The current Tappan Zee Bridge in New York is 45 years old and talk of a replacement is going around.


2 designs remain for new Tappan Zee Bridge

http://www.lohud.com/assets/mov/BH1655021015.PNG

NEW CITY — There still isn't any money to replace the aging Tappan Zee Bridge but there are now two final designs for what the new bridge might look like.

One is a single-level span that would have room for trains to run in the middle, with bus lanes on either side of the tracks, and car and trucks traveling in the outer lanes (Plan 3, above).

The second design is a dual-level bridge (Plan 5, above). Trains would run underneath the north span. Vehicle traffic would be on the top level, with two dedicated bus lanes in the center. Because it would have fewer support structures than the single-level span, 66 compared with 118, it would take less time to construct.

Michael Anderson, leader of the Tappan Zee Bridge/Interstate 287 Corridor Project, unveiled the recommendations Friday in New City.

He said the two designs were narrowed from six options by the project's consultants — Earth Tech/AECOM, AECOM and Ove Arup, all of Manhattan — because they had the shortest construction times, lowest costs to build and the least environmental impact to the Hudson River. They also offered the greatest transportation flexibility and provided the safest emergency access.

"We haven't made any hard and fast decisions," Anderson said. "We're going to take these recommendations into consideration as we advance the DEIS (draft environmental impact statement)."

A new span to replace the soon-to-be 55-year-old Tappan Zee Bridge is just one part of the $16 billion project. It also would add bus rapid transit from Suffern to Port Chester along 30 miles of Interstate 287 and would call for the construction of a new passenger rail line across Rockland, over the new bridge and into Westchester onto Metro-North Railroad's Hudson Line, ending at Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan.

A new bridge with highway improvements in Rockland would cost $8.3 billion (the bridge alone is $6.4 billion); bus rapid transit would run $1 billion; and the rail line would cost $6.7 billion in 2012 dollars.

The two final bridge recommendations, as well as the transit and highway improvements that were unveiled Friday, will be analyzed in the environmental review, which is due to be finalized early next year.

The state Department of Transportation is the lead agency and is supported by the state Thruway Authority and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Metro-North Railroad.

During the 3 1/2-hour meeting, project officials also said they were continuing to work on financing for the project but had secured no firm commitments.

Each of the bridge designs shares traits: four lanes in each direction; two dedicated bus lanes; safety shoulders; two railroad tracks (or the space to add them later); and a shared-use pedestrian and bicycle path on the north side of the span.

Anderson said in the case of the single-level span, where the train would run in its center, the tracks could be built at a later date in segmented sections at night, much like the ongoing deck replacement on the Tappan Zee Bridge.

The new bridge would be built about 400 feet north of the old one, and connect to the Thruway in the same places it does now.

The new bridge also would rise gradually to the midspan, unlike the current bridge, which features a steep grade to its highest point. That slope leads to many problems, Anderson said.

"We have determined that heavy trucks coming up this 3 percent grade ... results in a reduction of speed by about 15 mph," he said. "That is not good for traffic flow and probably contributes to a number of accidents."

It's also necessary to have a relatively flat grade in order for the trains to travel on the bridge.

Anderson spoke before more than 60 residents, politicians and transportation officials in New City at a meeting organized by Rockland County Legislature Chairwoman Harriet Cornell.

She has held similar summits on the project for the past six years.

Philip Ferguson, the head of the project's finance team, reported that it was focusing on the first phase of the project, namely securing $8.3 billion for the new bridge and highway improvements. It was looking at both "traditional and innovative" financing options, and said that it would require multiple funding sources.

Martin Robins, a transportation consultant who is working with the Rockland Legislature, said the cancellation of the New York-New Jersey rail tunnel project due to cost overruns proves how "brittle" the financing of public works projects are today.

"It just underscores the difficulty New York state DOT is having in 2010" in putting together a financing package, Robins said.


