5 ms·
I imagine there are two factors at play here: 1. Since digging takes time, you really only need the permits where you are actually digging. So if you start on
by johnm1019 10y ago
I imagine there are two factors at play here:
1. Since digging takes time, you really only need the permits where you are actually digging. So if you start on a piece of land you largely control, or can quickly get permits for, you could theoretically bore until where you need the next permit.
2. For all these permits, you would apply for them in parallel, so you don't really need 100% of the permits for the entire length of the tunnel to start.
- Anechoic 10y agoSo if you start on a piece of land you largely control, or can quickly get permits for, you could theoretically bore until where you need the next permit. It's not quite that simple - you may largely control the land you're tunneling under/through, but when you remove a large amount of soil, the surround ground may shift or you can affect water tables and those can cause issues for adjacent parcels and structures. Spoil removal (meaning muck trains and/or dump trucks to haul away dirt) will also affect adjacent properties through dust and noise. Unless he owns hundreds of acres of property, any tunneling activity will cause issues that will come up through the permitting process. And if he does down hundreds of acres of property, why not just build a surface road?
- Someone 10y agoTheoretically, yes, but you wouldn't want to dig significant parts of the tunnel before you're certain to get the rights to finish it, either. Imagine negotiating with a land owner for the rights to dig the last 10 meters of tunnel, somewhere in the middle of already built parts stretching over kilometers. That owner probably will be able to get 50% of the completed tunnel in exchange for those rights.
- ac29 10y agoThat's what eminent domain laws are for.