New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap
In October, a Department of Transportation panel narrowed the list of potential designs for the new Kosciuszko Bridge down to three finalists, including what The Brooklyn Paper calls the front runner, above. In addition to a new look, the bridge of the future will have nine lanes instead of six (yay!) as well as a…
In October, a Department of Transportation panel narrowed the list of potential designs for the new Kosciuszko Bridge down to three finalists, including what The Brooklyn Paper calls the front runner, above. In addition to a new look, the bridge of the future will have nine lanes instead of six (yay!) as well as a bike and pedestrian lane; the whole thing will be set at less of an incline than the current structure because tall boats no longer go underneath. All this good stuff won’t come cheap though: We’re looking at a $1 billion price tag. Sounds like a lot of dough to us, but apparently that’s what it takes to get bridge builders out of bed these days. For a bridge that is a mile long in New York City, $1 billion is the going rate, said DOT spokesman Adam Levine. The Feds will pay 80% of the freight, leaving the state with the rest. But the state is now talking about slashing its transportation spending, so it remains to be seen of the bridge, over which 160,000 vehicles pass every day, makes the cut.
The Billion-Dollar Bridge! [Brooklyn Paper]
It is not just a bridge over a creek; it also includes the interchange between the Long Island Expressway just east of the Midtown Tunnel and the BQE just north of the Williamsburg Bridge. Do any of you ever drive to Queens???
Most of the backups on the current bridge are related to the interchange and related merges.
If there were no bridge, gigantic trucks would be driving through many Brooklyn neighborhoods at street level.
“There is no current plan to expand the BQE to nine lanes.”
So why is the writer cheering? Does he want to pull off on the shoulder and take in the view or think it will help him get to his Hampton house quicker on the ridiculously packed LIE? Don’t think he’d want to get Queens quicker. Hmmm. Sounds like LA mentality.
Three less lanes might reduce the budget and maybe (but not likely) the funds could be used to make the G Train and LIRR better and a more attractive option than spewing pollution into our kids’ lungs.
Yep, the roads in England are excellent, way ahead in quality of anything I’ve encountered in the US (apart from a good stretch of highway I remember in in Arizona).
The petrol costs there are huge however.
Yep, the roads in England are excellent, way ahead in quality of anything I’ve encountered in the US (apart from a good stretch of highway I remember in in Arizona).
The petrol costs there are huge however.
If that’s the design, it looks really nice.
Maly is right about the gasoline taxes in Europe.
paullbuttons- if you’re being sarcastic, bery funny. If you’re being serious- I’d love to hear your alternative plan to the BQE. Do you really have no idea the impact of forcing all that traffic through local streets would have? First of all, they couldn’t take the weight, they’re narrow, the pollution would shoot through the roof- (not become less) over what it is now, and all of Brooklyn would become a parking lot.
Epiphany, the bridge is nine lanes, not the BQE. There is no current plan to expand the BQE to nine lanes.
“nine lanes instead of six (yay!)”
What an idiotic statement. Nine more lanes of cars producing more asthma for our kids, more demand for Middle East oil (and the resulting wars) and more giant chunks of fiberglass taking up space in the crowded city. And what happens when these nine lanes of car traffic disperse (usually speeding) into the rest of the Brooklyn and Queens neighborhoods causing a local increase in noise, traffic pollution and blight?