Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 86

Thread: Bayonne Bridge in Need of Replacement - Designed by Othmar Amma with Cass Gilbert

  1. #31
    Senior Member Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    926

    Default Calling all engineers...

    The road deck, not the arch, is in the way. Seems to be a savvy engineer could figure out a way to raise the road deck, and thread it through the arch (albeit at a higher point). Then, all you'd have to do is build new approachways. Yes, this may be as easy as it sounds, for the main reason that most bridges built in the 1930s were incredibly overbuilt. This tells me -- a non-engineer -- that this bridge can take a LOT of modification before anything structural has any real effect upon it. The upshot of all this is that we might be able to keep this baby but dispose of the bathwater.

  2. #32

    Default Replace Bayonne Bridge or move Port Newark?

    Lately I've begun seeing advertisements on the light rail about how the Bayonne bridge needs to be replaced in order to accommodate larger ships in Newark port authority, and how it will preserve 250,000 jobs. The claim is the next generation cargo ships can not fit under the Bayonne Bridge, so will have to go up to CT or down to GA, hence the loss of jobs.

    This caught my interest, so I starting looking for information on this topic and picked up some additional facts:

    • Many waterways and bridges on the eastern seaboard were designed on the limitations of ships that can pass through the Panama Canal.
    • Currently the permissible dimensions through Panama limits ships to 5000 containers. New ship designs can carry 10,000 to 15,000 containers
    • Panama Canal is currently begin expanded to allow the new ships through. Construction is scheduled to be completed 2014.
    • The waterway leading to Port Newark is 40 feet deep, and in order to accommodate the larger ships the waterways have to be dredged to 50 feet deep, and some say it needs to be 60 feet deep.
    • Ships navigating the kills have to make a right turn to get into Port Newark. Larger ships need more space to turn, but there is a small island between Staten Island and Bayonne that may need to be removed to provide enough room.

    The last 2 bullet points have me thinking what is the cost of a new bridge plus the dredging plus removing an island, compared to moving the port to Bayonne where the military dock is? Building a big port in Bayonne would require expansion of railways and roadways to move the cargo, but I would have to think that the cost would be less than what is being proposed.

    I know that real estate developers and those that bought condos by Port Bayonne would opt for a new bridge, but what do the rest of you think?

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whiteyaw View Post
    Lately I've begun seeing advertisements on the light rail about how the Bayonne bridge needs to be replaced in order to accommodate larger ships in Newark port authority, and how it will preserve 250,000 jobs. The claim is the next generation cargo ships can not fit under the Bayonne Bridge, so will have to go up to CT or down to GA, hence the loss of jobs.

    This caught my interest, so I starting looking for information on this topic and picked up some additional facts:

    • Many waterways and bridges on the eastern seaboard were designed on the limitations of ships that can pass through the Panama Canal.
    • Currently the permissible dimensions through Panama limits ships to 5000 containers. New ship designs can carry 10,000 to 15,000 containers
    • Panama Canal is currently begin expanded to allow the new ships through. Construction is scheduled to be completed 2014.
    • The waterway leading to Port Newark is 40 feet deep, and in order to accommodate the larger ships the waterways have to be dredged to 50 feet deep, and some say it needs to be 60 feet deep.
    • Ships navigating the kills have to make a right turn to get into Port Newark. Larger ships need more space to turn, but there is a small island between Staten Island and Bayonne that may need to be removed to provide enough room.

    The last 2 bullet points have me thinking what is the cost of a new bridge plus the dredging plus removing an island, compared to moving the port to Bayonne where the military dock is? Building a big port in Bayonne would require expansion of railways and roadways to move the cargo, but I would have to think that the cost would be less than what is being proposed.

    I know that real estate developers and those that bought condos by Port Bayonne would opt for a new bridge, but what do the rest of you think?
    The Port Authority taking over the former Military Ocean Terminal and turning it into a container terminal would be the best solution, it would also allow Newark Airport to grow. Unfortunately the City of Bayonne wants to build Condos and stores and retail stores, which is not as valuable to the region as the Port.

    BTW..

    There's already a Bayonne bridge thread:

    http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9389

  4. #34
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default

    Merged.

    I would think a new bridge is the far better and probably cheaper option than moving all of the port facilities since a new bridge is needed anyway or will be in the future, and it needs to be on the short list of absolutely necessary infrastructure for the greater economy of the metro area.

