http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-12-05/tappan-zee-bridge-panel-said-to-back-3-dot-14-billion-fluor-bid
I did a little bit of research, but couldn't find any definitive plans from the Fluor company, as to the actual details of the bridge, i.e. number of lanes, etc.
(edit) It looks like all the proposals had 8 lanes, plus a dedicated bus lane in each direction, but the idea of mass transit like a rail line being added seems to still be a mystery.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323501404578161783240925880.html
Once agin, like in Louisville, the TZ project scope was scaled back under the burder of an 8Bil cost estimate to a revised design of 5.5Bil, whose bids came in at 3.3Bil, too late to scale the project back up.
TOLLROADSnews: Fluor's 'Honda logo' design recommended for Thruway's new Tappan Zee Bridge at Tarrytown NY+ design crit (http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/6311)
QuoteAn advisory panel of notables has recommended that the New York State Thruway go with Fluor over Bechtel and Kiewit in design-build bids for the new Tappan Zee Bridge (TZB), or New NY Bridge as it is now being styled. The Fluor price was by far the best at $3,142m, $848m less than Bechtel ($3,990m) and $917m less than Kiewit ($4,059m.) HNTB reportedly pulled out and did not make a formal proposal, although a picture of their design was released.
QuoteFluor's price is so much better than the next two proposers it seems almost certain to be chosen when the New York State Thruway Authority board of directors meets December 17 for the formal decision. Fluor leads a project group named Tappan Zee Constructors comprising also American Bridge, Granite, and Traylor.
QuoteThis is one of those megaprojects that has been around for decades - well justified by the traffic, by safety, and by economics - prevented only by rail transit fanatics who have constantly tried to load it up with supporting the costs of an unnecessary and unfinanceable rail line.
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on December 08, 2012, 10:59:17 AM
Once agin, like in Louisville, the TZ project scope was scaled back under the burder of an 8Bil cost estimate to a revised design of 5.5Bil, whose bids came in at 3.3Bil, too late to scale the project back up.
The scaling back was to ditch the idea of including space for a rail line on the structure.
Which really shouldn't be a big deal but of course the transit advocate community is up in arms over it.
A rail line over the Tappan Zee would be nice, don't get me wrong. Would certainly make commuting to the city from Rockland County a hell of a lot more convenient. But the highway is a more pressing matter here and if it takes sacrificing the rail line to get the bridge built, then so be it. Trans-Hudson rail capacity can always be revisited in any number of ways at a later date (and it is worth revisiting).
I had a thought that they could possibly re-purpose the bridge for rail travel, but I have no idea about what a train weighs as opposed to say 50 semi trucks rolling across it at the same time, or if the bridge could even last long enough structurally to make a difference. It's probably a non-starter, but since the new bridge doesn't seem to have any provision for a deck underneath for rail, or a center span at road level, I was just shooting ideas off the wall to solve the issue.
On a lighter note, when I wanted to look at the span in Google Maps, it came up with "reviews" of the bridge itself, which are pretty comical.
"my car went over it no problem! It didn't fall in the water and it's never been dryer."
https://plus.google.com/109793989358298922778/about?gl=US&hl=en-US
Quote from: BamaZeus on December 12, 2012, 12:43:13 PM
"my car went over it no problem! It didn't fall in the water and it's never been dryer."
https://plus.google.com/109793989358298922778/about?gl=US&hl=en-US
Going by the condition reports of this bridge, its certainly a valid review!
Quote from: BamaZeus on December 12, 2012, 12:43:13 PM
I had a thought that they could possibly re-purpose the bridge for rail travel, but I have no idea about what a train weighs as opposed to say 50 semi trucks rolling across it at the same time, or if the bridge could even last long enough structurally to make a difference. It's probably a non-starter, but since the new bridge doesn't seem to have any provision for a deck underneath for rail, or a center span at road level, I was just shooting ideas off the wall to solve the issue.
A diesel locomotive ways about the same as 10 fully-loaded tractor trailers. Trains are both heavier and a more concentrated load than highway traffic and require a much stronger structure to hold them. Repurposing a road bridge to carry trains is pretty much not possible.
This is also why removing rail from the proposal cuts the cost by so much. The load the structure has to be built to carry gets a lot lighter.
What is transit service like on either side of the bridge today? Who would own and operate the line? And are there any plans on either side of the bridge for right-of-way of the line?
My brother asked me a question about the bridge reconstruction plans and I was unable to give him an answer. He was wondering how they plan to proceed if they're building two replacement spans as shown in the renderings. Seems there could be two options: (1) Build the first new bridge either to the north or the south of the current one, then move all the traffic onto it, knock down the current bridge, and then build the second new span (a similar process to what was done with the Woodrow Wilson Bridge here); or (2) Build both new bridges at the same time either to the north or the south of the existing bridge, move the traffic over, and knock down the old one afterwards.
Difficulty with option (1) is that it reduces traffic capacity during the years when the first new span is shared. Difficulty with option (2) might be the topography on either side of the Tappan Zee being potentially restrictive in terms of options for tying two new bridges into the roadway while the existing bridge still stands (I'm thinking in part of the pictures I've seen of the sharp curve on the Bay Bridge in Oakland).
Anyone know? I assume nothing firm's been decided nor publicized if the design itself isn't finalized, but I figured maybe someone here might have a better reply I could give my brother.
Quote from: BamaZeus on December 12, 2012, 12:43:13 PM
On a lighter note, when I wanted to look at the span in Google Maps, it came up with "reviews" of the bridge itself, which are pretty comical.
"my car went over it no problem! It didn't fall in the water and it's never been dryer."
https://plus.google.com/109793989358298922778/about?gl=US&hl=en-US
One of the reviews is from someone named Steve A, and when I hovered over his name, I saw that he was a traffic engineer. I wonder who that could be...
P.S.: The misspelling of "Tappan" in the thread title is starting to drive me nuts!
Sorry, I am starting to have problems with the "a" key sticking on my computer.