Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both say they want to spend more to fix America’s supposedly crumbling infrastructure. But if Congress passes an infrastructure spending bill, this is the kind of thing it will be spent on: digging two tunnels for Interstates 84 and 91 in Hartford, Connecticut. This project is being promoted by Representative John Larson (D-CT), who is obviously looking forward to the day when Democrats control the White House and at least one house of Congress.
How much would these tunnels cost? A mere $10 billion, estimates Larson, who promises that “It’s not remotely close to what the Big Dig was.” No, the Big Dig was only supposed to cost $2.8 billion. Since it eventually cost $14.5 billion, will the Hartford dig end up costing $40 billion?
The purpose of the tunnels is to relieve congestion since there is supposedly no room to add capacity to the existing, above-ground highways. I suspect Larson hasn’t considered overhead solutions such as the Selmon Expressway in Tampa, which added three lanes without taking any new right of way by being built in the median strip of an existing highway. It cost about $7 million a lane mile, far less than a tunnel.
This will save men from getting embarrassed whenever they feel like they are lucky to our site generic cialis tadalafil have anything at all in the name of harder erections. It is an viagra super active ‘easy on’ condom which is shaped slightly differently to prevent the fumbling that usually occurs when you put on the condom. She looks at you with desperate eyes but you are nowhere near! This might be a problem and must be taken care of as and when they come to know they are suffering from ED. cialis professional cipla you could check here or Generic viagra Sildenafil citrate which is a PDE5 inhibitor. Effect of sildenafil citrate on the levitra 10 mg body in different, small parts.
I’m even more certain that Larson hasn’t considered using variable tolls to eliminate congestion on the Hartford interstates. As the Antiplanner has shown, using tolls to end congestion can paradoxically double highway throughputs, because congested roads move only a fraction of what an uncontested road could move. Larson isn’t against tolls because he proposes to pay for part of his $10 billion tunnels with tolls, but why spend $10 billion when tolls alone can solve the problem?
The toll solution, however, wouldn’t give Larson any ribbons to cut, any construction jobs to take credit for, or any construction company profits that could be spent as campaign contributions. Spending $10 billion on tunnels wouldn’t cure many structurally deficient bridges or other crumbling infrastructure. But that’s the kind of spending we are going to get if people continue to believe the propaganda claiming our infrastructure needs more tax dollars.
I’m from Connecticut and the Hartford capitol crowd has always milked the rest of the state for their boondoggles. This one tunnel project would cost more than a decade worth of spending on roads for the entire state.
Larson throws in everything plus the kitchen sink: he says it will be paid for by tolls, an increased gasoline tax, bonding, federal funds and an “infrastructure bank”.
The Hartford politicos (unbelievably) always think Hartford is the equal of Boston – so they will proudly outspend Boston on this impossible project.
One Democratic leader says this will make Hartford just like San Antonio. (I am not making this up.)
No help from the other side – Larson’s Republican opponent is also in favor of this project but claims he thought of it first!
The Antiplanner wrote:
I’m even more certain that Larson hasn’t considered using variable tolls to eliminate congestion on the Hartford interstates. As the Antiplanner has shown, using tolls to end congestion can paradoxically double highway throughputs, because congested roads move only a fraction of what an uncontested road could move. Larson isn’t against tolls because he proposes to pay for part of his $10 billion tunnels with tolls, but why spend $10 billion when tolls alone can solve the problem?
Or follow your advice, and toll the system as it exists today, and instead of using the revenue for questionable rail transit projects (always a threat when there’s a “new” revenue source), and use the resulting revenue to fund a big chunk of the cost of the tunnels, and improve freeway performance in the area.
Am I misunderstanding the situation? It looks like the state is already going ahead with a project that will cost half as much up front, have just as much capacity and be less expensive to maintain in the long run.
As for the riverfront, I realize it’s not easy. But if Hartford wants this, they should work on routing I-91 over CT 15, run it with I84 to I291 and back across to where I91. The route would need more capacity added but would be considerably less expensive to do than tunneling. And it would open up the river.