  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NYatKNIGHT View Post
    Merged.

    I would think a new bridge is the far better and probably cheaper option than moving all of the port facilities since a new bridge is needed anyway or will be in the future, and it needs to be on the short list of absolutely necessary infrastructure for the greater economy of the metro area.
    The signs supporting building a new bridge are all over the Turnpike and next to the Outerbridge, I love the Bayonne bridge. I think the Bayonne and Verrazano Bridges are the most beautiful in our region, however if they need to replace the Bayonne bridge to help protect the hundreds of thousands of good paying jobs the Port supports then go ahead and replace the bridge. My only concern would be that they include a mass transit portion to the bridge, preferably bringing the Hudson/ Bergen Light rail to Staten Island. Either down the West Shore to a park n' ride near the Staten Island mall, or along the North Shore to St.George (or both).

  6. #36
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default

    They should preserve the arch if at all possible.

  7. #37

  8. #38
    NYC Aficionado from Oz Merry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,478

    Default

    ^ Stunning photo.

    The Bayonne Question

    9.16.09 | Aaron Seward


    The Bayonne Bridge is currently the fourth longest steel arch bridge in the world.


    The Port Authority has released a report conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which points out that the Bayonne Bridge will begin to impose more and more restrictions on commercial shipping. Designed by master bridge designer Othmar Ammann and architect Cass Gilbert and completed in 1931, the span was at the time the longest steel arch bridge in the world, supporting a road bed of more than 8,000 feet, 1,675 feet of which hang from the arch with no intermediary support. However, its 165-foot height will no longer cut the mustard with todays larger ships, more and more of which are expected to pass through the region with the completion of upgrades at the Panama Canal to be completed in 2015. The Corps determined that the roadway could either be jacked up to 215 feet high, or, alternately, that the bridge could be knocked down and replaced with a tunnel. The Port Authority has devoted $10 million to figure out which is the best solution.


    http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/4496


    The report:

    PORT AUTHORITY RELEASES STUDY AS PART OF ONGOING EFFORTS TO ADDRESS BAYONNE BRIDGE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS TO EASE PASSAGE FOR BIGGEST SHIPS

    Date: September 16, 2009
    Press Release Number: 119-2009

    The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey today released the results of a study completed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that found the Bayonne Bridge’s height will pose an increasing obstacle for the newest and largest commercial ships in the coming decades.

    Officials with the bi-state agency re-emphasized their willingness to determine how best to address the navigational limitations posed by the current clearance of 151 to 156 feet between the bridge deck and the Kill van Kull waterway, depending on tides. Increasing numbers of big ships are anticipated at our port facilities following an expansion of the Panama Canal, which is slated for completion in 2015.

    That study - commissioned by the Port Authority -- looked at potential solutions, such as establishing a new height of 215 feet either by jacking up the existing 78-year-old span or building a new bridge. Another potential alternative to be looked at is to build a tunnel linking Bayonne and Staten Island.

    Port Authority officials already have implemented the Corps’ recommendation that “further planning and environmental analyses by the PANYNJ are warranted for the identification of a preferred project alternative.’’ Last month, the agency authorized a $10 million planning and engineering analysis to determine the best solution for rectifying the Bayonne Bridge’s clearance problem.

    "We thank the Corps for its independent analysis of the Bayonne Bridge clearance problem and have acted on its recommendation by launching a review of possible solutions," said Anthony Coscia, the Port Authority’s chairman. "Our agency was founded - first and foremost - to enhance the region’s port facilities and we pledge our resources to ensuring that commerce thrives along the Kill van Kull."

    “We appreciate the work of the Army Corps and Coast Guard to help address the future of the Bayonne Bridge,’’ said Christopher O. Ward, the Port Authority’s executive director. “We must carefully explore all options and find the best, most cost-effective way to address this challenge.’’

    "We are committed to finding a resolution to the Bayonne Bridge's height issues that keeps the region's port operations among the nation's busiest,'' said Susan Bass Levin, the agency’s deputy executive director. "Planning wisely to ensure the continued flow of commerce to and from our ports is not only critical to the long-term growth of our region, but also to the nation's future economic viability."

