Streams

Rebuilding the Tappan Zee Bridge

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Rockland County Executive Scott Vanderhoef and Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino talk about the reconstruction of the Tappan Zee Bridge.

Guests:

Rob Astorino and C. Scott Vanderhoef

Comments [18]

Douglas Sussman from Westchester

The Governor does indeed care very, very much. He just doesn't care at all about public transit and it's users. He does care, very, very much for making a dubious, rhetorical statement about fiscal conservatism. Fortunately, for him, a sucker is born every minute who buys his baloney.

Jul. 19 2012 11:52 AM
Urban Planner from Rockland

Two words: Rail Freight. Build a new bridge with rail for both commuter and freight. These uses are already co-located in the region and are desperately needed here. The commuter issues is a no-brainer but critics say the demand isn't there. Currently freight trains must travel 150 miles north of the NY NJ ports to cross the Hudson at Selkirk. Many of the goods being delivered on these trains are coming back down the Hudson on the east side and over to New England. Let's simply make the crossing at the Tappan Zee. There are freight lines on both sides of the river and by sharing rail with commuters, we can warrant the construction of rail in the first place.

Why hasn't this been brought up before?

Jul. 18 2012 09:53 AM
Andre

Not adding rail and bus rapid transit is VERY short sighted!! It will be even more expensive later... but the governor doesn't seem to care.

Jul. 17 2012 05:13 PM
Mike from Inwood

One look at a map reveals that the Tappan Zee Bridge is built at the widest point in the river; it's 3 miles long. It doesn't take an engineer or an accountant to realize that a mile of road over land is MUCH cheaper to build and mnaintain than a mile of road suspended over water. I used to live in Westchester. There are plently of points along the river where the bridge would only have to be 600 yards long. GENIUS: Why not MOVE the bridge to a narrow point in the river and save all that money? Perhaps invest the savings in mass transit or express buss lanes? Why can't our politicians come up with the common sense ideas like this? Sure, someone's riverfront property would have to be confiscated with eminent domain to facilitate this, but if eminent domain can be used to grab land for private businesses in New London, (CT) surely it can still be used for the public good, too. Perhaps the people whose land is confiscated could get the land where the current bridge is located once the bridge is removed plus a lot less cash to rebuild.

Jul. 17 2012 11:56 AM
KYLE from mahwah

Truth & Beauty from Brooklyn. The reason we can not repair a great deal of our infrastructure is because some folks decided when these items were built to only build for 50 and 75 yr life cycles. Which means that they went the cheap route in construction and thus repairing will cost the same as building new but you have to do it repeatedly not a one time. Until we discover building materials that do not degrade over time we have to build will longer life cycles. And that is just Common Sense.

Jul. 17 2012 11:25 AM

As much as I am a public transit supporter, we need to be very careful of where we put rail because it can cost much more than what it will revenue generate in return. Also its easy to throw a rail line on a bridge, but its not so easy connecting those rails to new rail lines or existing rail lines on either side of the bridge. Creating and expanding rail lines to and from bridges is a MAJOR infrastructure project. It means utilizing eminent domain, constructing stations, constructing parking lots and redirecting, demolishing and/or constructing roads and utility lines. Usually these projects cost BILLIONS. If the fares collected by such a rail line don't cover the costs of the repayment of financing and maintenance of that rail line then it makes no sense to build it.

Jul. 17 2012 11:24 AM
Ann from Washington Heights

Please don't make the same mistake that was made on the GWB. It was meant to have rails on the lower level. The GRIDLOCK in Manhattan is exacerbated by the lack of these simple transit solutions!

Jul. 17 2012 10:59 AM
Nick from UWS

Jesus Christ, this country is dead in the water. We can't even repair a simple bridge in less than a 100 years because of a bunch of idiots arguing about it and "planning" and running "studies" and trying to prognosticate the "future of mass transit". We're finished. Idiots have full control of this country.

Jul. 17 2012 10:58 AM
KYLE from mahwah

Bottom Line Transportation projects are always more expensive tomorrow than today. Intelligent planning for the future will always pay off in more ways than one.

Jul. 17 2012 10:57 AM
Jeremy from Nyc

Doesn't having an expensive toll bridge create classes of infrastructure?

Jul. 17 2012 10:57 AM
Amy from Manhattan

As Gov. Cuomo said, you do have to pay for it later. What he doesn't seem to see is that accommodating mass transit will help pay for it, by saving environmental & health costs--which we would absolutely have to pay for later. More people on mass transit means less traffic (w/fewer parking spaces needed on the other end!) & less pollution.

Jul. 17 2012 10:56 AM
Demetri from putnam

What about the inflated mass transit costs? These costs as suggested by the governor are larger than what many people say are reasonable.

Jul. 17 2012 10:55 AM
Kressel

I live in Rockland and work in Westchester. I ride in someone else's car every single day. But the few times I've had to take the Tappan Zee Express were fine. It's getting around Westchester that takes too long. An hour on the bus between White Plains and New Rochelle!

Jul. 17 2012 10:53 AM

sounds like these guys might be smarter than the nj governor who stopped a tunnel to the future from being built. That tunnel will be built one day it will just cost the next generation a lot more.
Here’s to hoping Cuomo doesn’t make the same mistakes that Christie has.

Jul. 17 2012 10:50 AM
Truth & Beauty from Brooklyn

I don't think the bridge needs to be replaced - just repaired. Why does everything in this country need to be demolished and replaced? Just for infrastructure dollars for your constitutents? They'll get enough infrastructure dollars for repairing the bridge without destroying it.

And I don't think the fate of this bridge should be determined by whether it impacts any individual's legacy. Any work that gets done on this bridge should be based on need and common sense.

Jul. 17 2012 10:47 AM
Gary from queens

Ahhh, so rebuilding the bridge is all about Scott Vanderhoef's legacy from the perspective of his two sons.

Here I though the public interest was the reason

Jul. 17 2012 10:46 AM
antonio from baySide

Tell the Governor not to be a Christie!
LightRAIL guys Light Rail, They're are clean and awesome!

Jul. 17 2012 10:45 AM
Leo from Queens

The governor and mayor are very much against public transit and public transportation projects that would help with the region's economic development and environment over the long term.

They have been short sighted and are really making decisions based on the short term gains for themselves and their politically connected associates.

Jul. 17 2012 10:33 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.