Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 86

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

  1. #46
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    The newbie has made THREE posts -- same trick on all of them: Copy a previous post from a thread and then paste it in as a new one of his own.

    Curious.

    Maybe just shy ...

  2. #47
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,472

    Exclamation PANYNJ Must Solve Problem

    Bayonne Assemblyman Chiappone casts only vote against raising bridge



    Friday, February 26, 2010
    BY CHARLES HACK

    TRENTON - The state Assembly passed a resolution yesterday urging the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to solve the Bayonne Bridge's height problem.

    The bridge has to be raised or replaced or it will be impossible for the new super-sized container ships to reach Port Newark and Port Elizabeth.

    The abundance of these large cargo ships is expected to explode once the expansion of the Panama Canal is completed in the next few years.

    The resolution, which was passed 74-1 with four non-voters, urges the Port Authority to design and pay for a solution to the height problem.

    Of the Hudson County Assembly members, Charles Mainor and Joan Quigley of Jersey City, Ruben Ramos of Hoboken, and Vincent Prieto of Secaucus, all Democrats, voted for the resolution.

    Caridad Rodriquez, D-West New York, was one of four Assembly members who didn't vote.

    "Since almost half our goods come to this part of the United States by ship, we're going to see consumer prices jump up for all sorts of important items," Quigley said.

    Assemblyman Anthony Chiappone, D-Bayonne, was the sole vote against the resolution.

    Chiappone argues that any elevation of the bridge would involve extending the span's ramp, which would result in knocking down homes and tearing up neighborhoods.

    Chiappone believes the Port Authority should look into alternatives such as expanding Port Jersey, which is in Jersey City and ships can reach without crossing under the Bayonne Bridge.

    "While it may be all very well for the region to raise or replace the Bayonne Bridge, or build a tunnel, there is not going to be anything positive for the City of Bayonne," Chiappone said.

    Port Authority spokesman Ron Marsico said the bi-state agency has commissioned a $10 million study to determine how best to address "navigational issues" posed by larger ships.

    An identical bill sponsored by Sandra B Cunningham, D-Jersey City, and Nicholas Sacco, D-North Bergen, is being considered in the state Senate.

    http://www.nj.com/news/jjournal/bayo...541.xml&coll=3

  3. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    815

    Default

    The Port is vital to the local economy, Port Newark/ Elizabeth is the busiest Port on the East Coast and the third busiest in the Country (Los Angeles/Long Beach is #1, Houston/Galveston is #2).

  4. #49

    Default

    If they could preserve the bridge, I would really like to see the whole bridge structure being lifted and the connecting roadways also lifted so additional steel beams could be added to the steel beams. While I am not sure if it is structurally capable of being lifted and modified in such way, but it'll benefit to preserve the ever beautiful Bayonne Bridge.

  5. #50

    Default Interesting not to this

    I was at a NRBP function today when this subject came up and it seems that the latest/fastest solution that is in play now is basically creating a lift in the center of the bridge(basicaly a draw bridge). This option is viewed as being the fastest potential option. Both replacing/raising the span and lifting the bridge are expected to take a decade whereas the widened Panama canal is expexted to come online in 2014. It seems there is INTENSE political presure not to loose jobs by allowing the port to fall behind.

  6. #51
    Forum Veteran Newarkguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    University Heights,Newark
    Posts
    1,270

    Default Bayonne Bridge.

    I prefer the last option...raise the ENTIRE Bridge. close the waters a month, and let smaller ships use the Arthur river (Kill) (river is "Kill" in dutch) to access Port Newark. Or build a larger REPLICA with the SIRT Staten Island Rapid Transit using the abandoned ROW along Staten Island's north shore. After crossing the new bridge, SIRT can continue along route 440 northward and connect into Path's Journal square. I think the PA and MTA may not go for this. then again, the free SI ferry must cost NYC $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
    Last edited by Newarkguy; March 2nd, 2010 at 08:45 PM.

  7. #52
    Forum Veteran Newarkguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    University Heights,Newark
    Posts
    1,270

    Default Newark to lose port? Never!

