract from the fact that it's impossible to have a 100% secure southern border.
That makes (unfortunately) a lot of sense.
In my perfect world, the United States government would not be expending so much in the way of money and people to secure the southern border either, since I am in favor of
legalizing (and taxing) most of the drugs that get smuggled over that border today.
Efforts to secure the U.S. border against invasion from Canada might have made some sense in 1812, but they make no sense now.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 12, 2012, 04:18:13 PM
Quote from: deanej on June 12, 2012, 03:34:52 PM
I think they're "securing" the northern border mainly to distract from the fact that it's impossible to have a 100% secure southern border.
That makes (unfortunately) a lot of sense.
In my perfect world, the United States government would not be expending so much in the way of money and people to secure the southern border either, since I am in favor of legalizing (and taxing) most of the drugs that get smuggled over that border today.
Efforts to secure the U.S. border against invasion from Canada might have made some sense in 1812, but they make no sense now.
Agreed. This is still a problem that would need to be solved inorder to attract the Trucking companies to utlize the road. As it is, in order to go In-Transit, requires a lenthey and costly delay in order to meet the requirments, in order to complete the trip at both border crossings. Most Canadian trucking companies would not be able to justify the added expense in order to shave off a few miles in some cases. IE, The MOM (Manitoba, Ontario, Minnisoda) Way. As it stands now, I would say Maine is wasting tax payer dollars on a road most would not use. That being said empty or "deadheading" trucks would use the road as this has little or no delay at any border.
I'm wondering how this road is being justified myself. It doesn't look like a corridor that would ever see traffic. I could see something on the US 2 corridor though, especially since US 2 winds up and down the river a lot, so a straighter road on its own would lower travel times.
Quote from: aridawn on June 12, 2012, 11:44:36 PM
Maine is wasting tax payer dollars on a road most would not use.
Quote from: Thread Title
Private Financing for East-West Highway through Maine
Quote from: WCSH news article linked upthread
The construction, operation and maintenance of the highway would be done privately.
[...]
If the project moves forward, the developer would be responsible for paying the state back the $300,000 for the study.
Now how exactly is this a waste of taxpayer money?
If the interstate system wasn't built as new highways and instead just US hwys expanded as needed, There probably wouldn't be any freeways touching the border...except for in the Lake Erie area
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 13, 2012, 01:11:57 PM
Quote from: aridawn on June 12, 2012, 11:44:36 PM
Maine is wasting tax payer dollars on a road most would not use.
Quote from: Thread Title
Private Financing for East-West Highway through Maine
Quote from: WCSH news article linked upthread
The construction, operation and maintenance of the highway would be done privately.
[...]
If the project moves forward, the developer would be responsible for paying the state back the $300,000 for the study.
Now how exactly is this a waste of taxpayer money?
As I said earlier, take a look at a once heavly travelled In-Transit route Sault Ste-Marie, ON to Emerson, MB or N Portal, SK. I drove truck prior to and after 9/11. No trucking company in canada is preforming In-Transit trips. You can put all the tolls and bonds and grands in place you want, the traffic isn't there. Take another example going the other way, Detriot to Buffalo, American companies are not longer doing In-Transit trips. As for wasting money, before tolls can be generated the state still have to contract an EIS (EA in Canada) or preform the work themselvs, expropriate land, servays, public meetings and planning.
Quote from: aridawn on June 13, 2012, 05:58:05 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on June 13, 2012, 01:11:57 PM
Quote from: aridawn on June 12, 2012, 11:44:36 PM
Maine is wasting tax payer dollars on a road most would not use.
Quote from: Thread Title
Private Financing for East-West Highway through Maine
Quote from: WCSH news article linked upthread
The construction, operation and maintenance of the highway would be done privately.
[...]
If the project moves forward, the developer would be responsible for paying the state back the $300,000 for the study.
Now how exactly is this a waste of taxpayer money?
As I said earlier, take a look at a once heavly travelled In-Transit route Sault Ste-Marie, ON to Emerson, MB or N Portal, SK. I drove truck prior to and after 9/11. No trucking company in canada is preforming In-Transit trips. You can put all the tolls and bonds and grands in place you want, the traffic isn't there. Take another example going the other way, Detriot to Buffalo, American companies are not longer doing In-Transit trips. As for wasting money, before tolls can be generated the state still have to contract an EIS (EA in Canada) or preform the work themselvs, expropriate land, servays, public meetings and planning.
