Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Think of what you just said and let me know when the light bulb goes off.
Port traffic will undoubtedly increase in Miami and while the tunnel is a fix, it's really nothing more than a short term fix. Once it reaches capacity it will create even worse backups than the MacA already has. Boring a new tube is extremely expensive and time consuming.
Not even considering the current MacArthur delays, people going to the Port and using the tunnel will clog the thru lanes to Miami Beach as they sneak to the front of the line to avoid traffic.
If it was a "last exit" type approach (ex: The Lincoln Tunnel from NJ to NY) it wouldn't be a problem, but since it has a shared lane approach (the lanes continue to another destination and the Port is simply an exit,) any delays from the tunnel will create backups on the MacArthur's lanes to Miami Beach.
While I agree that taking trucks out of Downtown is needed, the tunnel, as it stands now, is not the best way to do it.
There is no other way though. You can build a bridge because the bridge would have to be huge and there really is no where to put it. I was talking about streets in Downtown area going to capacity soon with possible new developments not the tunnel. I hope the tunnel will have extra capacity and the city/county could still allow some small trucks and traffic to use the roads. Or maybe if capacity is reached only allow trucks in the tunnel and no other cars at all etc.. The only way to get trucks out of downtown and straight to the port is with a tunnel. There are no other options.
As for the thru lanes there needs to be barriers between the two! Like the express lane barries. That is a must we cant have trucks trying to skip the line. Enforcement will have to be strict.
There is no other way though. You can build a bridge because the bridge would have to be huge and there really is no where to put it. I was talking about streets in Downtown area going to capacity soon with possible new developments not the tunnel. I hope the tunnel will have extra capacity and the city/county could still allow some small trucks and traffic to use the roads. Or maybe if capacity is reached only allow trucks in the tunnel and no other cars at all etc.. The only way to get trucks out of downtown and straight to the port is with a tunnel. There are no other options.
As for the thru lanes there needs to be barriers between the two! Like the express lane barries. That is a must we cant have trucks trying to skip the line. Enforcement will have to be strict.
I'm sure the tunnel does have enough capacity for a few years, but I don't see Port traffic slowing down in years to come. I also don't foresee much enforcement of lane cutting.
It would have made more sense to make the exit to the Port where they're putting the entrance to the tunnel (in the median of the MacArthur on Watson Island) make a flyover over the eastbound lanes, run four new lanes along the MacArthur (separated from the current MacArthur lanes, two lanes in each direction) and then have a drawbridge connection to the Port right about where the bridge over to Star Island is.
Scheduled lifts would be published (worked on with the cruise industry (cruises exclusively use the north side of the island whereas containers use the south side, I believe. Since cruises depart and arrive on pretty accurate schedules, it shouldn't be much of a problem. Container/industrial traffic wouldn't be a concern since the draw would be over the north channel)) and in doing this it would A) Give tremendously more road for traffic to backup on and B) Most likely be cheaper and easier to build than the tunnel.
The project will obviously go ahead as is now, but I just think it is a terrible idea since everything (the tunnel, the MacA thru lanes to Miami Beach and the dumping of all that traffic from the already congested Dolphin) is in such cramped quarters.
I'm sure the tunnel does have enough capacity for a few years, but I don't see Port traffic slowing down in years to come. I also don't foresee much enforcement of lane cutting.
It would have made more sense to make the exit to the Port where they're putting the entrance to the tunnel (in the median of the MacArthur on Watson Island) make a flyover over the eastbound lanes, run four new lanes along the MacArthur (separated from the current MacArthur lanes, two lanes in each direction) and then have a drawbridge connection to the Port right about where the bridge over to Star Island is.
Scheduled lifts would be published (worked on with the cruise industry (cruises exclusively use the north side of the island whereas containers use the south side, I believe. Since cruises depart and arrive on pretty accurate schedules, it shouldn't be much of a problem. Container/industrial traffic wouldn't be a concern since the draw would be over the north channel)) and in doing this it would A) Give tremendously more road for traffic to backup on and B) Most likely be cheaper and easier to build than the tunnel.
The project will obviously go ahead as is now, but I just think it is a terrible idea since everything (the tunnel, the MacA thru lanes to Miami Beach and the dumping of all that traffic from the already congested Dolphin) is in such cramped quarters.
Thank goodness for the Venetian...
I like that idea, but I really do not think there is enough land to make a drawbridge large enough for the huge cruise ships.
Hopefully lane cutting will be enforced or the lanes separated with something to not allow trucks to skip like that.
I think the whole thing is short sighted, seems something that would have been thought of in the 60's.
A couple of things; I do not understand the comparisons/competition with Port Everglades. It does not make sense to have two large scale ports in such close proximity. All it adds is an extra layer of bureaucracy and duplicity of costs. Instead of spending money on two ports, the money could be consolidated into one port.
The ports are not located in a good area to begin with, with Port Everglades being in the better area. I do not fault the ports for this, but the general direction of growth around these areas with the constant expansion of the ports. A new port facility should be built in another location, and scale down the two current ones, maybe just for cruise ship traffic. With the new location, urban congestion would not be a problem, and an efficient rail link could be installed connecting the port facility to the railways (Hialeah's rail station is not efficient by no means for port traffic).
I think the whole thing is short sighted, seems something that would have been thought of in the 60's.