Link: http://www.lohud.com/article/201010160342

The current bridge, which carries I-87 and I-287 and connects Westchester and Rockland Counties of New York.

http://home.fuse.net/ard/jandress/TappanZeeBridgeFromBelow.jpg
http://home.fuse.net/ard/jandress/TappanZeeBridgeFromBelow.jpg


http://mlibby.net/boston2004/pictures/tappan_zee.jpg
http://mlibby.net/boston2004/pictures/tappan_zee.jpg

The bridge doesn't really look to be in too bad of shape, what's wrong with it exactly?

It deals with more traffic than it was designed for, might have been made with inferior material, and has a lifetime of 50 years.

Yes, it was built during the Korean War, and the materials of that time was of inferior quality.

$ 1 billion for just a number of bus lanes is an awful lot of money, I don't think you can ever justify that, especially considering there will also be a rail facility across the bridge.

Its not Earthqauke proof , its over Capacity. Its not safe , no shoulders. There are always accidents on that bridge. Bus Rapid Transit isn't really needed , Rail is very needed. Idk , why it would cost 1 billion to construct bus lanes smells like typical New York corruption.:ohno:

if u take a good look on the second pic, there's a lot of rust on the construction,..seems to me a bit tacky and seems to me bad maintained

They should just go for Plan 3. The current bridge is a cantilever bridge, it is unknown what the new bridge's type is.

They should just go for Plan 3. The current bridge is a cantilever bridge, it is unknown what the new bridge's type is.

why? type 5 has RR in it and I am for building mass transit as much as possible. ARC tunnel is canceled and I hope that his one at least have some compensation for it.

I like plan 5... easier to me it seems...
although plan 3 is cleaner...

I prefer Plan-3 just because it looks more "spacious " :)

The bridge doesn't really look to be in too bad of shape, what's wrong with it exactly?

The pilings that support the bridge are made of wood. They are being eaten by ship-worms. There weren't any ship-worms for a long time due to pollution but now that the Hudson is cleaner they along with other types of sea life have returned.

Wow thats crazy who's bright idea was it to use wood pilings on such a bridge..

Wow thats crazy who's bright idea was it to use wood pilings on such a bridge..

there alot of Bridges with Wood pilings around here and even wooden Railway bridges..

I like Plan 3 but both are great.

there alot of Bridges with Wood pilings around here and even wooden Railway bridges..
I know its an old method but by that time I would think they had better methods to use. They should make that bus lane an express toll/HOV lane at least get some money back from it, what a waste.

Wood piles will be conserved as long as they remain under water. I believe a lot of piling in Amsterdam and Venezia is wood.

Wood piles will be conserved as long as they remain under water. I believe a lot of piling in Amsterdam and Venezia is wood.

It used to be that the river was polluted enough that it killed off the wood borers that would eat through wooden pilings. Now that the river is cleaner, the wood borers are coming back. This has been a problem for some of the old piers around Manhattan.

I can't decide. Both are equally good, though Plan 5 would allow for easy subway expansion on the other portion of the bridge. :)

Yes, it was built during the Korean War, and the materials of that time was of inferior quality.

$ 1 billion for just a number of bus lanes is an awful lot of money, I don't think you can ever justify that, especially considering there will also be a rail facility across the bridge.

Things in America are just expensive due to labor and high material prices (low and antiquated production) I prefer 3.

NY Times (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/tappan-zee-bridge-project-gets-fast-tracked/)


October 11, 2011, 1:36 pm
Tappan Zee Bridge Project Gets Fast-Tracked

By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY

http://www.opacengineers.com/projectpix/TappanZee-2.jpg

The Tappan Zee Bridge, which has been long overdue for a costly overhaul, was one of 14 projects chosen on Tuesday by the Obama administration for expedited federal review and approval — possibly allowing work on a replacement bridge to begin as early as next year.

For two decades, local politicians have been trying to get the aging bridge repaired or replaced, and numerous options have been floated for a project that would cost billions of dollars.

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo called the fast-tracking “a shot in the arm for the project and a major step forward to restoring this key piece of infrastructure and putting tens of thousands of New Yorkers back to work.”