    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?
    Port Newark belongs in Newark. Moving it to Bayonne makes Newark irrelevant as a commercial hub. Another suburb(Bayonne) getting city infrastructure while Newark becomes a Detroit. Detroit is a former beautifull city of 2 million (now 800,000)that now reverts to forest and prairies in the middle of nowhere. Yet surrounded by rich suburbs.All because railroad and sea shipping traffic as well as business commerce by passes it between NYC and Chicago. The only way Bayonne gets the Port of Newark is AFTER Newark ANNEXES bayonne! New Port location, still PORT NEWARK in Bayonne, Newark,NJ. PERIOD.

  8. #53

  9. #54
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,472

    Lightbulb New Jack City

    Port Authority exec tells metro area realtors that building a new, higher roadbed is the preferred option for solving Bayonne Bridge's height problem

    Friday, October 01, 2010
    By CHARLES HACK
    JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

    The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey may raise the roadbed of the Bayonne Bridge and leave the iconic arch intact to solve the Bayonne Bridge's height problem, according to a Port Authority official.

    The Bayonne Bridge poses navigational problems for large container ships that will start to arrive in large numbers once work to expand the Panama Canal is completed in 2014.

    Sharon McStine, manager of industry and government relations for the Port Authority, spoke about the bi-state agency's plans for the bridge to roughly 100 real estate agents, brokers, and developers aboard a cruise ship Wednesday night that motored around New York Harbor.

    McStine was the featured speaker at an annual get-together sponsored by the Industrial and Office Real Estate Brokers Association of the New York Metropolitan Area, the Industrial/Commercial Real Estate Women, Inc. and Certified Commercial Investment Members of NJ/NY.

    Responding to questions from the audience, McStine said the Port Authority has already invested $2 billion into area ports and will invest another $1 billion to solve the bridge's height problem.

    Depending on the tide, the roadbed of the Bayonne Bridge currently rises between 151 and 156 feet above the Kill Van Kull. The goal is to raise the roadway to at least 216 feet above sea level.

    McStine said that alternatives to solve the problem will be made public at the end of the year, but the "object" was not to build a tunnel or bridge, and "probably not to jack up the bridge."

    "Initially - our objective - we were looking very closely at the navigational (lift) bridge, but as a result of all this analysis, I think they have gone away from that.

    "The thing they are looking to do is replace the roadbed," she said.

    Stephen Gallo, Bayonne's business administrator, confirmed yesterday that raising the roadbed was one of the favored options discussed in meetings with the Port Authority.

    The results of an engineering and environmental study the Port Authority is conducting will be ready by the end of the year and the city is "eagerly awaiting" the results, Gallo said.

    http://www.nj.com/news/jjournal/bayo...590.xml&coll=3

  10. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    814

    Default

    This would be an extremely interesting project to watch should it go through. Does anyone know if anything similar to this has been done somewhere else?

  11. #56

    Default

    Does this mean that the roadway will be relocated to the top of the arch and bearing via compression members to the panel points? Sort of like Eiffel's bridges in Oporto and elsewhere.

  12. #57
    Jersey Patriot JCMAN320's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    4,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Newarkguy View Post
    Port Newark belongs in Newark. Moving it to Bayonne makes Newark irrelevant as a commercial hub. Another suburb(Bayonne) getting city infrastructure while Newark becomes a Detroit. Detroit is a former beautifull city of 2 million (now 800,000)that now reverts to forest and prairies in the middle of nowhere. Yet surrounded by rich suburbs.All because railroad and sea shipping traffic as well as business commerce by passes it between NYC and Chicago. The only way Bayonne gets the Port of Newark is AFTER Newark ANNEXES bayonne! New Port location, still PORT NEWARK in Bayonne, Newark,NJ. PERIOD.
    Orginally posted by STT757:
    Bayonne sells part of Military Ocean Terminal to Port Authority.

    Bayonne has changed it's mind and decided to sell a third of the former Military Ocean terminal to the Port Authority, the Port Authority also is purchasing the Global Marine Terminal and has already purchased Greenville Yards. The Port Authority will combine these properties to form a huge container terminal, this new container terminal will be able to handle the largest ships which will soon be unable to pass under the Bayonne bridge.

    The City of Bayonne originally envisioned turning the former Military Ocean Terminal into a residential and retail development, however they've finally realized that plan would not bring in the jobs or taxes they thought when they purchased the property from the Army in 2002. This will mean lots of new jobs, and Port jobs are very well paying. They need to make improvements to rail connections and roadways (new exit 14A) to accomodate the traffic.

