Tappan Zee Bridge replacement moving at a snail's pace

[cpzilliacus]

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):

Thanks for posting here.  In my opinion, it generated so much commentary because this is an infuriating topic to those that know something about it - especially given the age and documented seismic vulnterabilities of the existing T-Z span, something needs to be done, and done sooner rather than later. 

I have a hard time imagining what the cost of a closure of the Thruway at the Hudson River would be to the economies of New York (and probably New Jersey and Connecticut as well).

And it is a crisis that can be avoided, but like so many things going on in Washington, D.C. that involve difficult choices, there seems to be an overwhelming desire to "kick the can down the road" if the parties involved don't get excactly what they want.

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.

I suppose all of the Hudson River crossings would need to convert to two-way (cashless) tolling if the  Thruway Authority did so at the Tappan Zee. 

But since nearly all of the Hudson River crossings are tolled one-way eastbound only now, I suppose it makes sense to stay that way, since diverting to a (non-tolled) eastbound crossing is not really an option.

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.

The difference between a $14 toll to cross the T-Z and a $1 toll to cross the Bear Mountain Bridge is going to "move" a lot of eastbound traffic north, even if the highway network there cannot support a huge increase in traffic.  For trucks, I-84 will become an even more attractive option for crossing the Hudson.  Wonder if the Thruway Authority or NYSDOT have asked one of their consultants to model the traffic impact of a $14 toll eastbound at the T-Z?

[Duke87]

You would think that NYSTA could raise their tolls everywhere rather than just at the bridge to distribute the stress. The mainline tolls are pretty low as is. Compare about $20 from Woodbury to Buffalo with about $50 for about the same distance on the PA Turnpike.

But of course, New York politics dictates that money must be funneled from NYC metro to upstate, never the other way around.

[cpzilliacus]

You would think that NYSTA could raise their tolls everywhere rather than just at the bridge to distribute the stress. The mainline tolls are pretty low as is. Compare about $20 from Woodbury to Buffalo with about $50 for about the same distance on the PA Turnpike.

But of course, New York politics dictates that money must be funneled from NYC metro to upstate, never the other way around.

Good point.  The Tappan Zee Bridge is part of the Thruway system, isn't it?

On a related note, it seems to me that it would be a good idea if the Thruway started to collect tolls from all passing traffic at the Spring Valley barrier (northbound I-87, westbound I-287) not just commercial vehicles.  That would collect a few dollars that could be used to help pay for the new bridge.

If memory serves, wasn't that once the southern limit of the Thruway ticket system?

[NJRoadfan]

Spring Valley used to be a barrier toll for all traffic. Politics switched it to commercial vehicles only in 1997.

[Duke87]

Even further back, though, it was the beginning of the ticket system. Exits 14B and 15A were built after it was changed to a barrier toll.

[cpzilliacus]

Spring Valley used to be a barrier toll for all traffic. Politics switched it to commercial vehicles only in 1997.

I've not been near Buffalo since I was a child (roadgeek), but didn't "politics" scuttle at least one toll barriers on the I-190 part of the Thruway system?

The excuse repeatedly raised by anti-toll "activists" and elected officials that pander to them is that toll barriers (like the one at Spring Valley and on the Garden State Parkway) "cause congestion," which was true before the advent of electronic tolling, but should not any longer.

[cpzilliacus]

Even further back, though, it was the beginning of the ticket system. Exits 14B and 15A were built after it was changed to a barrier toll.

That's what I thought (I think I drove through there at least once when it was the start of the ticket system).

I suppose that Thruway Exit 15 (to N.J. 17, pre-I-287) must have looked different when it was "inside" the ticket system.

[Duke87]

In 2006, NYSTA agreed to stop collecting tolls on I-190 for one year in exchange for a lump sum of cash from Albany. They then agreed to make the removal permanent and, to offset the loss in revenue, maintenance of I-84 was transferred back to NYSDOT. I'm not sure exactly what the politics of this were but that's how it happened.

The barriers on 190 in Buffalo are completely gone now (Grand Island Bridges remain tolled), but Rand McNally thinks they still exist.

[cpzilliacus]

In 2006, NYSTA agreed to stop collecting tolls on I-190 for one year in exchange for a lump sum of cash from Albany. They then agreed to make the removal permanent and, to offset the loss in revenue, maintenance of I-84 was transferred back to NYSDOT. I'm not sure exactly what the politics of this were but that's how it happened.

