Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Reason for rebuilding the bridge. Bridge pilings are wood, similar to telephone poles and they are rotting. What were they thinking?
i understand why bridges need to be rebuilt, that isnt the problem. where the problem lies is when government decides on a contract, they set things up to where a contractor can legally pad their costs, thus pumping up what they get from the government in cost over runs, delays due to weather, etc.
and when this is shown to the public, there is outrage, and calls for someones head to roll, and the government "investigates" the situation, and then comes to the conclusion that the contractor over billed for the work, and so they then "fine" the contractor a couple million dollars, and perhaps "suspend" the contractor from pursuing government contracts for six months.
in the mean time the contractor is laughing all the way to the bank to take that couple million in fines to pay the government because they made an extra 5-6 million on the contract, so the net extra money they made was 3-4 million. all taxpayer money.
and once everything is settled, the government is happy because they got the bridge they wanted, and they got "back" 2 million in fines, the taxpayers are happy because they got the new bridge, and they also got the "feeling" that the government is looking out for them against those evil contractors, and the contractor is happy because instead of netting say 15 million in profits on the bridge job, the netted more like 18 million in profts.
I don't know of any of those names sticking except the FDR Drive, which I've spent many hours driving. I think using the other names marks you as an out-of-towner, like calling Sixth Avenue Avenue of the Americas.
I agree with the people who favor keeping the name.
On the issue of tolls I have a kind of interesting story about that. My family moved to New Jersey in 1959, with my father commuting into the city every day. In the early 60's he got a letter published in the Times criticizing the inefficiency of having toll booths on both ends of the bridge and suggesting that if they would just put the tolls on one end and double the rate they would collect the same amount of money with fewer toll booths and less delay. He got a letter back from the Port Authority telling him that they couldn't do that because the law prohibited letting people ride without paying a toll. Several years later, when the Port Authority adopted the exact proposal he had made, my father and the other half-dozen or so people who subsequently made the same suggestion got letters from the Port Authority recognizing their contribution.
Since The Port Authority of NY & NJ is not the owner/operator of the Tappan Zee Bridge, your suggestion doesn't really make much sense. In reality, the bridge is operated/maintained by the New York Thruway Authority.
Funny. I was just on it last week. For the first time ever. My usual route is GW when I go to points north. This time somebody suggested to take Tappan Zee to avoid the traffic. Bad idea. There is no easy way to get back on 95. I learned once again that it is better to sit in traffic than take a “shortcut” you are not familiar with.
I-287 ends at I-95 North. And I-87, after becoming the Major Deegan, intersects with I-95, albeit at the New York end of the GW Bridge. Depending on where you're going the GW often is a must to avoid, especially on nights with Yankee games.
and once everything is settled, the government is happy because they got the bridge they wanted, and they got "back" 2 million in fines, the taxpayers are happy because they got the new bridge, and they also got the "feeling" that the government is looking out for them against those evil contractors, and the contractor is happy because instead of netting say 15 million in profits on the bridge job, the netted more like 18 million in profts.
Are there any better suggestions? One cannot do a strict, fixed-price bidding sequence since you don't know engineering conditions and weather in advance.
Over the next several years, the current Tappan Zee Bridge is being replaced, in stages. Construction of the new span is well underway.
Of those, only the last three have stuck to any extent, and only the last two are in truly common use. Since we know renaming is inevitable. what are your choices. Mine, to name it after the Simon & Garfunkel song "Bridge Over Troubled Waters" has not gone over well.
Are there any better suggestions? One cannot do a strict, fixed-price bidding sequence since you don't know engineering conditions and weather in advance.
yes there are ways to get around those issues;
1: get out to the site and study it before sending in a bid
2: if the contractor doesnt do the above, the tough cookies for them, they have to live with their bid
3: the government sets forth a performance clause in the final contract, basically stating that if the project is done on time AND on budget, then the contractor gets a performance bonus of 5-10% of the contract price, thus a $20 million contract done on time and on budget could net the contractor another $1-2 million, where as done in the current manner, the government would be paying more than $30 million on a $20 million contract, and most likely the project would not be done anywhere near on time. this has worked in the past very nicely.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.