Verrazano-Narrows Bridge - Designed by Othmar Ammann

[BigMac]

Downtown Express
January 12-18, 2007

Editorial

Backup — Verrazano’s toll change gets worse with time

There are new people in power in Washington and Albany, so bad decisions made two decades ago can be changed. We’re talking about the Verrazano Bridge’s warped tolling system.

What’s the problem? The bridge tolls are only collected from riders leaving Brooklyn to Staten Island. The result: thousands of truckers and other commuters going from Brooklyn or Long Island to New Jersey avoid the Verrazano toll by taking the Manhattan Bridge into Lower Manhattan and going to one of the free outbound routes – the Holland or Lincoln Tunnels or the George Washington Bridge.

Truckers can no longer use the Holland on the west end of Lower Manhattan, but they still clog up the east end of Downtown, Brooklyn and Midtown. For large trucks, which can pay almost $5/per axle on top of their $9 base toll, the longer route represents big savings. Motorists and truckers seeking to avoid the one-way toll contribute to making the Canal St. corridor one of the most congested, polluted and dangerous crossings in the city.

It shouldn’t take a revelation to see that adding pollution to the city’s most clogged areas, and forcing companies with business in Manhattan to waste more time and money, are things to be avoided.

The Verrazano tolls used to go both ways until 1986 when Staten Island’s representative in Congress, Guy Molinari, and Sen. Al D’Amato, took the highly unusual step of fighting for federal rules on a local tolling decision. The two Republicans later got bipartisan “help” from Democratic Gov. Mario Cuomo, who backed this foolish change.

We were pleased last week when Rep. Jerrold Nadler told us he has not let the issue die and he plans to discuss changing the tolls with Sen. Chuck Schumer soon, although we are a little disappointed that he has not brought the topic up yet. Nadler told us he thinks the “political stars are aligned” for a toll change. We appreciate his advocacy on this issue and hope his optimism is well-placed.

This change will not happen quickly though. It will also need support in Albany and City Hall. Traffic analyst Brian Ketchum points out that London’s successful congestion pricing system, which has cut down on traffic in the city’s busiest sections, took a five-year, $30-million public education effort before it could be implemented.

We know there are people reading this saying, “It’s easy for these Downtowners with their great mass transit to back tolls on the other boroughs.”

Well to that we say the city’s mass transit commuters who pay $2 in MetroCard swipes to get around town should not have to subsidize the driving habits of people, particularly when there is not nearly enough resources to fund all of the needed mass transit improvements. Correcting the misguided one-way Verrazano toll could not only pay for some of these improvements, it would reduce pollution and lower business costs.

Ketchum, a veteran of New York’s traffic fights, and others are understandably skeptical the Verrazano tolls will be changed. “There hasn’t been any courageous people in government for three decades,” he told us this week. Let’s hope he’s wrong about that and Jerry Nadler is right.

© 2006 Community Media, LLC

[BigMac]

Alan Betensley on Wikipedia:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/9d/Verrazano.JPG/800px-Verrazano.JPG

[Punzie]

Just to set the record straight, former governor Mario Cuomo changed his position vis-a-vis the Verrazano:

Cuomo Asks Return of 2-Way Toll For Trucks on Verrazano Bridge

March 4, 1988
By JAMES BARRON,
SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES; Metropolitan Desk
Late City Final Edition, Section B, Page 3, Column 1, 339 words

DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - LEAD: Hoping to ease traffic jams, cut pollution and gain at least $3 million in lost revenue, Governor Cuomo today proposed reinstating two-way tolls for trucks crossing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge.

[splicing]

Traffic in Manhattan isn't going to change one bit by reinstating the two-way toll between Brooklyn and Staten Island.
I worked on King Street for 16 years and saw the mess created by the bottlenecks at the Holland Tunnel every single day.