A couple of things; I do not understand the comparisons/competition with Port Everglades. It does not make sense to have two large scale ports in such close proximity. All it adds is an extra layer of bureaucracy and duplicity of costs. Instead of spending money on two ports, the money could be consolidated into one port.
The ports are not located in a good area to begin with, with Port Everglades being in the better area. I do not fault the ports for this, but the general direction of growth around these areas with the constant expansion of the ports. A new port facility should be built in another location, and scale down the two current ones, maybe just for cruise ship traffic. With the new location, urban congestion would not be a problem, and an efficient rail link could be installed connecting the port facility to the railways (Hialeah's rail station is not efficient by no means for port traffic).
What? Where in the world can they put in a new port??? If you could just answer that question it would be great. So your saying instead of spending $1 Billion they should spend I dont know 10 billion or more building a new a on in a spot where there really is not. Lets also not forget that Port of Miami is ran by Miami Dade and Port Everglades by Broward County. Two completely different governments running these two ports and both are doing very well.
The tunnel is needed. Its about time they did something. Downtown Miami's population is only growing and now with the future possible development in the area where the trucks to the port drive to this needed to be done. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq2Zj0sH1jE
It could be built in many places along the coast, like how Cape Canaveral was built back in the day or Kings Bay, just pick an area and build.
The ports may be ran by the local governments, but they solicit a lot of funds from outside of the area, which makes it not wholly independent on the local governments, and again, why the huge amount of money to maintain two separate facilities? Consolidation would be much better in the long run. Both ports are still thinking like the 60's (I looked up after the fact and it was proposed in the 80's). But still using the inefficient means of massive amounts of trucks taking things to and from, with America's innovation, I think we can do better than that.
It could be part of the overall picture of updating America's inefficient rail system and make it work for us, instead of relying on massive amounts of trucks to haul everything from point A to B, which uses an incredible amount of resources to do so.
It is just my opinion, it is not like I am actively lobbying for it, heck, it may even not be a good idea. But I still do not see the point of the redundancy between the two ports, it is a waste of money.
I think the whole thing is short sighted, seems something that would have been thought of in the 60's.
A couple of things; I do not understand the comparisons/competition with Port Everglades. It does not make sense to have two large scale ports in such close proximity. All it adds is an extra layer of bureaucracy and duplicity of costs. Instead of spending money on two ports, the money could be consolidated into one port.
The ports are not located in a good area to begin with, with Port Everglades being in the better area. I do not fault the ports for this, but the general direction of growth around these areas with the constant expansion of the ports. A new port facility should be built in another location, and scale down the two current ones, maybe just for cruise ship traffic. With the new location, urban congestion would not be a problem, and an efficient rail link could be installed connecting the port facility to the railways (Hialeah's rail station is not efficient by no means for port traffic).
Port everglades = BRoward County, Port of Miami = Dade county. There is no way they are going to "share costs", they are two different government entities and each has its own constituents to worry about. Ports produce revenue, they are not friends or allies in this regard, they are competitors. Miami is a larger entity and as such should improve their port. With Miami's location there is no reason it couldn't and shouldnt eclipse the heck out of port everglades in every way possible. The only short sightedness I see in Miami's plan is the lack of mass transit to key locations. You can expand roads sure, but as more cars come on board, that means you will be back at it again in the distant future. You get far more bang for your book via mass transit. Anyone went to sleepless night on South Beach yesterday? It was BANANAS, I have never seen the causeway THAT backed up since I have been down here. If they had mass transit, people could have hoped a train and headed over to the beach instead of having to endure that hot mess.
Port everglades = BRoward County, Port of Miami = Dade county. There is no way they are going to "share costs", they are two different government entities and each has its own constituents to worry about. Ports produce revenue, they are not friends or allies in this regard, they are competitors. Miami is a larger entity and as such should improve their port. With Miami's location there is no reason it couldn't and shouldnt eclipse the heck out of port everglades in every way possible. The only short sightedness I see in Miami's plan is the lack of mass transit to key locations. You can expand roads sure, but as more cars come on board, that means you will be back at it again in the distant future. You get far more bang for your book via mass transit. Anyone went to sleepless night on South Beach yesterday? It was BANANAS, I have never seen the causeway THAT backed up since I have been down here. If they had mass transit, people could have hoped a train and headed over to the beach instead of having to endure that hot mess.
That's only if those people live in areas suitable for mass transit. Many people who have disposible incomes and purchasing power live in the suburbs. Reality is Miami(and 90+% of America) is not ready for mass transit either. I can't blame them either, I like walkable dense cities but I despise riding on mass transit.
That's only if those people live in areas suitable for mass transit. Many people who have disposible incomes and purchasing power live in the suburbs. Reality is Miami(and 90+% of America) is not ready for mass transit either. I can't blame them either, I like walkable dense cities but I despise riding on mass transit.
rent in downtown miami - 2,000 to 3,000 a month. to quality for rent like that you need to make 80,000 to 112,000 a year (40 times rent). The same can be said for Miami Beach. To say they don't have disposable income defies reality. Not to mention, if the suburbs were all so wealthy we wouldn't be seeing the high amount of foreclosures in suburbs as we are seeing now, they would be able to handle their bills (which they can't at this point in time). Suburbs by and large are filled with people who bought into a dream that they couldn't not afford, it is what it is. As for mass transit, the cities in america with the most density are generally those with great mass transit i.e. Chicago, NYC, Boston, DC etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