The barriers on 190 in Buffalo are completely gone now (Grand Island Bridges remain tolled), but Rand McNally thinks they still exist.

In my opinion, it is pretty asinine to have a toll agency maintaining a section of highway that is "free."

And New York is not the only state guilty of this. 

Maryland comes to mind, especially with the part of I-95 that's the JFK Highway between Md. 43 (White Marsh - present-day Exit 67) and Md. 279 (Elkton - present-day Exit 109).  Yes, politics were involved - in the early 1980's, the General Assembly ordered MdTA to stop collecting money at the ramp tolls (always unstaffed exact change coin drop toll gates) along the (formerly tolled) JFK Highway.

I've never driven it, but doesn't West Virginia give away a lot of free trips on its (in theory) tolled Turnpike?

[vdeane]

Spring Valley used to be a barrier toll for all traffic. Politics switched it to commercial vehicles only in 1997.

I've not been near Buffalo since I was a child (roadgeek), but didn't "politics" scuttle at least one toll barriers on the I-190 part of the Thruway system?

The excuse repeatedly raised by anti-toll "activists" and elected officials that pander to them is that toll barriers (like the one at Spring Valley and on the Garden State Parkway) "cause congestion," which was true before the advent of electronic tolling, but should not any longer.

Actually, the excuse for the Buffalo was that it was the only upstate city where motorists had to pay a toll to drive downtown.

[Alps]

Even further back, though, it was the beginning of the ticket system. Exits 14B and 15A were built after it was changed to a barrier toll.

That's what I thought (I think I drove through there at least once when it was the start of the ticket system).

I suppose that Thruway Exit 15 (to N.J. 17, pre-I-287) must have looked different when it was "inside" the ticket system.

Check Historic Aerials. It was a trumpet with some neat features vis-a-vis NY 17.

[mapman1071]

State to demolish T.Z. bridge; construction of new span may begin late this year
7:41 AM, Aug 2, 2012

Written by
Jim Fitzgerald
Associated Press

WHITE PLAINS – The state plans to demolish the current Tappan Zee Bridge and use innovative measures to protect fish and people during the construction of the new bridge that will make road commutes easier, according to a new report.

Construction is expected to begin late this year or early next year and to last about five years. But first, a builder has to be chosen from among three that submitted bids.

Residents will be able to go online to check noise and air quality levels. Fish in the Hudson River will be protected from the acoustic effects of pile driving by underwater "bubble curtains."

The updated environmental impact statement – like a draft released in January – concludes that the bridge will have no major, lasting environmental effects. Dredging will affect some life forms in the riverbed, however, and builders will have to undertake environmental programs elsewhere in the river to compensate, the report said.

The report continues to call for demolition of the existing bridge, disappointing enthusiasts who had been calling for it to become a car-free greenway, like Manhattan's High Line.

The report also reveals no change in the plans for rapid transit, a concern for many who felt train or bus systems should be incorporated. The bridge will be built strong enough to handle commuter trains, but no new transit lines are being built to take advantage of that. Gov. Andrew Cuomo's office has promised that at least during rush hour, there will be lanes dedicated to buses.

Adding even a bus rapid transit system to the bridge – and the 30-mile corridor it anchors – would double the cost of the project, now estimated at $5.4 billion, the administration said. A commuter train line would cost billions more.

For auto commuters, however, the bridge should be a big improvement once it replaces the current Tappan Zee, an aging and overused span built in 1955 that carries Interstate 87, the New York State Thruway. The new span between Tarrytown and Nyack will have more lanes, shoulders to handle breakdowns, and several toll lanes that cars can use at highway speed. Its steep climb over the Hudson will be more gradual, helping trucks maintain their speed.

Currently, accidents and breakdowns cause big delays at rush hour, partly because disabled cars block traffic and emergency vehicles have no lanes available.

The report said the bridge will be safer and air pollution will be reduced because of less congestion.

It said the state no longer plans to take anyone's property. Nine households had been targeted in the draft, but design changes were made.

Monitors measuring noise and particulates will be placed throughout the area and they can be checked in real time online, the report said. It said excessive noise has to be stopped an hour after it's reported.

"We are making every effort to limit negative impacts on residents and the environment,"  Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Wednesday.

The report said pile driving would generally be prohibited between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. A method that uses vibration rather than pounding to get piles in place will be used when possible.

When there is pile driving, underwater devices will pump out curtains of air bubbles – not unlike air stones in a fish tank – to minimize the acoustic effect on animals. Dredging will be limited to August, September and October to avoid peak migration and spawning.