Two southbound lanes on Varick Street merge with two westbound lanes on Broome Street, merge with two westbound lanes on Canal Street, merge with two eastbound lanes on Canal Street, merge with two northbound lanes on Hudson Street. All of that traffic enters the tunnel on two lanes.
On top of that, everyone blocks-the-box.
That's the problem, not a one-way toll 16 miles away.


BTW, the Verrazano Bridge toll subsidizes LIRR and Metro North - two services that are totally useless to Staten Island's residents.

[ZippyTheChimp]

I worked on King Street for 16 years and saw the mess created by the bottlenecks at the Holland Tunnel every single day.All your time on King St was after the one-way toll was initiated, so you have no basis for comparison.

I've worked in the area since the early 70s, and the change in traffic was almost immediate. Within a year, all the truckers were clued-in.

[splicing]

All your time on King St was after the one-way toll was initiated, so you have no basis for comparison.

I've worked in the area since the early 70s, and the change in traffic was almost immediate. Within a year, all the truckers were clued-in.

The trucks are gone and the traffic is still there. There's the comparison.

Trucks and cars will still need to get in and out of Manhattan regardless of the expense.

[ZippyTheChimp]

The trucks are not gone. They still cross the Manhattan Bridge and head cross town and up 9A. Because of the axle fees, the one-way toll attracts a higher percentage of large trucks.


The trucks are gone and the traffic is still there. There's the comparisonNo one is suggesting that restoring two-way tolls is going to eliminate traffic, but the last thing you need in a high traffic environment is extra 50 ft trucks that have trouble getting across intersections.

The point is that the one-way toll adds truck traffic to Lower Manhattan streets.

[splicing]

The point is that the one-way toll adds truck traffic to Lower Manhattan streets.OK, let's say that the two-way toll is restored.
What changes will the trucks make to their routes?

[ZippyTheChimp]

The trucks that would normally take the shorter (or faster) route across Staten Island would do so. If the route is faster or shorter across Manhattan, then that's the way they will go.

That's how it was before 1986. This has been studied to death; it's not rocket science.

If, as you say, the two-way toll will accomplish nothing, what's the big deal about restoring it - like the other intracity crossings?

[splicing]

The trucks that would normally take the shorter (or faster) route across Staten Island would do so. If the route is faster or shorter across Manhattan, then that's the way they will go.

That's how it was before 1986. This has been studied to death; it's not rocket science.

If, as you say, the two-way toll will accomplish nothing, what's the big deal about restoring it - like the other intracity crossings?

The big deal is that Staten Island's residents will pay the price, again.

Every other borough's residents have the choice of several FREE routes to travel intracity - which is not so on Staten Island.

If people belive that tolls are useful in reducing traffic, then why not advocate tolls for all Jersey-bound routes, and the Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williamsburg, and Queensborough Bridges?

You're right, it's not rocket science. The trucks will indeed use the shorter and faster routes regardless of the tolls because it is far more expensive to sit in traffic then to avoid them. The traffic that exists in Manhattan will never change because it's necessary for business.

My point is that a two-way toll on the Verrazano will only further burden Staten Island and resolve nothing in Manhattan.

[ablarc]

If people belive that tolls are useful in reducing traffic, then why not advocate tolls for all Jersey-bound routes, and the Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williamsburg, and Queensborough Bridges?
Great idea !!! :p

[ZippyTheChimp]

The big deal is that Staten Island's residents will pay the price, again.
The bridge was a boon to Staten Island, moreso than to any other borough. Two-edged sword.


Every other borough's residents have the choice of several FREE routes to travel intracity - which is not so on Staten Island.The ferry is free.


If people belive that tolls are useful in reducing traffic, then why not advocate tolls for all Jersey-bound routes, and the Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williamsburg, and Queensborough Bridges?Who's not advocating tolls for the East River? The problem is that if this discussion was about reducing traffic by putting tolls on the East River bridges, someone could make a similar statement to yours, just switch Manhattan for Verrazano.


