Metro North WOH Rail Options Using the Tappan Zee Bridge TZB

The Port Jervis AND Pascack Valley (Don't see how the Pascack Valley will do it with the line going south of the bridge area and NJT owns the line?) lines both will be crossing over the bridge/tunnel to the Hudson Line?

With ARC probably dead this probably is the only option even with the train ride being longer.

Tommy, it's just the gist of what I've read in the LoHud articles, that they were leaning that way. I may have been reading Between the Lions. I thought it was the easiest operationally. They won't be tunneling for some time at any point, at least not until they figure out how to pay for any of it.

My own feeling is the rail option will be left off the final design. I live in the area and I hear about this quite a bit in addition to seeing the articles in the local paper and on cable TV. The rail option has already been brought back from the dead once. As I recall that was when the BRT estimate came in at a lot more money than expected. People said (including the Journal News editorialists) if we're going to pay that kind of money lets get more than just bus service. That was before the recession though.

Everyone thinks rail is the superior option but it's too expensive. The latest estimate from NY DOT is the replacement bridge will cost $6.5 billion and double that, $13 billion, with rail included. (That's in the article I linked Thursday.) A lot of money and there's really no way to know in advance what ridership will be like. I have the feeling the Thruway Authority being highway people, they're more comfortable with the bus option anyway.

They may build the bridge in such a way to allow future rail use but I have a hunch rail will be left off the final design. I really hope I'm wrong!

Tommy Meehan wrote:My own feeling is the rail option will be left off the final design. I live in the area and I hear about this quite a bit in addition to seeing the articles in the local paper and on cable TV. The rail option has already been brought back from the dead once. As I recall that was when the BRT estimate came in at a lot more money than expected. People said (including the Journal News editorialists) if we're going to pay that kind of money lets get more than just bus service. That was before the recession though.

Everyone thinks rail is the superior option but it's too expensive. The latest estimate from NY DOT is the replacement bridge will cost $6.5 billion and double that, $13 billion, with rail included. (That's in the article I linked Thursday.) A lot of money and there's really no way to know in advance what ridership will be like. I have the feeling the Thruway Authority being highway people, they're more comfortable with the bus option anyway.

They may build the bridge in such a way to allow future rail use but I have a hunch rail will be left off the final design. I really hope I'm wrong!

The sad part is they if reject the rail option everyone will regret it in the future. Traffic is only going to get worse not better (at least during the rush hour times).

Too much politics involved like everything is and millions of dollars wasted on study after study. It's no wonder they don't have the money to do it right.

I don't think there's any way they can build the bridge without a provision for mass transit, including rail. I definitely think the rail will be added later; maybe much later.

State down to 2 final designs for Tappan Zee Bridge replacement

http://www.lohud.com/article/20101015/N ... f=obinsite

NEW CITY — State officials today announced the final two designs for the bridge that will replace the Tappan Zee Bridge.

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 cars and trucks traveling in the outer lanes (Plan 3, above).

The second configuration is a dual-level bridge (Plan 5, above). Trains would run under the north span. Vehicle traffic would be on the top level, with dedicated bus lanes in the center.

looks like plan 5 has possible expansion option in right side bridge, the bottom level could eventually be expanded in another bus or auto or train option.

Could be the lower level of the south plan would take the BRT, and the bus lanes up top could be converted to HOV or HOT lanes. I'd say go ahead and do that right away, the HOT tolls could help pay the bonds for the bridge.

Just to clarify what I meant, about the rail option being left off the final design. I think the rail line will be in the design, absolutely, but once construction starts they'll decide it's too costly and announce it's being mothballed to be completed at a future date. Which is exactly what happened to the rapid transit line that was to be built on the George Washington Bridge. Maybe this sounds pessimistic but the MOST I really expect is a watered down BRT.

Off-topic - With about 150,000 vehicles a day crossing the bridge by the time it's completed I don't see any problem paying off the construction bonds.

On-topic - That's what tantalizes mass transit planners. With that kind of use if you could get even 20% of those people out of their cars and onto a train you'd have a hugely successful project and make a big contribution to improving air quality to boot.

Here are additional images. Perhaps they're the rejected plans or variations on the two chosen plans.

HalMallon wrote:State down to 2 final designs for Tappan Zee Bridge replacement

http://www.lohud.com/article/20101015/N ... f=obinsite

NEW CITY — State officials today announced the final two designs for the bridge that will replace the Tappan Zee Bridge.

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 cars and trucks traveling in the outer lanes (Plan 3, above).

The second configuration is a dual-level bridge (Plan 5, above). Trains would run under the north span. Vehicle traffic would be on the top level, with dedicated bus lanes in the center.

looks like there is no plan without rail option??

I think Tommy is right; they'll build the bridge with the capacity for rail, but the rail won't be built. At least not for some time.

I don't think MTA will allow that, as part of funding has to come from MTA.

My understanding is that the rail and bridge portions of the project have been split into parallel Environmental Impact Studies. This allows the timeline to be compressed, as they can start working on building the bridge before they have all of the final rail design work done. My understanding is that they're planning on building the rail semi-concurrently with the bridge (the rail might open a few years later, but not decades), in order to maximize the funding opportunities. With all of these agencies working together (MTA, Thruway, NYSDOT, FTA and USDOT) the likelihood of cobbling together enough funding sources increases.

There will probably be higher tolls for passenger and commercial vehicles, fares from rail and bus passengers, federal grant money and regional tax levees to help pay off the cost of construction. The higher taxes will theoretically be offset by the increases property values of those within a 5 mile radius of any of the stations. Expect a real estate boom in Orange if this project gets approved.

The newspaper reports the rail portion may get $1 billion in FTA funding that just became available! This is great news.