Tappan Zee Bridge replacement moving at a snail's pace

[SidS1045]

The New York Times had an article today on the progress (or lack thereof) on getting the ailing, ancient Tappan Zee Bridge replaced.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/27/nyregion/tappan-zee-bridge-plan-draws-complaints-and-questions.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion

They're still arguing over whether it will be built to carry trains, or whether that will have to be cut for budgetary reasons.  No wonder nothing gets built in NY anymore.

[nexus73]

Someone channel the spirit of Robert Moses...stat!  This kind of procedure over production setup has gone on for too long.  Remember folks, we built the entire Alcan Highway in less than one year.  Too bad it took a war to get the sense of urgency up so Things Got Done.

Rick

[roadman]

Someone channel the spirit of Robert Moses...stat!  This kind of procedure over production setup has gone on for too long.  Remember folks, we built the entire Alcan Highway in less than one year.  Too bad it took a war to get the sense of urgency up so Things Got Done.

Rick

The problem with the current environmental review process - apart from the fact they consider WAY TOO MANY things that have very little to do with true environmental issues (like the  "but you're able to see the new bright shiny bridge from a house that may potentially be on the National Register some day" type of arguments) - is the whole "the project developer is presumed guilty until proven innocent" mentality when it comes to the environmental study and public review process.

If they changed the process so that anybody raising objections to the design had to prove their objections beyond a reasonable doubt, instead of forcing the DOT and their consultants to waste time, manpower, and money addressing non-issues, that alone would greatly streamline the process.

Putting the burden of proof on the opponent, as opposed to the proponent, would also eliminate much of the NIMBY factor.

Sadly, it is unfortunate that "environment" has become such a buzzword in today's political climate that nobody in government has the fortitude or will to seriously re-evalute the current regulations.  And it's equally sad that nobody in the media has the courage to truly investigate how much time and taxpayer money is being wasted by these rules, procedures, and regulations, most of which do nothing to actually preserve the air, land, and water we use.

In the meanwhile, I just hope NY State doesn't face the "sense of urgency" that Minnesota was faced with a few years back.

[RoadWarrior56]

As a transportation professional who deals with this "crap" every single working day, roadman could not be any more correct.  It can take many years just to upgrade a traffic signal, if you are using federal money for it.

Let the current bridge fall in, then they will get the replacement done quickly.

[NJRoadfan]

The problem with the current environmental review process - apart from the fact they consider WAY TOO MANY things that have very little to do with true environmental issues (like the  "but you're able to see the new bright shiny bridge from a house that may potentially be on the National Register some day" type of arguments) - is the whole "the project developer is presumed guilty until proven innocent" mentality when it comes to the environmental study and public review process.

Look up the term "environmental justice". The EA/EIS process covers not only the impact on the natural environment, but on the human environment too.

[Mr. Matté]

Speaking of NIMBYs, I heard a few times on the news a while ago about the residents of Tarrytown and Nyack were complaining about the test piles the engineers were pounding into the river (specifically the rhythmic ping every time the hammer hit the pile) and I always question if they'd be complaining about the noises made when/if the present Tappan Zee collapses into the river.

[Alps]

Speaking of NIMBYs, I heard a few times on the news a while ago about the residents of Tarrytown and Nyack were complaining about the test piles the engineers were pounding into the river (specifically the rhythmic ping every time the hammer hit the pile) and I always question if they'd be complaining about the noises made when/if the present Tappan Zee collapses into the river.

At that point, they'll complain that New York didn't build the new bridge in time.

[roadman]

The problem with the current environmental review process - apart from the fact they consider WAY TOO MANY things that have very little to do with true environmental issues (like the  "but you're able to see the new bright shiny bridge from a house that may potentially be on the National Register some day" type of arguments) - is the whole "the project developer is presumed guilty until proven innocent" mentality when it comes to the environmental study and public review process.

Look up the term "environmental justice". The EA/EIS process covers not only the impact on the natural environment, but on the human environment too.

With respect, the concept of "environmental justice" is a big part of the current problem.  So abutters have to look at a shiny new bridge.  Guess what, they'll get used to it quickly.