President Obama had created a national competition to win expedited federal approvals for high-priority, job-creating projects. New York submitted the Tappan Zee Bridge project, following its bid with personal lobbying efforts by Governor Cuomo, who called William M. Daley, the White House chief of staff, and Howard Glaser, New York State’s direction of operations, who went to Washington to make the case.

---

I don't understand why a bridge like this would cost "billions of dollars". It's less than 5 kilometers to span the Tappan Zee. The Øresund Bridge between Denmark and Sweden has cost € 4 billion and that includes a tunnel and a double-deck road + rail bridge with a total length of 18 kilometers.

As I read on Wikipedia about the Tappan Zee Bridge:

The bridge would cost $6.4 billion, while adding bus lanes from Suffern to Port Chester would cost $2.9 billion. Adding a rail line from the Suffern Metro-North station and across the bridge, connecting with Metro-North’s Hudson Line south of Tarrytown, would cost another $6.7 billion.

NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/nyregion/us-to-expedite-tappan-zee-bridge-project.html?ref=nyregion)


U.S. Says It Will Expedite Approval to Replace Deteriorating Tappan Zee Bridge
By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY

Published: October 11, 2011

http://gothamist.com/attachments/NYC_Billy/2008_09_tz.jpg

The Tappan Zee Bridge, long overdue for an overhaul, was one of 14 projects chosen on Tuesday by the Obama administration for expedited federal review and approval — possibly allowing work on a new bridge to begin as early as the spring of 2013.

For two decades, local politicians have been trying to get the aging bridge repaired or replaced, and a number of options have been suggested. Transportation experts originally said the project could cost $9 billion to $16 billion, depending on whether the state included a bus and rail line.

The bridge, which was built in the 1950s, has cost the state $100 million a year in repairs and $83 million in studies about how to replace or fix it, said the Westchester County executive, Robert P. Astorino. When he took a boat tour beneath the bridge with other elected officials in July, Mr. Astorino said, the paint was peeling, there was rust on its joints and spans, and netting covered up much of its underbelly.

Mr. Astorino feared that if the bridge were not repaired or replaced, it could one day simply be shut down — forcing drivers, who make about 170,000 crossings each day, to find alternatives.

“This is a major economic artery for the entire region,” he said.

Citing the bridge’s deteriorating condition, the federal Department of Transportation decided it would let the state go forward with the project as long as it streamlined its earlier plan to make a new bridge a centerpiece of a $21 billion, 30-mile transportation corridor. The federal agency said it would help speed up the process for the state to build a $5.2 billion eight-lane bridge, to which mass transit could be added in the future.

[...]


The transit-inclusive designs were estimated to cost as much as $16 billion. By deferring transit, the bridge can be quickly replaced for around $5 billion. So it's good the Tappan Zee is getting fast-tracked but bad for anyone who doesn't drive.

I don't understand why a bridge like this would cost "billions of dollars". It's less than 5 kilometers to span the Tappan Zee. The Øresund Bridge between Denmark and Sweden has cost € 4 billion and that includes a tunnel and a double-deck road + rail bridge with a total length of 18 kilometers.

It's incredibly expensive to build anything in NYS. And people wonder why the US doesn't have endless new infrastructure...

The views of NYC from the new Tappan Zee Bridge will be spectacular! :)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5125/5245037220_c942f6676d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/39914158@N05/5245037220/)
NYC Skyline (http://www.flickr.com/photos/39914158@N05/5245037220/) by r0xyyyy (http://www.flickr.com/people/39914158@N05/), on Flickr

$ 5 billion for one additional lane is a lot of money. Why not make a 12-lane bridge with one HOV lane each way? That way you don't need additional bus lanes, because traffic can flow. As a taxpayer I wouldn't accept an expenditure of $ 5+ billion that doesn't solve an inch of traffic congestion.

A high price tag with the simple explanation "building anything in New York State is just expensive" won't do for me. You don't need billions in expropriation costs here. It's just the new bridge structure and some space around both bridge heads. The Tappan Zee is probably not extremely deep either, otherwise the current bridge would've been a Verrazano Narrows Bridge-like structure (suspension bridge).