    This buys them some time to address the Bayonne bridge height issues.

    http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/201...rove_port.html

    http://www.dredgingtoday.com/2010/06...mmercial-port/

    http://www.nj.com/bayonne/index.ssf/...give_thum.html

  13. #58
    Forum Veteran Newarkguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    University Heights,Newark
    Posts
    1,270

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCMAN320 View Post
    Orginally posted by STT757:
    Bayonne sells part of Military Ocean Terminal to Port Authority.

    Bayonne has changed it's mind and decided to sell a third of the former Military Ocean terminal to the Port Authority, the Port Authority also is purchasing the Global Marine Terminal and has already purchased Greenville Yards. The Port Authority will combine these properties to form a huge container terminal, this new container terminal will be able to handle the largest ships which will soon be unable to pass under the Bayonne bridge.

    The City of Bayonne originally envisioned turning the former Military Ocean Terminal into a residential and retail development, however they've finally realized that plan would not bring in the jobs or taxes they thought when they purchased the property from the Army in 2002. This will mean lots of new jobs, and Port jobs are very well paying. They need to make improvements to rail connections and roadways (new exit 14A) to accomodate the traffic.

    This buys them some time to address the Bayonne bridge height issues.

    http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/201...rove_port.html

    http://www.dredgingtoday.com/2010/06...mmercial-port/

    http://www.nj.com/bayonne/index.ssf/...give_thum.html
    This is the beginning of the END of Port Newark Elizabeth!!! If this comes to be....the PANYNJ will simply build the new Bayonne port to acommodate both the new massive ships AND existing ships. Ill tell you this..IMO the Bayonne bridge will NOT be altered.There is now no need to. Instead, the new state of the art Bayonne port will become the MAIN PORT with time. Port Newark will become secondary,neglected,used for domestic ships,and lower end shipping,and worst of all, it becomes a giant rusty idle container storage yard!!. A few years ago, it was suggested in "The (ex Newark)Star Ledger"(The liberal star Daily Democrat) that Port Authority look into moving Port Newark to Bayonne,lower the Nj turnpike below grade, and finally expanding EWR Newark Liberty International. his would allow the airport to add 2 extra runways to absorb future travel growth. Such rubbish!! eliminating Newark's port is like a fat person cutting off their right leg to give his fat wide left leg room to expand!!!
    Last edited by Newarkguy; October 1st, 2010 at 03:23 PM.

  14. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Newarkguy View Post
    This is the beginning of the END of Port Newark Elizabeth!!! If this comes to be....the PANYNJ will simply build the new Bayonne port to acommodate both the new massive ships AND existing ships. Ill tell you this..IMO the Bayonne bridge will NOT be altered.There is now no need to. Instead, the new state of the art Bayonne port will become the MAIN PORT with time. Port Newark will become secondary,neglected,used for domestic ships,and lower end shipping,and worst of all, it becomes a giant rusty idle container storage yard!!. A few years ago, it was suggested in "The (ex Newark)Star Ledger"(The liberal star Daily Democrat) that Port Authority look into moving Port Newark to Bayonne,lower the Nj turnpike below grade, and finally expanding EWR Newark Liberty International. his would allow the airport to add 2 extra runways to absorb future travel growth. Such rubbish!! eliminating Newark's port is like a fat person cutting off their right leg to give his fat wide left leg room to expand!!!

    A port in Bayonne could not sufficiently grow w/o doubling rail capacity going west. They could build the port as large as they want but there would be no way to quickly move the stuff out once there.

  15. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    815

    Default

    Depending on the tide, the roadbed of the Bayonne Bridge currently rises between 151 and 156 feet above the Kill Van Kull. The goal is to raise the roadway to at least 216 feet above sea level.
    Wow, going from 151 feet of clearance to 216 feet of clearance is going to be a big project. The entire roadways leading up to the bridge will have to be demolished and replaced, and unless the plan on having vertigo inducing grades leading up to the bridge they are going to have to push the roadways leading up to the bridge further out. It's not a problem on the Staten Island side as it would just go further down the MLK Expressway, however on the Bayonne side it will be very tight.

Page 4 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