At a meeting of the Tappan Zee project’s Stakeholder Committee on Wednesday, the study team showed it was making a good-faith effort to engage communities on land use and provided more clarity on the project timeline. (TSTC is a member of the Stakeholder Committee and several of the “stakeholder advisory working groups” which meet monthly to provide input on the project.)
Transit-oriented development training began in two towns this week, and will be offered to all municipalities in Rockland and Westchester Counties in the fall. According to team leader Michael Anderson, NYSDOT views the training as a pilot program that, if successful, can be emulated in other major transportation projects. It does not include direct grants to municipalities. In the Draft Environmental Impact Statement portion of the study, the team will expand an examination of land use and other impacts beyond the immediate I-287 corridor, encompassing Orange County and locations off of the corridor where BRT routes would operate.
The study team will also examine additional bus rapid transit options, most notably a dedicated busway that excludes all other vehicles, in both Rockland and Westchester Counties.
Anderson said the project team was more confident in its timelines than at earlier points, anticipating a final EIS and federal approval of the bridge and highway work in 2011, completion of bridge and highway design and the “Tier 2” transit study by 2013, and a new bridge opening in 2017. But in a walkback of earlier comments, he said that while BRT would be implemented in “the most expedient matter” and that the goal was to have it running when the bridge opened, this was not guaranteed. The timeline for construction of Rockland-Manhattan commuter rail would be clearer by next summer, he said.
Of the study’s many unanswered questions, the biggest is how to fund the project. Merill Lynch has signed onto the project and will help complete a financial study expected to take 5 years. Ironically, study team members said that the first year of this study was being paid for with a federal earmark and that funding for the next four years has not been identified. Hopefully that means the state is taking a wait-and-see approach on renewal of the earmark, and not that it is unwilling to fund a study of such importance.
More information on the scope of work in the DEIS, and the reasoning behind the changes to the project, is available in the recently-released Scoping Summary Report.
I suggest eliminating the BRT and replacing it with commuter rail from Suffern that both connects directly to a line to Grand Central and has a line that allows every fifteen minute service through downtown White Plains to a station on the New Haven Region. This service could be run using two to four car trains. Both services should share the same fare structure with the buses and indeed for intracounty services be just a peculiar bus route. The operating costs will be far less than bus. The stations can be located to focus development and based on the Sacremento experience, the coordinating of the buses with the rail system will also coordinate buses at a given station with each other improving local trip possibilities. If this is done in conjunction with limited or no lane expansion on the Tappan Zee bridge and the Thruway, costs should be reduced. This also would work well with extending service to Stewart Airport since it would provide rail access from much of Westchester to the airport. My recommendation is high level platforms and overhead electrification at 12.5 KV or 25 KV AC overhead. Based on Swiss experience 12.5 KV is safe for street running if so desired for part or all of the connection to the New Haven Region. Standard rail size cars have been used in street running in both Michigan City, Indiana and on Amtrak services in Oakland, California.
I second Clark Morris’s proposal for a cross-county commuter rail line, which should help White Plains become more transit-friendly toward commuters from areas outside the Harlem Line. And I’ll add that they should consider building a new station in Tarrytown, south of the Tappan Zee Bridge, with service to both Croton-Harmon and Suffern. As Tarrytown expands as a job center, such a train station will help promote TOD and reverse the development of the area as an edgeless city.
“Of the study’s many unanswered questions, the biggest is how to fund the project.”
No, the biggest question is “Why did they use such a simplistic model of population and driving, and refuse to consider anything with less than ten car lanes?”
http://capntransit.blogspot.com/2009/06/crc-not-ok.html
Steven, hold on a second. The timeline for the 5 year financial study makes no sense if NYSDOT is to hold to their original timetable of a 2017 construction completion date. Are we to believe that the study would be concluded in 2014 at that construction would commence immediately, with a 3 year build time? Given our recent history of infrastructure projects in this area, I find this HIGHLY unlikely.
Do you have any additional information on the forthcoming TOD trainings?