Once again, as it says in my quote, "the construction, operation, and maintenance of the highway would be done privately." This means the private company building it would be paying to build it. That's how private road construction works. They secure financing, be it through bonds or whatever, and then pay those off using the toll revenue over subsequent years.
Now I haven't read the developer's proposal, just news articles, but I would assume that since they are proposing it the state wouldn't be liable for reimbursing them if toll revenue is lower than expected. So even if truck traffic is low, I fail to see how the taxpayers would be footing the bill for anything significant.
Building it, but what about the pre-build steps? And what happens when the company goes under because nobody told them what a stupid routing for a freeway this is beforehand?
Presumably they would do the planning and permitting and everything themselves. Isn't that how it normally works for private roads?
As for if the company goes under, presumably whatever contract they sign with the state if this proposal goes ahead would not leave the state liable.
Quote from: deanej on June 14, 2012, 11:19:59 AM
Building it, but what about the pre-build steps? And what happens when the company goes under because nobody told them what a stupid routing for a freeway this is beforehand?
This happened with the Camino Colombia toll road in southeast Texas, except that it wasn't total stupidity but rather government agencies backing out of their promises (basically, that it would be required for all international trucks to use it...then they built a whole new truck-only bridge downriver). When the CCTR went bankrupt, the road was auctioned off on the courthouse steps, and the state of Texas bought it on the cheap. So they didn't have to build the road, yet they still get to collect tolls on it. Sounds like a win-win for Texas, especially since it's now all-electronic and they don't even have to pay a toll collector.
This is a waste of taxpayer money because the feasibility study he been authorized at our expense.
Even if construction, operation and maintenance will be done privately. Even if the private entity interested in building and profiting from it already HAS money to do so.
Quote from: yakra on June 19, 2012, 12:26:53 AM
This is a waste of taxpayer money because the feasibility study he been authorized at our expense.
Even if construction, operation and maintenance will be done privately. Even if the private entity interested in building and profiting from it already HAS money to do so.
I disagree. Even when private investors are willing to front the money to build a highway, they are generally not willing to go through the treacherous process of securing approvals of an Environmental Impact Statement, as required by the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
That's a very risky business that most investors do not wish to take on. So taxpayers fund it.
That was the process used to build the private Dulles Greenway (Va. 267) in Loudoun County, Virginia.
Privite money asside, the big problem is traffic, and the new import/export laws. Maine will have to loby the Federal Gov't to be able to attract the business. As I had said earlier most Canadian trucking companies are not using any us routes to continue their trips to and from Canadian destinations. IE Calgary - Toronto.
I disagree too. :) The hit to taxpayers is $300,000, which would be small change to Cianbro or any company seriously enough interested in building & profiting from such a highway to allow the discussion to get as far as it has, and to consider ponying up $2G for construction, however they come up with it.
If one hopes to reap the benefits of this highway, they should put their money where their mouth is and assume this risk -- which in this case, of the $300,000 feasibility study, looks small. And not externalize the costs onto the backs of taxpayers. Most of whom have no involvement with this private venture, and precious little to gain from it.
Privatize the gain. Socialize the losses.
N.Y. Times: Plan to Speed Travel With Toll Road in Maine Hits a Nerve (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/us/private-toll-road-across-maine-is-proposed.html)
they should use the Alaska pipeline and Dalton Highway as a reference. yep, they built it. and Alaska still remains pretty dang remote.
Or look at the I-88 corridor in NY. I don't see how building a highway will automatically destroy the rural character of an area. It will only destroy the area if the people in the area let it. If they want to stay rural, they can simply refuse to allow developers to create strip malls and subdivisions near the interchanges. Zoning laws exist for a reason - enforce them!
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 07, 2012, 03:09:05 PM
they should use the Alaska pipeline
I looked this up on urbandictionary by accident, looking up something else. Can't be unseen.
Quote from: Steve on August 07, 2012, 07:14:32 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 07, 2012, 03:09:05 PM
they should use the Alaska pipeline
I looked this up on urbandictionary by accident, looking up something else. Can't be unseen.
/me is currently cracking the heck UP!
