FALL QUARTERLY MEETING - THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2005 - 7:00 P.M.

PLACE: Orangetown Town Hall
26 Orangeburg Road, Orangeburg NY
Directions: Traveling south on the Palisades Interstate Parkway (PIP) exit 6E Orangeburg Road.
Continue from ramp, merge left, at traffic light turn left onto Dutch Hill Road, turn left into
Town Hall parking lot. Traveling from Route 303, turn at Orangeburg Road intersection,
continue to Dutch Hill Road turn right, turn left into Town Hall parking lot.

7:00 P.M. Reports on Environmental Issues

Migratory patterns of birds observed in Hudson Valley. Presented by Doris Metraux

Update on Ford Motor Company paint sludge clean-up efforts. Presented by Geoff Welch

7:30 P.M. Program: I-287 Corridor Inter-County Task Force-presentation by Co Chairs
Catherine Nowicki (Rockland), Marsha Gordon (Westchester)

On June 8, 2005 Rockland County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef and Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano announced the formation of a joint inter-county task force to address the many critical issues related to the Tappan Zee Bridge and I-287 corridor. The task force is to submit a report of recommendations in preparation for the state’s environmental review process. Attendee input is encouraged, so please bring along your questions, suggestions and comments.

Your continued membership and contributions are greatly appreciated and necessary for RCCA to carry on its work. Please invite a friend to join. Thank you

Rockland County Legislature Proclaims September 18, 2005 Rockland County Conservation Association Day

On behalf of the Rockland County Legislature, Chairwoman Harriet D. Cornell publicly and formally proclaimed September 18, 2005, Rockland County Conservation Association Day. A “Distinguished Service Award” was presented by Rockland County Legislature Chairwoman Harriet Cornell and Legislator Ellen Jaffee to Betty Hedges, President Emeritus. The RCCA Board expresses many thanks to all who participated in the seventy-fifth year celebration, Artist’s of the Rockland County Conservation Association exhibition. Avery special thanks to the Village of Pomona for its generous hospitality and the use of the Pomona Cultural Center.

A glimpse of the exhibit - September 18, 2005

A VIEW OF THE BRIDGE – 1936

In December 1936, the last issue of STRIDE, Inc. — Magazine of Rockland County was published. The editor was Heywood T. McKenney, who lived in Suffern . We are grateful to Cynthia McKenney, RCCA board member and sister -in-law of Mr. McKenney, for preserving this last issue and passing it along.

She called our attention to an article in which the editor expresses his concerns regarding the impact of the proposed bridge . This is what he wrote 69 years ago:

It looks as though the Nyack-Tarrytown bridge will be more than a pipe dream if it can find a place to rest its feet . Real estate agents can see the bridge creating a boom in their business, and can’t understand why anyone should object to the span . They see the bridge as a convenience for the prospective Rocklander who wants to dash over to Westchester to have tea with friends and still be home in time for supper . They see it as the only logical answer to the prayer of the commuter who has always wanted to ride to New York in the trains on the east side of the Hudson rather than those on the west side.

Gazing into the crystal hall, STRIDE sees a different picture . It sees homes demolished to make way for the bridge and its approaches; it sees the Nyack Turnpike transforme d into a six lane speedway with banked corners and one auto accident daily; it sees no more peaceful country lanes, nothing but ribbons of concrete without curve or character over which swarm holiday picnickers — their cars weighted down with camp chairs a nd baby carriages — scattering five cent candy wrappers and Dixie Cups along the way; it sees rows and rows of small bungalows where rambling farms used to be. These houses are so close together that your neighbor doesn’t even have to put his head out the window in order to hear your radio; it sees Rockland County becoming, to quote the musical comedy The Bandwagon, "a. nice place to visit, but a hell of a place to live."

Just how Westchester will react to the bridge is not known . One thing is certain: The bridge will knock the sleep out of Sleepy Hollow.

And here we are, in 2005, living in a county that was changed forever by the construction of the Tappan Zee Bridge . STRIDE'S crystal ball was working pretty well back in 1936.