And, IMO, studying such subjective issues do not justify wasting the DOT's time and the taxpayer's money delaying necessary infrastructure projects.

[ARMOURERERIC]

Speaking of NIMBYs, I heard a few times on the news a while ago about the residents of Tarrytown and Nyack were complaining about the test piles the engineers were pounding into the river (specifically the rhythmic ping every time the hammer hit the pile) and I always question if they'd be complaining about the noises made when/if the present Tappan Zee collapses into the river.

At that point, they'll complain that New York didn't build the new bridge in time.

Most NIMBY's will indeed do as you say, but in private will high 5 themselves and get a free lawyer to make sure a replacment is newer built.  Then get on thier private ferry boat to Wall Street

[SidS1045]

I just hope NY State doesn't face the "sense of urgency" that Minnesota was faced with a few years back.

My understanding is that they've already come close several times.  The metal structures underlying the pavement were failing at an alarming rate for quite some time, causing "punch-outs" of the pavement, where a hole will suddenly appear where a chunk of the metal fell into the Hudson and the asphalt couldn't hold itself up with nothing under it.  I think they've now brought this under control, but for a while people were very nervous about crossing that bridge.

Considering that the next bridge north of the TZ is the Bear Mountain, which is on local roads and could not possible handle Thruway traffic, and the next one south is the George Washington, you would think there would be some sort of urgency on getting the TZ replaced quickly.  But....nooooooooooooooooooooo...  Heck, even California, one of the worst when it comes to environmental reviews of major infrastructure projects, gets their act together in emergencies (like after earthquakes) and rebuilds roads in a hurry when they need to.

[vdeane]

My understanding is that if you rebuild something the way it was before, no environmental review is necessary.  At least that's how NY got the Lake Champlain bridge rebuilt.

However, the Tappan Zee is also going to be widened and expanded significantly to handle current traffic levels.

[cpzilliacus]

My understanding is that if you rebuild something the way it was before, no environmental review is necessary.  At least that's how NY got the Lake Champlain bridge rebuilt.

However, the Tappan Zee is also going to be widened and expanded significantly to handle current traffic levels.

When Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia agreed that the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (I-95 between Oxon Hill, Maryland and Alexandria, Virginia) needed to be replaced and widened, a long and detailed environmental impact statement process had to be followed, even though the proposed new (and wider) bridge was replacing an old and inadequate crossing.   

Once the environmental impact statement was complete, the Sierra Club filed suit in federal court for the District of Columbia to remand the document for more work, and Sierra won at the district court (trial court) level, but they trial court's remand was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.  All of this litigation took several years to complete.

Edit:  Added what Md., Va. and D.C. agreed about.

[roadman]

My understanding is that if you rebuild something the way it was before, no environmental review is necessary.  At least that's how NY got the Lake Champlain bridge rebuilt.

However, the Tappan Zee is also going to be widened and expanded significantly to handle current traffic levels.

When Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia agreed that the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (I-95 between Oxon Hill, Maryland and Alexandria, Virginia), a long and detailed environmental impact statement process had to be followed, even though the proposed new (and wider) bridge was replacing an old and inadequate crossing.   

Once the environmental impact statement was complete, the Sierra Club filed suit in federal court for the District of Columbia to remand the document for more work, and Sierra won at the district court (trial court) level, but they trial court's remand was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.  All of this litigation took several years to complete.

So, how long has the new bridge been in now?  And the world hasn't gone boom yet.  At least the appeals process resulted in a victory for the good guys.

[on_wisconsin]

Have the infamous NYC area unions decided how much of a cut there going to take yet? 

[vdeane]

My understanding is that if you rebuild something the way it was before, no environmental review is necessary.  At least that's how NY got the Lake Champlain bridge rebuilt.

However, the Tappan Zee is also going to be widened and expanded significantly to handle current traffic levels.

When Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia agreed that the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (I-95 between Oxon Hill, Maryland and Alexandria, Virginia), a long and detailed environmental impact statement process had to be followed, even though the proposed new (and wider) bridge was replacing an old and inadequate crossing.   

