Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j88ed04 wrote

So the article speaks about how basically, we won't have a Bronx/Queens connection.

Besides already not fulfilling many promises, as of what used to be elevated train lines in Manhattan that were said to be put underground in the future, and never were, we won't get a train line from Queens to Bronx, not that it was ever promised.

I already have many questions. I thought the Penn Station access development was recent, not many years ago. I question why did it take so long? Why did it cost so much, if MTA wants to save money? Has MTA ever planned to rebuild old elevated train lines underground? Why is there no highway tunnel/bridge from Long Island to Connecticut or somewhere in Westchester?

−7

iliveoffofbagels t1_j88hu6i wrote

>Why is there no highway tunnel/bridge from Long Island to Connecticut or somewhere in Westchester?

from wikipedia(but remember tio look up the page's cited sources for more details)

Opposition

>Moses ran into a problem once the proposal was brought to the Federal Highway Administration. Opposition to the bridge was beginning to form on both sides of Long Island Sound. In addition, plans to turn the Oyster Bay area into a bird sanctuary and a protected park made working on the highway harder, as building on such protected places is forbidden by law. Faced with growing opposition, Governor Rockefeller canceled the plans for the bridge on June 20, 1973, nine years after the first proposal by Moses.[12]

.... and then more recently

21st century

> In January 2008, this idea was revived when developer Vincent Polimeni proposed building a privately financed, tolled tunnel between Oyster Bay on Long Island and Rye in Westchester County, featuring two tubes carrying three lanes of traffic each and a third tube for maintenance and emergency access. The route would connect Route 135 (Seaford-Oyster Bay Expressway) on Long Island to Interstate 287 in Westchester County. It would cost between $12 and $16 billion[13] and would not be completed until at least 2025. The proposed tunnel would be 16 to 18 miles (26 to 29 km) long, making it the world's longest highway tunnel, longer than the Lærdal Tunnel in Norway.[14] A hearing on this proposal was held in Syosset on January 24, 2008.[15]

During his second term, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo also proposed a tunnel connecting NY 135 to Rye. This is also a highway in two tubes and a third tube for maintenance. After a polarizing debate, the NYSDOT released a statement saying the tunnel would not be moving forward at this time.[16]

....

ultimately, many people argue against it. It's been proposed over and over in several forms, but nobody wants it, but the opposition is too strong. Fuck dude... if in the 50's we couldn't get people to be alright with making a connection from Route 135 in Oyster bay through the rest of the north shore and across to Rye, we sure as hell ain't going to do it easily any time soon with way more people living through the possible path now.

5

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j88mso0 wrote

That sucks a ton of baloney bricks. Why in the world would people oppose it? Who cares about what they think? Have any of them thought of the loads of traffic that would probably decrease going through half of NYC just to get to NJ? If people could just go through from Connecticut, go through Long Island, go over the Verrazzano bridge, through Staten Island, it probably would save a lot of time then going through I-95, I-87, or Bronx River Parkway just to end up in the Bronx and cross the only two bridges from Bronx to Queens (which gets traffic at times), or go to Manhattan which has traffic, taking the FDR and going over the Manhattan or Brooklyn Bridge or the tunnels.

More people going through Long Island would probably mean a lot more less traffic for all the other roads/bridges in the city, I would at least hope.

−1

Pinuzzo t1_j89ml2e wrote

Any Oyster Bay - Stamford connection would be too expensive to build and maintain and would be too close to the existing Bronx-Queens bridges to have that big of an impact in reducing vehicle-miles traveled

1

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j8a93hi wrote

Sure it would be too expensive, but to close to existing Bronx-Queens bridges? Calverton is no where near the two only bridges, which gets a lot of traffic and takes up time for those trying to get into Queens easier. It would definitely have a big if an impact if cars can just get off I-95 before going into southern Westchester, besides taking up less time to travel since you'll have less traffic on the other two bridges now that the tunnel exists. Also won't have to go through all of that just to get to Queens, but instead just take the LIE to the other highways that would take you to the Verrazzano

2

Pinuzzo t1_j8aear7 wrote

Well the tunnel proposal was to extend NY135 from Oyster Bay to the I287 in Port Chester, nowhere near Calverton, NY and also not even connected to CT.

Southbound traffic from I95 from CT to NJ through Queens/Long Island is unlikely to relieve much congestion for anyone since all the LIE/BQE/Belt Pkwy is already near capacity anyway.

1

rick6787 t1_j88fhpk wrote

>Why is there no highway tunnel/bridge from Long Island to Connecticut or somewhere in Westchester?

