Tappan Zee Bridge Replacement

[SECTMB 612]

Aside from jumpers or person making a statement the most recent press about the bridge concerns its replacement.

Does it bother anyone else that the bridge is described as falling apart at age 50 while so many other bridges, such as the GW, Brooklyn, Golden Gate, etc, etc. which are much older, are not considered falling apart and not requiring the expense of billions of dollars to replace them.

I hope that this time, they design a proper structure for well into the future. 30 years ago, one of the partners at Robert Martin, which had the big office park in Elmsford thought it would be a good idea to have an elevated monorail from Rockland to Westchester with branches to all the 'Golden Mile' office parks, a la Disney World.

The train to the plane at JFK takes you from the outlying parking areas to each terminal, the monorail in Vegas takes you to many locations. Why not from parking areas in Rockland to the greater White Plains office parks and the White Plains train station. I think connecting to the Tarrytown train station with be impossible.

Whatever they do, I just hope they plan for the next 50 or more years. Anyway, its just money. If you're going to spend 10 Billion, why not spend 15 Billion?

Edited February 28, 2012 by SECTMB

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Aside from jumpers or person making a statement the most recent press about the bridge concerns its replacement.

Does it bother anyone else that the bridge is described as falling apart at age 50 while so many other bridges, such as the GW, Brooklyn, Golden Gate, etc, etc. which are much older, are not considered falling apart and not requiring the expense of billions of dollars to replace them.

I hope that this time, they design a proper structure for well into the future. 30 years ago, one of the partners at Robert Martin, which had the big office park in Elmsford thought it would be a good idea to have an elevated monorail from Rockland to Westchester with branches to all the 'Golden Mile' office parks, a la Disney World.

The train to the plane at JFK takes you from the outlying parking areas to each terminal, the monorail in Vegas takes you to many locations. Why not from parking areas in Rockland to the greater White Plains office parks and the White Plains train station. I think connecting to the Tarrytown train station with be impossible.

Whatever they do, I just hope they plan for the next 50 or more years. Anyway, its just money. If you're going to spend 10 Billion, why not spend 15 Billion?

They keep saying in press releases they want to ensure its a 100 year bridge this time. I just hope 1 they build it higher so taller ships can come through and that it something nice looking like the bridges you see down south with the single support tower in the middle. That and mass transit that ties into the hudson line.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

That and mass transit that ties into the hudson line.

I am opposed to any and all plans that do not include a mass transit feature. Whether it be specialty lanes for buses or lines for rail it really does not matter. However to not include mass transit features is to not plan for the future. What will this region look like in 50 years? If the next 50 years are going to look anything like the last 50 years, this region is going to look like LA with snow before I reach the age to retire. Therefore, it would be common sense to extend mass transit over the bridge into Rockland. Hell, if they could link up with NJ transit, we could have the start of a logical and connected mass transit system allowing anyone from New Haven to Trenton the ability to enter the NYC and Metro Area via mass transit without having to take 3 separate lines. If one could go from NJ to NY and then NY to CT without having to enter NYC, imagine the relief that would provide stations such as Penn or GCT.

[Danger 160]

I am opposed to any and all plans that do not include a mass transit feature. Whether it be specialty lanes for buses or lines for rail it really does not matter. However to not include mass transit features is to not plan for the future. What will this region look like in 50 years? If the next 50 years are going to look anything like the last 50 years, this region is going to look like LA with snow before I reach the age to retire. Therefore, it would be common sense to extend mass transit over the bridge into Rockland. Hell, if they could link up with NJ transit, we could have the start of a logical and connected mass transit system allowing anyone from New Haven to Trenton the ability to enter the NYC and Metro Area via mass transit without having to take 3 separate lines. If one could go from NJ to NY and then NY to CT without having to enter NYC, imagine the relief that would provide stations such as Penn or GCT.

I said the same thing from day 1. Between existing right of way and (possibly) following and paralleling 87, there's no reason the Pascack and even Port Jervis lines couldn't cross the Tappan Zee and meet the Hudson line in Tarrytown. Upstate NYers could get to Giants Stadium, Newark, etc....Or to Long Island through Penn...Or to New Haven through 125th Street. Instead it stays fragmented like everything else in the region.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I said the same thing from day 1. Between existing right of way and (possibly) following and paralleling 87, there's no reason the Pascack and even Port Jervis lines couldn't cross the Tappan Zee and meet the Hudson line in Tarrytown. Upstate NYers could get to Giants Stadium, Newark, etc....Or to Long Island through Penn...Or to New Haven through 125th Street. Instead it stays fragmented like everything else in the region.

Sounds like consolidation to me.

I would agree, but that would mean that different agencies should work together and a few people have said I have an agenda, and this common sense approach would be part of that agenda.