    The Port Authority’s planning efforts to identify a preferred alternative will take approximately one-and-a-half years. The initiative also will provide a conceptual engineering study and a preliminary environmental analysis of alternatives.

    The Bayonne Bridge Air Draft Analysis completed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers is available on The Port Authority of NY & NJ’s Web site at: http://www.panynj.gov/CommutingTravel/bridges/pdfs/Bayonne-bridge-Air-Draft-Analysis-pap

    http://www.panynj.gov/AboutthePortAu...ex.php?id=1298

  9. #39
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,472

    Thumbs up Full Court Press

    Pressing P.A. to take action on raising Bayonne Bridge

    Tuesday, September 29, 2009
    By CHARLES HACK
    JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

    Maybe it won't take 10 years to raise the height of the Bayonne Bridge after all.

    Officials of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said yesterday the minimal 10-year timetable is not set in stone as U.S. Rep. Albio Sires, D-West New York, joined a New York congressman on Staten Island to highlight the fact that new, super-sized container ships can no longer pass under the bridge.

    "We want to make sure the Port Authority acts as soon as they can to deal with this issue," said Sires, joined by U.S. Rep. Michael E. McMahon, D-New York, at Faber Park in Staten Island.

    "We cannot afford to lose these jobs, especially with the economy as it is today. I know there are ports that are salivating knowing that we are going to have some issues."

    The Port Authority recently released a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers report that estimated it would take until 2019 to complete a $1.3 billion project to jack up the bridge 40 percent above its current clearance of 150 feet above the Kill Van Kull.

    But asked yesterday about the 10-year timetable, Port Authority officials emphasized that the agency has commissioned a more detailed $10 million study that will give a more definitive time frame.

    "The Port Authority clearly recognizes that the Bayonne Bridge poses an obstacle to the future growth of our seaport and that is why we are already hard at work to find the best most cost-effective solution to address the bridge's clearance problem," Port Authority spokesman Steve Coleman said in a statement.

    If a solution isn't found, Sires fears thousands of jobs could be lost as shipping companies divert their trade from ports in Newark, Elizabeth and Staten Island to other container ports along the East Coast.

    A new breed of container ships that can potentially carry double the load of current vessels are expected to become commonplace after an expansion of the Panama Canal is completed in 2015.

    The bridge, which connects the Port Richmond area of Staten Island to Bayonne, has a clearance of between 151 feet and 156 feet above the Kill Van Kull depending on the tide, but will need a clearance of 215 feet to handle the new ships.

    Other options are to build a new bridge or to construct an underwater tunnel to replace the existing bridge.

  10. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    814

    Thumbs up No matter which option, the arch will stay

    The air draft analysis put out on the PANYNJ website contained a good amount of information about the options to repair or replace the bridge.

    One important piece of information is that no matter what option is carried out, the plans all include leaving the arch structure in place, even if a new bridge or tunnel is built to replace the existing road.

    These two images are in the analysis. The first is of a new bridge with the existing arch structure remaining, the second is of the existing bridge (arch and roadway) jacked up at its piers to the necessary height.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	bridge1.JPG 
Views:	308 
Size:	34.9 KB 
ID:	7652   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	bridge2.JPG 
Views:	290 
Size:	31.1 KB 
ID:	7653  

  11. #41
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Not sure how they'd do it, but I go for jacking up the original.

  12. #42

    Default

    I honestly have to say I'm unsure how this is good for tourism. I can see how it is good in the sense that larger ships could pass beneath it to get to the ports.

  13. #43
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,472

    Default

    I wrote that. In the thread about the Bayonne Cruise Terminal. Whoever that is copied my post.

  14. #44
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Another spammer trying to get on board?

  15. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCMAN320 View Post
    I wrote that. In the thread about the Bayonne Cruise Terminal. Whoever that is copied my post.
    Okay, concering the cruise terminal it makes much more sense lol. Maybe the guy who quoted doesn't yet know how to use the site?

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Queensboro (59th Street) Bridge
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: March 10th, 2015, 05:10 AM
  2. Manhattan Bridge
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: April 28th, 2014, 08:35 AM
  3. Triborough Bridge
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: August 22nd, 2011, 10:35 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 26th, 2011, 04:09 AM
  5. The gantry of the float bridge of New York Central Railroad
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: March 21st, 2011, 04:16 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software