Developer wants to build tunnel under Long Island Sound
New York developer Vincent Polimeni wants to connect Long Island and Westchester County with a 16-mile tunnel running between Oyster Bay and Rye under the Long Island Sound. His plan calls for the estimated $10 billion dollar project to be privately funded, with advertising and $25 tolls in each direction recovering the development costs once the tunnel opens. If ultimately approved and completed, it would consist of two 3-lane tubes plus a center maintenance/emergency access tunnel. While Oyster Bay's town supervisor, who initially called the idea "unrealistic," is waiting to see more information before passing final judgement, Westchester County officials are very opposed to the project, saying that it would transform existing traffic conditions from merely bad to completely unmanageable. Realistically, it's very hard to see this ever getting past the discussion stage, even though the idea's an interesting one. Currently, there's a ferry service between Port Jefferson, Long Island and Bridgeport, CT, where passengers can then jump on I-95 (and sit in that traffic) or transfer to commuter rail into NYC.
UPDATE: Toll Roads News has a more detailed feature than the AP report we found initially. It includes more information about the exact tunnel route, etc. The official website for the project, dubbed the Cross Sound Link, can be found here.
[Source: AP]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Corey W. 9:45AM (1/31/2008)
$25 dollars?!?!? H - E - Double Hockey Sticks No!!
It will never happen... but that just my baseless opinion. :-)
Reply
J M C 3 9:56AM (1/31/2008)
If your sending a truck from connecticut to LI it's only $ 20 more than the Throgs Neck Bridge which can be a 2 hr plus difference depending on traffic.By comparison ,the tunnel would be 15 min.Perfect sense when you're running a truck with a driver.
Rick 7:02PM (1/31/2008)
$25 toll!?!? Wow, I thought the FL turnpike had some high tolls.
Reply
icu812ru469 9:46AM (1/31/2008)
16 mile tunnel? What happens when a car catches fire, an multi-car accident occurs that blocks all lanes? How big is this emergency middle tunnel going to be? I just see a 16 mile long tunnel as being a big risk for motorists.
Reply
Alex 10:08AM (1/31/2008)
The Chunnel is 31 miles long, granted it's a rail line but it still carries similar risks. I would assume that it would not be three open lanes of travel, but more like three restricted lanes, i.e. you enter in lane 1; you can't merge into lane 2 or 3 unless there is an accident in lane 1. The emergency middle tunnel will likely be large enough to carry all sorts of emergency vehicles and construction equipment.
It'll require tons of safety, security, and traffic management systems to work efficiently. It will be well worth the $25 price of admission, especially considering it'll likely cut travel time by hours.
The project will be a tough sell to the residents of both Rye and Oyster Bay. Both of which are affluent areas.
sk 10:18AM (1/31/2008)
There are enough of other tunnels around the world that are longer than this one. For example take a look at the Gotthard Tunnel in Switzerland which is 35miles / 54km long.
rail road http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel
road http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Road_Tunnel
tankd0g 11:15AM (1/31/2008)
Tunnels for cars have been death traps but lessons learned from past disasters (should) make new tunnels safer than ever before. $10 billion seems pretty optumistic for something like that.
rgseidl 3:22PM (1/31/2008)
I can't comment on whether the proposed link is desirable or not but in engineering terms, it's a non-starter. Digging tunnels big enough for three lanes side-by-side would be hugely expensive. Moreover, ensuring sufficient ventilation 8 miles from shore would be very difficult if it's full of cars with ICEs.
There' a reason the Channel Tunnel features a train that transports cars.
J M C 3 9:51AM (1/31/2008)
It's time for a visionary public works project for the greater NY area.It's been too long.The last one we had ,I think ,was the Verrazano Narrows bridge.This short cut would help a great deal with truck traffic especially at the Throgs Neck/Whitestone bottleneck and go a long way to curb pollution and increase productivity.
Reply
Travis 10:32AM (1/31/2008)
I still think that there should be a tunnel from the Port Jeff to Bridgeport. The Ferry is expensive (~$50/way) and takes forever (almost 2 hours) so it doesn't save any time over driving around. I used to work in Islandia, and going to CT/Boston was a HUGE pain. That i would've paid a $25 toll for, especially to avoid the Throgs Neck/Whitestone bridges. This seems too close to those, and really would only be a sort of overflow valve during the summer months when all the hamptons traffic is backed up for miles and miles...
J M C 3 10:06AM (1/31/2008)
It's not visable on the map,but 287 traverses westchester and crosses the Hudson at the Tappan zee bridge cutting more time from travel.as it makes a trip from Nyack to Syosset a straight run.I think that's brilliant.It just saves so much time and gas.
Henry Rosenberg 9:51AM (1/31/2008)
Oyster Bay is a pretty upscale place. Wikipedia says: "According to a 2006 estimate, the median income for a household in the town was $97,934, and the median income for a family was $109,478." How likely is it that they'll want all that traffic?
Reply
calebe 2:11PM (1/31/2008)
$25??? ROFL. yeah
Reply
pacman 2:29PM (1/31/2008)
People already pay $45 to used the ferry. No one would invest $10B in private funds if he didnt think it would turn a profit.
David(Postal) 9:54AM (1/31/2008)
Sorry I don't think this is going to happen nor do I think the time saved is worth the extra toll cost.
Reply
robert bell 10:08AM (1/31/2008)
OK, such a tunnel wouldn't be without risks and problems to overcome, but from a purely pragmatic standpoint this makes a lot of sense if the goal is to alleviate traffic near and into/around metro NYC.. Given the population density of the NYC market and the inability to expand existing freeways, anything which might alleviate the congestion into and out of the NYC and Jersey area would be helpful. On the other hand, spending ten billion dollars to encourage more vehicular traffic in the metro area would not be as wise as a like amount invested in some form of mass transit
The Port Authority has discussed, for years, the need for an expansion of the Lincoln and/or Holland tunnels to handle increased rail lines into the city from Jersey but they have reisisted proposals to increase vehicle traffic; instead, they are now discussing a variation on the London scheme to charge cars for entering certain areas of Manhattan; a new form of user tax based on how much congestion you create and how much pollution is attributable to your car.
Bottom line: this scheme is fraught with all sorts of public policy issues and is not simply a matter of whether or not it could be built. Given the bureacracies in the metro NY area and the dueling agendas of politicians this ain't likely to happen.
Reply
Chris 10:15AM (1/31/2008)
So, I guess the shortest distance between two points is not a straight line anymore?
Reply
300Kid 2:16PM (1/31/2008)
That's the current path of travel, the tunnel would connect A & B in a straight line. And btw, as someone who travels to LI frequently, I think it's a great idea.
Chris 3:06PM (1/31/2008)
Yeah, that's what I realized AFTER I posted that comment. Sorry.
FThorn 10:16AM (1/31/2008)
Instead of building up congested, costly places, just move to part of USAmerica that has tons of cheap, open spaces? Room to breath is also refreshing. Preowned homes from $20,000-40,000 or so and new construction from $90,000 also makes it more affordable for folks to LIVE, too. But, hey, if that's what you want; or it's your security blanket (being around more strangers) go for it.
Reply