Once the environmental impact statement was complete, the Sierra Club filed suit in federal court for the District of Columbia to remand the document for more work, and Sierra won at the district court (trial court) level, but they trial court's remand was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.  All of this litigation took several years to complete.

I wasn't talking about replacing something with a more modern or wider structure... I was talking about replacing something with a structure that's nearly identical to the old one.  When NYSDOT and VTDOT replaced the Lake Champlain Bridge, they were able to get it fast tracked because the new bridge was nearly identical to the old one.  In fact, they specifically avoided doing any improvements to the area to avoid doing an EIS.

[swbrotha100]

I read this thread and think of the irony of new commercials on some cable channels promoting New York State. In the ad, New York is a "great place to do business". Reality, not so much. It's a miracle any road related project gets done.

[Alps]

My understanding is that if you rebuild something the way it was before, no environmental review is necessary.  At least that's how NY got the Lake Champlain bridge rebuilt.

However, the Tappan Zee is also going to be widened and expanded significantly to handle current traffic levels.

When Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia agreed that the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (I-95 between Oxon Hill, Maryland and Alexandria, Virginia), a long and detailed environmental impact statement process had to be followed, even though the proposed new (and wider) bridge was replacing an old and inadequate crossing.   

Once the environmental impact statement was complete, the Sierra Club filed suit in federal court for the District of Columbia to remand the document for more work, and Sierra won at the district court (trial court) level, but they trial court's remand was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.  All of this litigation took several years to complete.

I wasn't talking about replacing something with a more modern or wider structure... I was talking about replacing something with a structure that's nearly identical to the old one.  When NYSDOT and VTDOT replaced the Lake Champlain Bridge, they were able to get it fast tracked because the new bridge was nearly identical to the old one.  In fact, they specifically avoided doing any improvements to the area to avoid doing an EIS.

And it's not that the bridge design is identical, far from it. I know they reused the same approaches, I wonder if they reused the pier locations as well.

[vdeane]

Probably.  What the bridge aesthetics are probably doesn't factor into the need to do an EIS as long as they aren't too different.  The main thing is that the bridge fits in the foot print of the old one.

[cpzilliacus]

My understanding is that if you rebuild something the way it was before, no environmental review is necessary.  At least that's how NY got the Lake Champlain bridge rebuilt.

However, the Tappan Zee is also going to be widened and expanded significantly to handle current traffic levels.

When Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia agreed that the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (I-95 between Oxon Hill, Maryland and Alexandria, Virginia), a long and detailed environmental impact statement process had to be followed, even though the proposed new (and wider) bridge was replacing an old and inadequate crossing.   

Once the environmental impact statement was complete, the Sierra Club filed suit in federal court for the District of Columbia to remand the document for more work, and Sierra won at the district court (trial court) level, but they trial court's remand was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.  All of this litigation took several years to complete.

So, how long has the new bridge been in now?  And the world hasn't gone boom yet.  At least the appeals process resulted in a victory for the good guys.

The replacement Woodrow Wilson Bridges have been open for several years now (the old six-lane span was torn down [good riddance]), though the very last part of the project, a reconstruction of the interchange at Va. 241 (Telegraph Road, I-95 Exit 176, is just now nearing completion, and the freeway has been narrowed to three lanes each way (and less than three lanes during non-commute times [causing miles-long queues of vehicles]).

You are absolutely correct - the good guys did win this one, much to the rage of the Sierra Club and the Washington, D.C.-area Smart Growth industry.

[mc78andrew]

Tolls going to $14 bucks a day.  That's a little more than $3000 a year.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-03/tappan-zee-bridge-tolls-seen-almost-tripling-when-new-span-opens

[vdeane]

I wonder how much research was done for this:

Cuomo has previously said the tolls would be in line with other Hudson River crossings. When the new Tappan Zee opens, which is expected in 2017, tolls on the George Washington Bridge will be at least $14, Schwartz said.

Meanwhile, the crossings to the north will only be $1.

[Roadgeek Adam]

I wonder how much research was done for this:

Cuomo has previously said the tolls would be in line with other Hudson River crossings. When the new Tappan Zee opens, which is expected in 2017, tolls on the George Washington Bridge will be at least $14, Schwartz said.