Are you actually asking for a history lesson?

4

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j88mmto wrote

Yes, but someone has told me. Kind of sucks though.

3

rick6787 t1_j88nez4 wrote

Disagree. Long island does not need any more density. And it's a great thing to have made oyster bay a wildlife refuge.

−5

chargeorge t1_j88vs54 wrote

I mean I have no comments on the specific infrastructure, but yea Long Island needs a ton more density.

7

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j88nrep wrote

Density? Better traffic flow is what matters to me, and thats something NYC doesn't always have, for the most part. I would rather we try to build somewhere else instead of Oyster Bay.

−2

rick6787 t1_j88pndx wrote

When you increase access to a place, you increase population. What is it you're trying to accomplish with a long island sound bridge/tunnel?

2

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j88qls8 wrote

Less traffic on I-95 mainly through the Cross Bronx expressway, on the Whitestone, the Throgs Neck Bridge, any bridge/tunnel going Manhattan to Queens/Brooklyn, I don't think it will make a big difference in population from a new tunnel, since everyone's mainly just passing through. It would save time for people from Northeastern states above us from having to go through the Bronx and Manhattan, to get to Queens/Brooklyn, just to get to NJ on the most left side. Do that, and traffic flow should be a bit if not a lot better for New Yorkers.

3

rick6787 t1_j88tmna wrote

You think building an entirely new route is cheaper/simpler/more feasible than just expanding I95, if that's your goal?

1

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j8a9r6h wrote

Of course not, but say that you expand I-95, the Throgs Neck and Whitestone will still have just more traffic, and the GWB? Well skip that, just the bridges and tunnels connecting from Manhattan to Queens/Brooklyn would definitely receive less traffic from Connecticut/Northern Westchester

1

EquivalentBarracuda4 t1_j88zw7y wrote

Have you heard about the term “induced demand”?

Less traffic -> motivates new development -> more population -> more traffic.

1

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j8a7gqv wrote

Well, I've heard of new roads/bridges being opened to lessen traffic on an existing road way or so, and so say that they did build a tunnel on LI. Would people really care to live there now if the tunnel is completed? They could've been wanted to live there, why now with a tunnel?

1

EquivalentBarracuda4 t1_j8a7v5a wrote

Please read how induced demand works. There are plenty of videos on YouTube about this topic. Adding more lanes, bridges, etc solves traffic only on the near term. In the long term it will never work.

Ask yourself: how come that we still have traffic with those fancy multi lane highways? How come adding more lanes did not solve the traffic?

1

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j8abn4i wrote

It does work long term? Extra lanes doesn't do much, no, but more roadways/bridges have shown to reduce traffic, depending on where traffic really wants to go. Adding more lanes didn't do much because everyone's going that same way. Add another road, you'll have less people going that way. I've played Cities Skylines (which doesn't mean much), but adding more lanes does change a bit, but definitely not enough at all. For example, have one highway in a city for people to get in and out. You'll get traffic.

Adding a lane won't change anything because it will just allow more cars to fill in, but still traffic. Add another highway on the city's border going a bit of a different direction of that highway, but still having a similar route, more cars that are closer to that roadway, or people living near said roadway, are more likely to go on that route, reducing traffic on the other highway.

Say that you live on LI, now you have to drive all the way down through NYC, to get to Connecticut, instead of simply just going to Connecticut. Add an extra lane on the bridges, it won't change much, you're still going to add on to the rest of the cars on the road. Tunnel? Avoid those bridges, won't even need an extra lane, because you're one less car on the road.

1

TeamMisha t1_j88mmvl wrote

No one wants tunnel portals and highway approaches in their backyard. Northern Long Island has some of the wealthiest areas in the country with vocal opposition. They understandably don't wanna transfer congestion on I-95 in the Bronx to near their towns instead.

4

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j88n0jy wrote

I see, but that's not understandable for those who live in the Bronx and Manhattan that has to deal with said congestion now, and the bridges as well.

1

pompcaldor t1_j896u1i wrote

> I thought the Penn Station access development was recent, not many years ago. I question why did it take so long?

Because Penn Station is at capacity, and the only way to add new trains is to divert existing ones. Now that East Side Access (Grand Central Madison) is open, you can divert them there.

4

Best_Line6674 OP t1_j8a713c wrote

I see, well will ESA actually connect with the Bronx?

2

ECK-2188 t1_j88ez7i wrote

One thing is as certain as seeing taxes out of your check:

Outer boroughs will always be left out in the cold.

No surprises.

3