[M' Ave 1,466]

I too oppose any plan that doesn't include mass transit. I'm going to take that one step further and say that any plan that doesn't join Rockland to the Hudson Line of Metro-North is short sighted. As I understand it, the plan that is expected to proceed will no include a rail-line, but will allow it to be easily added at a later time when more money is available. While I think that probably means A VERY LONG TIME, at least it is forward thinking.

In this region of ever increasing congestion, roads can only get so much bigger or better. I truly believe that mass transit is the answer. Look, I live in Manhattan and I love the subway. I love my car too, but good mass transit beats a crowded congested road any time.

[Bnechis 3,961]

As I understand it, the plan that is expected to proceed will no include a rail-line, but will allow it to be easily added at a later time when more money is available. While I think that probably means A VERY LONG TIME, at least it is forward thinking.

When 1st designed the George Washington Bridge was to get a rail line added, that goes back 89 years, and I do not think its coming anytime soon. If not included, they will always put it off as too costly.

[Stench60 29]

Barry is absolutely right about the GWB, the bridge was designed for rail service as well as car/truck traffic. In the long run the structure for the rail component was used to build the lower roadway. Unfortunately, whether it be a new TZB with mass transit, the demise of a great deal of our local mass transit system ( The Put. Division, the NY, W & B., local trolley lines etc.) or the proposal to place a second level on I-95; we, collectively, have always managed to be very shortsighted in the areas of mass transit and urban planning. This is what happens when we fail to heed the lessons of Jane Jacobs and allow the apostles of Robert Moses to blindly follow his vision which leads us down the garden path of greater congestion and greater urban sprawl.

[mfc2257 464]

When 1st designed the George Washington Bridge was to get a rail line added, that goes back 89 years, and I do not think its coming anytime soon. If not included, they will always put it off as too costly.

You are right it never happened, but the lower deck expansion did. Although I hold no expectations that mass trans / rail expansion would actually happen on the TZB, the GWB is a good example of building for the future.

Edited February 29, 2012 by mfc2257

[M' Ave 1,466]

Barry is absolutely right about the GWB, the bridge was designed for rail service as well as car/truck traffic. In the long run the structure for the rail component was used to build the lower roadway. Unfortunately, whether it be a new TZB with mass transit, the demise of a great deal of our local mass transit system ( The Put. Division, the NY, W & B., local trolley lines etc.) or the proposal to place a second level on I-95; we, collectively, have always managed to be very shortsighted in the areas of mass transit and urban planning. This is what happens when we fail to heed the lessons of Jane Jacobs and allow the apostles of Robert Moses to blindly follow his vision which leads us down the garden path of greater congestion and greater urban sprawl.

Well said, and a mention of the Ol' Putt to boot! As stated, the GWB expansion did happen, but it was more roadways and not rail to occupied the available real estate. Things were different at that time, right through the time of Robert Moses. The automobile was rising and arrived at the top of the heap. We have to be realistic....gas is going to be $5 a gallon this summer and it'll never fall too far again. (Don't believe these nit-wit presidential wanna-bees who claim they'll bring back $2 gas). We need to find alternatives to driving our own vehicles in many urban and suburban areas. Money needs to be poured into mass transit and the scope of our projects needs to surpass the needs of today to accommodate for tomorrow.

[ny10570 745]

So, all of these questions and many more about the plan for the Governor Malcolm Wilson Tappan Zee Bridge (Had no clue that was the full name till I slogged through this report) are available in the Environmental Impact Review.

As a major recipient of Federal Highway funds as part of the last stimulus program and because of its recognition on both state and federal levels of being critical to the safety and economic viability of the tri state area, the new bridge has been fast tracked. They're expecting to have the bridge completed by 2017 assuming the current fast track continues. If they opt for the cheaper short span version construction bumps up to 5.5 years. The proposed shipping channel is wider, but the same height as the current bridge at the recommendation of the coast guard. The current bridge was not built for todays vehicle load. They acknowledge the designers were shortsighted concerning regional and technological growth. This Tapp was a 50 year bridge. Because of its critical importance this one is being designed to be a 150 year bridge. It is also being designed with a level of redundancy not present in the current structure. Two parallel spans allow the bridge to remain operational after an allision or in the event a major maintenance. The bridge is also being designed with actual shoulders. 10' on the right and 20' on the left. The 20' left shoulder allows for a dedicated emergency access lane now and potentially for the implementation or a BRT or HOV lane in the future, while still allowing emergency vehicle access. The extra space also would allow up to 7 lanes of travel in the event of a long term shut down of one span. There is also a shared use path on the north span to allow pedestrians and cyclists access across the river.