No way! IRC commands work on here???? :bigass:
Quote from: kphoger on August 07, 2012, 07:23:39 PM
No way! IRC commands work on here???? :bigass:
/me is amazed
/me knew about this long ago
/topic The working list of IRC commands on here is incomplete.
/kick Steve
I think it's just /me, actually. The last Simple Machines forum I used (back in 2005 or so) was where I discovered it.
/me is amazed that someone besides himself remembers what IRC was (or still is?)!
:-o
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on August 07, 2012, 10:01:09 PM
/me is amazed that someone besides himself remembers what IRC was (or still is?)!
:-o
Mike
I'm wondering (scratch that . . . /me) if anyone younger than me has ever used it. I'm 31 years old.
/me used IRC awhile back in 2001 or so but only a few times
Quote from: Steve on August 07, 2012, 07:14:32 PM
I looked this up on urbandictionary by accident, looking up something else. Can't be unseen.
TFTMS.
Quote from: kphoger on August 07, 2012, 10:07:54 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on August 07, 2012, 10:01:09 PM
/me is amazed that someone besides himself remembers what IRC was (or still is?)!
:-o
Mike
I'm wondering (scratch that . . . /me) if anyone younger than me has ever used it. I'm 31 years old.
I'm 29 and may have been the youngest in IRC when the chat last disbanded.
Now I'm really curious! Something tells me though that I may not wanna look it up here at work...
IRC = 'Internet Relay Chat'. It was a protocol that allows(ed) groups of users to participate in real-time round-table text discussions. It was popular in the 1990s and into the early to mid 2000s, but was mainly supplanted by cell-phone text messaging.
Mike
IRC is still occasionally used. I've used it before. It's pretty much pointless with all the other forms of instant communication though.
I was gonna say! IRC is still around; I've used mIRC within the last six years, as a matter of fact.
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/224517/314/East-West-highway-proposal-excoriated-by-environmental-group
Naturally, the Sierra Club has to stick their noses into this now.
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on December 12, 2012, 10:59:55 AM
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/224517/314/East-West-highway-proposal-excoriated-by-environmental-group
Naturally, the Sierra Club has to stick their noses into this now.
Also on their list of top 50 hated projects: every other road.
Quote from: Steve on December 12, 2012, 10:10:41 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on December 12, 2012, 10:59:55 AM
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/224517/314/East-West-highway-proposal-excoriated-by-environmental-group
Naturally, the Sierra Club has to stick their noses into this now.
Also on their list of top 50 hated projects: every other road.
Good observation.
Though I was amused that they have dropped Maryland's InterCounty Connector from their little list (the Club had essentially predicted that the world would come to an end if that highway was built - and their Web site is
still predicting that All Sorts of Terrible Things Will Happen if the road is built (here (http://maryland.sierraclub.org/action/p0096.asp) and here (http://maryland.sierraclub.org/newsletter/archives/2008/03/a_015.asp) and here (http://maryland.sierraclub.org/issues/icc/))).
They ought to add a western spur to NH and VT. That way, they can satisfy both traffic going to Montreal and the Burlington/Lake Champlain area.
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/241898/314/Small-business-owners-voice-concerns-over-east-west-highway
Small business owners had a big meeting in Augusta on Tuesday, voicing their concerns. One person proclaimed that Maine already has a East-West Highway...as in US Route 2.
They do realize that this is for a four lane freeway, not a winding two lane road that takes all day to traverse, right? Come to think of it, why isn't this highway proposed to follow US 2? That's where all the traffic is.
Quote from: vdeane on May 01, 2013, 10:47:22 AM
Come to think of it, why isn't this highway proposed to follow US 2? That's where all the traffic is.
IIRC, part of the reason for the proposed routing west of I-95 is that it would not require much use of eminent domain, since it would pass through land held only by a small number of companies, all of which would benefit from the new highway and would be willing to help the project get off the ground, such as by selling the ROW at low prices and without legal hassles. (I think the original thinking was that would also streamline environmental reviews, though I'm not sure about that.) Something like that happened with the Dulles Greenway, which passed through private lands held only by four companies, all anxious to get the toll road built so they could develop their properties.
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/244647/314/Maine-highway-study-law-repeal-voted
Does this mean the project is now dead?