During dredging, a fish expert will be present to make sure any captured shortnose or Atlantic sturgeon – both endangered – are released, the report said.

In October, President Barack Obama declared the bridge eligible for fast-tracked federal approvals. Funding has yet to be detailed, but the state is hoping for federal aid.

Copyright © 2012 www.poughkeepsiejournal.com
http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/viewart/20120802/NEWS01/308020009/T-Z-fall-no-transit-new-span?odyssey=nav|head

[cpzilliacus]

N.Y. Times:  Cuomo Against $14 Tappan Zee Toll

The $14 toll proposed by the administration of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo for a new Tappan Zee Bridge is too high, the governor said on Friday.

It would nearly triple the current $5 toll on the existing bridge. When it was announced by the governor's staff last week, it caused an outcry in the New York City suburbs that rely on the bridge.

"We must find alternatives, revenue generators and cost reductions that reduce the potential toll increases,"  Mr. Cuomo said in a letter Friday to the State Thruway Authority.

[kkt]

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.

Not always.  The Loma Prieta earthquake was in 1989, and the new Bay Bridge east span isn't expected to be open until September 2013.

[cpzilliacus]

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.

Not always.  The Loma Prieta earthquake was in 1989, and the new Bay Bridge east span isn't expected to be open until September 2013.

Had the eastern (cantilever) bridge section of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge entirely collapsed, it would have been replaced much more rapidly (the damage was repaired in about a moth, if memory serves). 

I understand that some of the delays in replacing the eastern bridge were due to arguments about aesthetics and cost.

[kkt]

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.

Not always.  The Loma Prieta earthquake was in 1989, and the new Bay Bridge east span isn't expected to be open until September 2013.

Had the eastern (cantilever) bridge section of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge entirely collapsed, it would have been replaced much more rapidly (the damage was repaired in about a moth, if memory serves). 

I understand that some of the delays in replacing the eastern bridge were due to arguments about aesthetics and cost.

So they were.  But, the original cantilever bridge is still in place and being used and no stronger than when one section of it collapsed in 1989.  The next pretty big earthquake doesn't care if the delays were due to arguments over cost or aesthetics or environmental concerns or construction delays.

[cpzilliacus]

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.

Not always.  The Loma Prieta earthquake was in 1989, and the new Bay Bridge east span isn't expected to be open until September 2013.

Had the eastern (cantilever) bridge section of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge entirely collapsed, it would have been replaced much more rapidly (the damage was repaired in about a moth, if memory serves). 

I understand that some of the delays in replacing the eastern bridge were due to arguments about aesthetics and cost.

So they were.  But, the original cantilever bridge is still in place and being used and no stronger than when one section of it collapsed in 1989.

You are correct.  And it is clearly a hazard, since nobody knows when the next quake might happen along the San Andreas or one of the other faults in the Bay Area.

The next pretty big earthquake doesn't care if the delays were due to arguments over cost or aesthetics or environmental concerns or construction delays.

I don't know Bay Area politics all that well, but I do wonder why the state of California did not step in and say to the local elected officials involved something like this:

Get it built.

Now.

Or else the highway and transit dollars that come to you from elsewhere will stop and be spent in some other part of California.

[vdeane]

Maybe they have plans and are waiting for an earthquake so they can say "we told you so, now we're going to build the bridge ourselves and you will have no say".

[PHLBOS]

The difference between a $14 toll to cross the T-Z and a $1 toll to cross the Bear Mountain Bridge is going to "move" a lot of eastbound traffic north, even if the highway network there cannot support a huge increase in traffic.  For trucks, I-84 will become an even more attractive option for crossing the Hudson.  Wonder if the Thruway Authority or NYSDOT have asked one of their consultants to model the traffic impact of a $14 toll eastbound at the T-Z?

IIRC, there are already BGS' (2, I believe) along I-287 northbound south near the NY-NJ state line that read *paraphrased* New England USE NORTH 87 TO EAST 84; the BGS' (one done in NJDOT specs, the other located closer to the state line in either NYDOT or NYSTA specs) were likely erected when the I-87/84 interchange was completed several years ago. 

If that toll increase indeed takes effect as currently proposed; many more drivers (myself included during my holiday trips to New England) will indeed heed those BGS' more often.

You would think that NYSTA could raise their tolls everywhere rather than just at the bridge to distribute the stress. The mainline tolls are pretty low as is. Compare about $20 from Woodbury to Buffalo with about $50 for about the same distance on the PA Turnpike.