Was gonna say something but I'll hold my tongue... Please just stop comparing everything to Europe

The bridge was originally built where it is so that it wouldn't fall under the Port Authority of New York/New Jersey's jurisdiction. The Authority has control over structures within a 25-mile radius of the Statue of Liberty. The Tappan Zee Bridge is just 3 feet outside of that.

$ 5 billion for one additional lane is a lot of money. Why not make a 12-lane bridge with one HOV lane each way? That way you don't need additional bus lanes, because traffic can flow. As a taxpayer I wouldn't accept an expenditure of $ 5+ billion that doesn't solve an inch of traffic congestion.

A high price tag with the simple explanation "building anything in New York State is just expensive" won't do for me. You don't need billions in expropriation costs here. It's just the new bridge structure and some space around both bridge heads. The Tappan Zee is probably not extremely deep either, otherwise the current bridge would've been a Verrazano Narrows Bridge-like structure (suspension bridge).

We don't need the HOV lane , but the Rail line is needed. But the cost of the whole project is fishy and once again proves how corrupt New York state is.

NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/nyregion/us-to-expedite-tappan-zee-bridge-project.html?ref=nyregion)



The transit-inclusive designs were estimated to cost as much as $16 billion. By deferring transit, the bridge can be quickly replaced for around $5 billion. So it's good the Tappan Zee is getting fast-tracked but bad for anyone who doesn't drive.

Thats ridiculous , build the Rail line now ....this region has been promised it for decades....add in the busway too. Most people in this region are tired of the half built projects and aren't going to stand for this.

Here's a video of the Tappan Zee Bridge from a driver's point of view.

tApGRD_3xg4

Was gonna say something but I'll hold my tongue... Please just stop comparing everything to Europe

I think he's comparing it to the Netherlands specifically: a country with a dense infrastructure, planning problems and an economy not all too dissimilar from this region. So I don't believe a comparison is all that unfair.

NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/nyregion/us-to-expedite-tappan-zee-bridge-project.html?ref=nyregion)



The transit-inclusive designs were estimated to cost as much as $16 billion. By deferring transit, the bridge can be quickly replaced for around $5 billion. So it's good the Tappan Zee is getting fast-tracked but bad for anyone who doesn't drive.

we both know that this "in the future" will never come unless they do it right away. today. NYC region needs more mass transit, not just new automobile roads. It is not a solution to build 20 lanes highways and feed them into NYC - that will never work. Besides even if you want to build these huge monster highways, given the geography of the city it is simply impossible to squeeze them in. City is way too crowded to have space for such a road.

So as of today this city, and I can testify to that, is choking with traffic 24/7. Highways system is pretty old there, lanes are narrow (smaller than any other highway outside the city) and entrances to highways are so dangerous that any outsider will be simply frightened to take them. I saw it plenty of times.

So the long term solution is more and more mass transportation into the city from across the Hudson. First they canceled the ARC tunnel, now they want to be even more cheapskates and get rid of transit? :nuts: I think that is too much. I know it is expensive but I'd rather see high tolls on this bridge, but see it done right rather than see it without transit.

It looks like things are moving rapidly for this project. They are planning and accepting bids from four major design/build contractors this summer! Here's an article published today: bridge on rapid pace (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-22/cuomo-says-tappan-zee-plan-is-on-phenomenally-rapid-pace.html)

Plan 5 definitely. And yes $ 1 billion is cheap considering the scale of this project. I'm looking at $3 b by the time they finish.

possible designs

http://www.news12.com/articleDetail.jsp?articleId=308614&position=1&news_type=news

(screen capped so it's blurry, sorry)

http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg857/scaled.php?server=857&filename=newtz2.png&res=medium

http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg7/scaled.php?server=7&filename=newtz1.png&res=medium

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/5214/newtz3.png


I think the whole greenway thing is a good idea. It's a beautiful location, the widest section of the river with a bridge.

I see cars, trains and pedestrians. Two questions.

1. Where's the landing strip for planes?
2. This building needs to accommodate passing ships.

(strictly comical)

It's a nice design, I like plan 5 better because rails should be underground. They're easier to maintain, and require less maintenance.