4 ms·
I think you should take either the Verrazano bridge exit off 95 or continue north to 87. The idea is to avoid driving through Manhattan planning one's trip acco
by detourdog 2y ago
I think you should take either the Verrazano bridge exit off 95 or continue north to 87. The idea is to avoid driving through Manhattan planning one's trip accordingly should work. The only reason to take either tunnel is to reach Manhattan.
- spyspy 2y agoI really wish there was a tunnel between jersey and Brooklyn. Every option sucks for that. You either end up stuck in traffic in Staten Island, manhattan, or queens.
- pc86 2y agoI'm looking at a map and really confused about how from New Jersey you can end up in Queens while trying to get to Staten Island.
- detourdog 2y agoCrossing the Verranzo Bridge and coninueing on the Brooklyn Queens expressway or 278.
- CryptoBanker 2y agoOk, sure if you’re an idiot and you go past Brooklyn you could end up in Queens
- selimthegrim 2y agoStarting in Ft. Lee?
- detourdog 2y agogoing where?
- detourdog 2y agoRemember when Chris Christie said a modern tunnel was not worth the cost to NJ?
- evanelias 2y agoThat's absolutely incorrect. Over a million NJ residents live closer to the tunnels, myself included. Every route I plan on google maps to various destinations in parts of Brooklyn and Queens puts the tunnels as being faster.
- datameta 2y agoRight, that's part of the problem. During the work hours the temporary population of Manhattan grows about threefold. They contribute to immense gridlock and then disappear to their suburbs in another state. Why must the residents bear the brunt of the externalized traffic impact? It is only fair to treat available street space as a limited resource.
- evanelias 2y agoThat's tangential to the issue being discussed in this subthread, which is that there's physically no way to stay on highways when coming from the tunnels, even when attempting to reach non-Manhattan destinations in outer boroughs. So the only relevant congestion for this specific issue is between the tunnels and the highways. Manhattan residents living near the tunnels know what they're signing up for. The tunnels opened in 1927 and 1937. The traffic isn't exactly a new problem. Also, the parts of NJ in question (where the tunnels are closer than bridges) are largely urban in character. You make it sound like people are coming from some far-away leafy suburb, that's not the case for the majority of this population.
- detourdog 2y agoPeople in NJ know what they are signing up for. The outer boroughs have existed in the same locations for decades. Traveling by automobile through Manhattan isn't exactly a new problem.
- evanelias 2y agoBeing charged $15 to travel literally two blocks between the tunnel and the West Side Highway is a new problem. That's the point. There's no way to avoid the city grid, due to bad highway design that doesn't directly connect either 495 or 78 with 9A. Any congestion pricing plan which ignores that problem is going to be met with mass outrage, to an extent that will swing elections against incumbents. Especially when said incumbents promote this "no charge if you stay on highways" BS without explaining the fine print. Again, I'm saying this as someone who only ever takes public transit and is generally in favor of congestion pricing as a concept.