The Virginian-Pilot
©
NORFOLK
At the urging of Virginia's congressional delegation, the White House's proposed 2010 budget will include $28.5 million for construction of a fourth state marine terminal at Craney Island in Portsmouth, the Virginia Port Authority announced Thursday.
It would be the first appropriation of federal dollars toward the Craney Island project.
"This officially turns the spigot on," said Greg Edwards, the Port Authority's director of external affairs. "It makes it easier to direct funds to an existing project."
Construction of the Craney Island project is expected to cost $2.2 billion and to unfold in three phases over the next 20 to 25 years, according to the Port Authority.
In late 2007, Congress authorized spending $356 million to help build a new cell on the east side of Craney Island, which the Army Corps of Engineers uses to store material dredged from local waterways. The new terminal would be built atop that cell once it's filled.
That $356 million splits the $712 million projected cost of building the containment levees and dikes for the project between the Port Authority and the federal government.
"We are grateful to the White House for its consideration of this important project and an equal amount of gratitude goes to Sen. Mark Warner for his leadership on the development of Craney Island," said Jerry A. Bridges, executive director of the port authority, in a statement.
Bridges also cited the support of U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., and U.S. Reps. Bobby Scott, D-Va., Glenn Nye, D-Va., Randy Forbes, R-Va., and Robert Wittman, R-Va.
Asked what amount, specifically, had been requested for inclusion in the budget, port spokesman Joe Harris said, "We didn't have a specific figure in mind."
Upon completion, the Craney Island terminal would have the capacity to handle the equivalent of 2.5 million 20-foot cargo containers a year.
In 2008, the Port Authority's three existing marine terminals in Norfolk, Portsmouth and Newport News, as well as the privately owned APM Terminals facility in Portsmouth, handled the equivalent of nearly 2.1 million 20-foot cargo containers.
Robert McCabe, (757) 446-2327, robert.mccabe@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
hmmm
So if there's a 6 mile backup at the HRBT, the third crossing won't give "TAX PAYING CITIZENS" an option to get quickly across the Bay? Just wondering how that works? How is available infrastructure not a good thing?
No, it will not help you
Your 6 mile backup will be the same, the "third crossing" ties into 664 over the water and connects to 64 via Terminal Blvd, it still uses the M&M tunnel, only now it will add all that port traffic to it. Yo will still have to use the HRBT or M&M to get to this side of the water.
Not what we need
Taxpayers get ready to fund a "third crossing" whether you want to or not. The politicians know what's best for you, just ask them. Previous posters of the Crany Island port had the "third crossing" running parallel to the Eastern side of it but it isn't a third crossing, it's just a connector between the M&M and terminal Blvd via the two ports, it will do nothing to aleviate any congestion suffered by those who fund it (the citizens).
Just wondering....
was there any more allocted for the tunnel improvements to support all the additional truck traffic? Or just more tolls for poor schmucks trying to go to work everyday? These are port roads, primarily benefitting the general fund in Richmond.
It is time the state stepped up and accepted responsibility for these tunnel crossing. The state owns the ports in Norfolk and Portsmouth and should foot the bill for improvements that line the coffers of every of locality in VA via funding granted from the general fund.