You're right, it's not rocket science. The trucks will indeed use the shorter and faster routes regardless of the tolls because it is far more expensive to sit in traffic then to avoid them.If it's not rocket science, why do you still fail to grasp that that's not what's happening.


The traffic that exists in Manhattan will never change because it's necessary for business.We are not talking about the traffic that goes to Manhattan, but traffic that goes through it instead of the normal route through Staten Island.


My point is that a two-way toll on the Verrazano will only further burden Staten Island and resolve nothing in Manhattan.Well, at least you finally admitted that your point is about Staten Island, not about any effect it would or would not have in Manhattan.

[splicing]

The bridge was a boon to Staten Island, moreso than to any other borough. Two-edged sword.
Economic, yes.
Quality of life, no.


The ferry is free.True, but cars are no longer allowed on the ferry - which is the meat of this thread.


Well, at least you finally admitted that your point is about Staten Island, not about any effect it would or would not have in Manhattan.Of course it is.
But, if you believe that my agenda is to screw Manhattan's residents, you're wrong.
If Manhattan's residents weren't guilty of the reverse, they'd advocate for Jersey-bound tolls on the Holland, Lincoln, and GW to test their beliefs instead of pushing their representatives to reverse one of the best traffic solutions for Staten Island in history.

Now, to address your other points, please consider this:

A truck's home base is somewhere south of NYC. It takes a route through SI (over the VZ) to make a delivery anywhere in Brooklyn. On its return trip back, why would it traverse through Brooklyn, over the Manhattan Bridge, across Canal Street, up 9A, and through the Lincoln Tunnel?
Every segment of this route is infamous for traffic.
It is far less expensive (driver's salary + fuel costs + loss of productivity) and sensible to just return back over the VZ and pay the toll - which IS what's happening.

[MrSpice]

Just to set the record straight, former governor Mario Cuomo changed his position vis-a-vis the Verrazano:

Cuomo Asks Return of 2-Way Toll For Trucks on Verrazano Bridge

March 4, 1988
By JAMES BARRON,
SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES; Metropolitan Desk
Late City Final Edition, Section B, Page 3, Column 1, 339 words

DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - LEAD: Hoping to ease traffic jams, cut pollution and gain at least $3 million in lost revenue, Governor Cuomo today proposed reinstating two-way tolls for trucks crossing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge.

Thanks for reminding what an ass Mario Cuomo was. I am so glad he is not in the office anymore. He turned New York City and New York state into high-taxed welfare capital of the US.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Economic, yes.
Quality of life, no.
Again, two-edged sword.


True, but cars are no longer allowed on the ferry - which is the meat of this thread.That will change when the terminal is complete.


If Manhattan's residents weren't guilty of the reverse, they'd advocate for Jersey-bound tolls on the Holland, Lincoln, and GW to test their beliefs instead of pushing their representatives to reverse one of the best traffic solutions for Staten Island in history.It was eliminated because the tunnels would back up and spill over into Manhattan streets. Both sides of the Verrazano connect to expressways.


A truck's home base is somewhere south of NYC. It takes a route through SI (over the VZ) to make a delivery anywhere in Brooklyn. On its return trip back, why would it traverse through Brooklyn, over the Manhattan Bridge, across Canal Street, up 9A, and through the Lincoln Tunnel?Did I say it was all trucks? What about trucks east and west? The fact that you acknowledge a two-way toll would increase traffic on Staten Island is an admission that it would decrease it somewhere else.

The traffic should flow along a natural route, not distorted by a toll structure that make the longer route through a more dense area financially preferable.

Manhattan residential density: 67,000/sq mile.
Staten Island: 7,000/sq mile. Suburban.

We haven't even discussed the middle of the night, when it is even more advantageous for big rigs to take this route.


It is far less expensive (driver's salary + fuel costs + loss of productivity) and sensible to just return back over the VZ and pay the toll - which IS what's happening.That is simply not true; if it is, then a two-way toll would have no effect on traffic patterns. Trucks would just continue to do what you think they already do.