Meanwhile, the crossings to the north will only be $1.

Well, my father and I when going to Rhode Island used to bypass the GWB by using the Tappan Zee. Now I guess we'll have to use the Bear Mountain. However, we rarely go to Rhode Island anymore, so that's not really an issue either.

I have to believe this may get the Bear Mountain more use, we'll see though.

[Alps]

I wonder how much research was done for this:

Cuomo has previously said the tolls would be in line with other Hudson River crossings. When the new Tappan Zee opens, which is expected in 2017, tolls on the George Washington Bridge will be at least $14, Schwartz said.

Meanwhile, the crossings to the north will only be $1.

$1.50, actually. I do see a lot more traffic heading up to Bear Mountain Bridge, but "a lot more" in the context that there is never a traffic jam there now that I've seen. Problem is, there could easily be one with another few hundred vehicles during peak times. I would certainly plan to use it to head east, via US 6 or 202/I-684 to I-84.

[vdeane]

I would watch Newburgh-Beacon to be honest.  It provides a great bypass for upstate traffic via I-684.

[Alps]

Here's some of the discussion over on Facebook (which is the most I've ever seen for a single post in a road group there):

If the Thruway Authority decides to go cashless, as some of its peer toll road agencies are headed, should it return to 2-way tolls at the T-Z? If the PANYNJ and the NYSBA do as well? No reason to stay with one-way if there is no cash collection.

-> My guess is that the toll would become two-way, but after the inevitable cost overruns and unforeseen construction delays, who knows: the toll might be $14 EACH way by the time construction is finished...
-> My guess is that it stays one way, as I haven't heard any rumblings from any of the agencies regarding "unconverting" one-way tolls. That includes MTA, PANYNJ, NYSTA, NJTA.
-> The MTA's one-way toll can't be undone, it's mandated by congress now...
-> I believe the Congressional mandate is limited to the Verrazano Bridge.
-> Two way tolls require double the amount of equipment to collect the tolls electronically. I believe there is still less overhead for the agencies to collect tolls in a single direction.
-> Agreed regarding overhead - but - I assert (but cannot prove) that the amount of revenue to be collected from two-way all-electronic tolling will make up for the additional cost.
-> For the situation such as the westbound WillyB/Holland Tunnel routing to avoid the VZ westbound, the loss TODAY is substantial for the MTA, which is why they were against the one-way tolling from the start. For the TZ and the PANY/NJ crossings, I don't see any real gain going back to two-way, since twice the amount of vehicles would need "enforcement" on a daily basis. With the TZ tolls to essentially match the PANY/NJ, there is no incentive to use one bridge or tunnel over another toll wise crossing the Hudson.

As far as using the Bear Mountain Bridge to avoid the TZ toll increase, I'm sure there will be a LOT MORE eastbound if the TZ goes up to $14, but I believe it will not be gridlocked... the Bear Mountain Bridge has poor high speed access on the Westchester side and it is a single lane span.

-> I have driven across the Bear Mountain Bridge several times (great views), and you are absolutely correct about the operational problems on the Westchester County side of the crossing.
-> Still however, if there's an alternate route to a $14 toll, most motorists would be willing to try it, even if the road conditions aren't ideal. (especially those coming from Harriman/Woodbury and points north and west) motorists already have proven that they can go to extremes to bypass tolls discrepancies that are much less than that. while a large increase in truck traffic at Bear Mtn can be avoided by placing weight restrictions on the Westchester side (there may already be such a restriction in place), it won't necessarily prevent cars and smaller commercial vehicles from driving the extra distance to save what for some, adds up to be about an hour's wage...
-> I've seen 3 mile backups on the Palisades coming down into the circle. I have no doubt in my mind that that will become a routine Friday evening occurrence once the toll hike occurs. The southern approach from US 9W/202 will also become clogged as anyone relatively local tries to come that way. I-84 will consequently also see an uptick in traffic, but at least that road's built to handle it. Also, that's far enough north and difficult enough to get to that I think it's mostly going to see a local diversion with limited volume. My route of choice will probably have to end up being 17-32-9W to get around the Bear Mountain area, unless I'm traveling off hours.