Yeah, that would logically make more sense; and in the wake of Gov. Cuomo's reversal on the $14 new TPZB toll (his re-election bid is just 2 years away BTW), that could very well happen if more federal funding can't be obtained/secured.

It's worth noting (though off-topic, but since you mentioned it) that the PA Turnpike tolls now funds other transportation projects in the state besides the Turnpike itself... courtesy of Act 44 enacted by then-Cov. Rendell.  The upshoot; Turnpike users in the Keystone state have been getting shaken down to fund other projects that they may never see or use.

[shadyjay]

The difference between a $14 toll to cross the T-Z and a $1 toll to cross the Bear Mountain Bridge is going to "move" a lot of eastbound traffic north, even if the highway network there cannot support a huge increase in traffic.  For trucks, I-84 will become an even more attractive option for crossing the Hudson.  Wonder if the Thruway Authority or NYSDOT have asked one of their consultants to model the traffic impact of a $14 toll eastbound at the T-Z?

IIRC, there are already BGS' (2, I believe) along I-287 northbound south near the NY-NJ state line that read *paraphrased* New England USE NORTH 87 TO EAST 84; the BGS' (one done in NJDOT specs, the other located closer to the state line in either NYDOT or NYSTA specs) were likely erected when the I-87/84 interchange was completed several years ago. 

Actually, those signs were there long before work even started on the I-84/Thruway interchange project.  When I was working down in NJ frequently, I would see them on the way home on I-287NB.  This was during the 2001-2004 era. 

Personally, I didn't like going the I-84 route.  Back then, the speed limit on I-84 in NY was 55 east of the Newburg-Beacon Bridge (as we used to say, you had to pay to go 65) and the traffic on I-84 in CT in the afternoon sucks.  But what was our alternative?  The turnpike wasn't so great either.

[PHLBOS]

Actually, those signs were there long before work even started on the I-84/Thruway interchange project.  When I was working down in NJ frequently, I would see them on the way home on I-287NB.  This was during the 2001-2004 era.

Thanks for the update/clarification.  That was one reason why I stated likely erected as opposed to definitely erected in my earlier post.   

Personally, I didn't like going the I-84 route.  Back then, the speed limit on I-84 in NY was 55 east of the Newburg-Beacon Bridge (as we used to say, you had to pay to go 65) and the traffic on I-84 in CT in the afternoon sucks.  But what was our alternative?  The turnpike wasn't so great either.

My only experience with going that route was one Thanksgiving weekend many years ago (before the I-87/84 direct-connection) after receiving word that the Thruway heading towards the Tappan Zee was an absolute parking lot; while that alternate was not perfect, it avoided a major traffic headache.

Is the speed limit along I-84 between I-87 and I-684 and I-87 north of I-287 now 65?  I know the I-87/287/Thruway multiplex and I-287/CWE is still posted 55.

While I-84 through CT can be a traffic headache at times, I-95 along the CT coast is usually worse.

[shadyjay]

Is the speed limit along I-84 between I-87 and I-684 and I-87 north of I-287 now 65?  I know the I-87/287/Thruway multiplex and I-287/CWE is still posted 55.

Sometime around 2002 or 2003, the speed limit was raised to 65 on I-684 for pretty much its entire length, except about a 1/2 mile on either side of its termini.  Shortly later, I-84 went to 65 from a point east of the Newburgh/Beacon Bridge to a point near the I-684 interchange, remaining 55 east to the CT state line and west across the bridge to a point west of the Thruway.  Also sometime around that later timeframe, the speed limit on the Thruway was raised to 65 MPH from the Spring Valley toll barrier to just past Exit 15A, so now that includes a portion of the I-87/I-287 multiplex.

[Alps]

While I-84 through CT can be a traffic headache at times, I-95 along the CT coast is usually worse.

Absolutely true. They still have the ridiculous bottleneck between Exits 25 and 25A, now with three lanes each way on either side. I-84 is a clusterfuck with a lack of any east-west connectivity in another corridor. You'd have to go way up to 202 and over to 44 to get away from 95/Merritt and 84 both.

[hbelkins]

Is there a particular reason that 84 near Danbury jams up so badly as to be the stuff of legends?

[KEVIN_224]

At least twice on a Peter Pan bus coming back from New York City, the driver stayed on I-684 one extra exit and opted for US 6/US 202 East...once all the way until they join I-84 at Exit 4.