Tappan Zee Bridge Considerations

Since the opening of the bridge in 1955, much has changed in Rockland and the neighboring counties. While plans for the physical structures are being designed and reviewed, we must not forget the human element. How do these structures impact each of us and our communities?

Interestingly, at the Transportation Summit convened by Rockland County Legislature Chairwoman Harriet Cornell, on September 30, 2005, the liveliest discussion was driven by a concern for adequate participation by stakeholders. The span of fifty years has driven home the point of how land use is influenced by how we get around, and what moves us. It is evident more than ever that careful, comprehensive planning be required of all public officials and government employees, but it is vitally important to have active citizen participation.

The I-287 corridor and Tappan Zee Bridge are a piece of the puzzle that determines the picture of the regional transit system. The overflow of a congested highway and over-crowded roads only adds to the problems of getting about in this area, and increases air pollution. Improved mass transportation facilities must be developed.

The following outline of comments was prepared by Julius Levine, a longstanding RCCA board member. Educated at Cooper Union, Julius spent a career working as an engineer. He has put together some basic points of interest that consider very tangible realities to be evaluated for the future of the Tappan Zee Bridge.

1. List the various approaches to be considered

2. Define each approach in great detail.

3. If any approach has variations list them separately as stand alone options.

4. For each approach, list all the key considerations and potential problems.

5. Define the projected needs for the bridge system for the next fifty years.

6. Whichever approach is selected, the design criteria should be for a hundred years of reliable operation.

Approaches to be considered for each of the repair or replacement conditions

Current bridge considerations:

1. Maximum design load; static, rolling and environmental, of existing bridge.

2. Does the design load meet the projected requirements for the next 50 years?

3. Can the present road surface support the current load requirements? If not can the present surface be strengthened?

4. Can the present supporting structure support an improved road bed if needed?

5. If the bridge can’t meet our future needs it should be replaced.

6. If the bridge is to be repaired, the causeway must be replaced.

Repair:

Physical bridge dimensions will remain unchanged.

The current structure may not support a, proposed cantilevered structure for cars to pull over.

There are many fixes that will provide short time through-traffic improvements.

For the existing bridge the maximum traffic flow can be modeled.

High speed overhead toll readers can be used to enhance traffic flow.

NOTE: Significant traffic increase may not be safe with the existing structure.

Replace:

Option 1: Vehicular traffic only.

1. Define future load requirements; cars, trucks, busses, etc:

2. Specify number of lanes needed to meet future requirements.

3. Specify pullover and emergency support requirements.

4. Know that the new bridge must be completely integrated with the thruway on both sides of the river before the old bridge is removed.

5. Consider: After the new bridge has been integrated with the Thruway and before the old one is removed, there will be two operational bridges in place. If the old bridge is repaired to carry one- way traffic and the new bridge is designed to carry all additional amenities, there is the additional safety of being able to maintain an operational link if an accident happens on one bridge.

Option 2: Vehicular traffic plus light rail, buss, or other mass transit system

1. Define the path and type of the mass transit system to be used.

Where does it start, where does it go, and where will the stops along the route be located.

Each stop will need a station, which will require parking and other amenities.

2. If mass transit capability is a requirement as part of the bridge structure, then links with the north, south rail lines will require additional considerations.

3. The thruway (bridge) and the north-south rail lines intersect at different elevations requiring stations at each level and handicapped accessible transport between levels.

4. The replacement bridge must be completed and smoothly interfaced with the thruway, at both ends, before the existing bridge can be removed.

5. Property on both sides of the river must be acquired to accommodate the replacement bridge as well as the staging areas for construction equipment and material.

NOTE: Turf battles between the Thruway Authority and the MTA will be harmful to both Rockland and Westchester Counties.

River Crossings

“Man is explicable by nothing less than all his history”
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Rockland County Conservation Association

Working with the Environment for a Better Future, through conservation of natural resources, sound land use, clean air and water, proper drainage energy conservation and preservation of natural beauty.