The addition of a transit option today would cost up to $7 Billion for just the infrastructure. Cars and their operation are not included. The current design leaves a 40' gap and is designed "so as to not preclude addition of a transit option". The current proposal would require abut $700 Million to build the transit option spanning the two structures. The addition of BRT is $4 - 5 Billion in infrastructure costs. When looking at the long term financial plans for all of the potentially involved agencies a transit system is estimated to add an additional $19 Billion in unfunded burden for maintenance and repair over the next 25 years. The bridge in its current form at $4.64 Billion could not be built without help from the Fed. Don't get me wrong, I think it's criminal that the tri state is so dependent on cars and generally support gas taxes and the like that pay for mass transit alternatives. However were do we get the $10 Billion dollars just to build a BRT and Rail system across the river, and the $760 Million a year to fund it?

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

This is a thought...build the one the propose above, or something like it. Then rehab/refirb the existing span and turn it into a mass transit line. They say the bridge cant handle the traffic and the weight, well remove the traffic and frequency of weight. Is there a reason why that wont work?

[SSCharged E100 7]

I saw posts earlier in this thread about why the bridge only lasted 50 years. I study engineering and sciences in college. They have said that the tappen zee was made under strict budgets and was only designed for the 50 years. Engineers design for life spans as well as purpose and strength. If that helps any just throwing that in.

In my opinion build a new bridge fast because if its true the wood piles used on the tappen zee are really disappearing like they are, that bridge will crumble. Sad but true.

[ny10570 745]

This is a thought...build the one the propose above, or something like it. Then rehab/refirb the existing span and turn it into a mass transit line. They say the bridge cant handle the traffic and the weight, well remove the traffic and frequency of weight. Is there a reason why that wont work?

The cost of the span across the river isn't the problem. $700 million for a rail capable addition to the new bridge. It is the cost of building parking lots, stations, and connections to the current rail systems. The old span is in such bad shape a plan to build a single new span and rehab the old bridge as the second span would cost $1.5 to 2 billion more thsn the current new dual span bridge. So even assuming you could make it rail capable for 1/6th the price of vehicle capable you still haven't addressed the cost of tying it into the current network. The cheapest option of no new stations still requires substantial land acquisition and the construction of miles and miles of rail that cannot simply follow the Interstate because of grade and turn issues.

[RescueKujo 130]

Aside from jumpers or person making a statement the most recent press about the bridge concerns its replacement.

Does it bother anyone else that the bridge is described as falling apart at age 50 while so many other bridges, such as the GW, Brooklyn, Golden Gate, etc, etc. which are much older, are not considered falling apart and not requiring the expense of billions of dollars to replace them.

I hope that this time, they design a proper structure for well into the future. 30 years ago, one of the partners at Robert Martin, which had the big office park in Elmsford thought it would be a good idea to have an elevated monorail from Rockland to Westchester with branches to all the 'Golden Mile' office parks, a la Disney World.

The train to the plane at JFK takes you from the outlying parking areas to each terminal, the monorail in Vegas takes you to many locations. Why not from parking areas in Rockland to the greater White Plains office parks and the White Plains train station. I think connecting to the Tarrytown train station with be impossible.

Whatever they do, I just hope they plan for the next 50 or more years. Anyway, its just money. If you're going to spend 10 Billion, why not spend 15 Billion?

The Golden Gate within the last few years underwent a multimillion dollar earthquake retrofit that has also extended the lifespan of the bridge...

[ny10570 745]

The Golden Gate within the last few years underwent a multimillion dollar earthquake retrofit that has also extended the lifespan of the bridge...

That reminds me, the Brooklyn bridge is currently undergoing another major renovation after being found structurally deficient in several areas.

[peterose313 345]

Executive Directior Thomas Madison of the Thruway Authority repeated the claim last week at a news conference in Tarrytown about soil and rock testing the state is doing in the Hudson River in advance of construction of the new span. Speaking in a room with a view of the Tappan Zee, Madison said the new bridge would be built to last more than a century."

The bridge that we're looking at out the window here was built in 1956. It was designed to last 45 to 50 years, so it's really reaching the conclusion of its useful life today," Madison said. "It's still perfectly safe, and we've been keeping up with the maintenance and repair on the structure, but the next bridge that crosses the Hudson at this location is going to be designed for 100 year(s) plus and will have the latest technologies and facilities."

Thruway revives claim of 50-year Tappan Zee Bridge life span

[Emscornsnake 36]

I believe that in order for this new Tappan Zee Bridge to last a hundred years or longer they need to build it big. they need to have 6 lanes each way, they need a bus lane each way, they need to have a nice walkway on each side for bikes and people, and they def need a commuter rail on it. they have done studies where it suggest that in 30 years traffic is going to increase by 40 percent, so instead of building something not so big to our needs now, they need to build big for the future, and use the proper materials this time. Or else in another 40-50 years, we will be in the same boat having to spend another ten billion.