So what are you afraid of?

[splicing]

That will change when the terminal is complete.
Not true. The official notice from NYCDOT is "...until further notice".
It can hardly be considered a viable route, anyway.


The fact that you acknowledge a two-way toll would increase traffic on Staten Island is an admission that it would decrease it somewhere else.I don't have the slightest belief that a two-way toll will increase the volume of traffic on SI.
I do contend that it will force vehicles to make an unnecessary stop thereby increasing congestion here, and have zero effect in Manhattan.


The traffic should flow along a natural route, not distorted by a toll structure that make the longer route through a more dense area financially preferable.I agree. So why can't you accept that lower Manhattan is, was, and always will be a natural route for traffic as you believe the SI Expressway is?


That is simply not trueSure it is. If the route is longer, in time and distance, then it must be more expensive. One hour of traffic (which is certainly a reasonable estimate) will cost more than any toll in existence.

Like I stated previously. If the belief is that traffic in Manhattan is the result of cost-reducing truckers, then Jersey-bound tolls are indeed the solution. The reduction in traffic would offset the spill-over.
What are you afraid of?

[ZippyTheChimp]

There is no point in further discussion on where the traffic goes, since you have ignored studies ad nauseam, and seem to instinctively "know" the answer.

The backed-up toll plaza is a pre-EZ Pass dinosaur argument that is no longer relevant.

I already stated why the two-way tolls from Manhattan to New Jersey were eliminated.

What seems to enter the debate whenever Staten Island is in the mix is the real and perceived affronts on its residents by the rest of the city.


The big deal is that Staten Island's residents will pay the price, again.

BTW, the Verrazano Bridge toll subsidizes LIRR and Metro North - two services that are totally useless to Staten Island's residents.

Funds being used elsewhere. Like that doesn't happen anywhere but Staten Island.

Even the three new ferries are a concession to Staten Island complaints. They hold 4400 passengers and 40 cars. If built strictly for passengers, they would hold 5400 - just so fat-ass guidos can sit in their bling-bling Escalades and drive off the ferry, rather than risk a heart attack by waddling to a subway station.

Thank you, Rudy.

BTW, until further notice means until the terminal and plaza are complete. The new boats are already configured for cars.

[ablarc]

And the winner is ... Zippy by TKO !

[splicing]

And the winner is ... Zippy by TKO !

Awww! No fair, my wife made plans for us.



The backed-up toll plaza is a pre-EZ Pass dinosaur argument that is no longer relevant.

I already stated why the two-way tolls from Manhattan to New Jersey were eliminated.If EZ Pass is good enough to work for a two-way Verrazano toll, then it's good enough to work for two-way Holland Tunnel toll.

[splicing]

Sunday, January 14, 2007
http://www.silive.com/images/spacer.gif http://www.silive.com/images/spacer.gif
Brooklyn Congressman Offers Ideas to Alleviate City Truck Traffic
Staten Island and Brooklyn will see the greatest increase in truck traffic by 2020, with 93% and 95% increases respectively over 1998 levels, according to Federal Highway Administration projections.

In an attempt to rectify the problem, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-Brooklyn) unveiled a plan today to battle the expected rise in truck traffic.

Among his suggestions are a 5.5 mile cross harbor rail freight tunnel, which has already been proposed by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-Manhattan/Brooklyn).

The tunnel would run under New York Harbor from Sunset Park in Brooklyn to Greenville Yard in Jersey City and is estimated to take 1 million trucks off City streets.

According to a New York State Department of Transportation study, 96 percent of Manhattan deliveries take place during peak hours.

To discourage truck traffic from passing through the City at peak hours, Weiner said truck tolls should be increased peak hour on City river crossings that have existing tolls.

[BrooklynRider]

1.
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd21/Rollercoaster1/CONEY%20ISLAND%2009/APRIL2009068.jpg

2.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd21/Rollercoaster1/CONEY%20ISLAND%2009/APRIL2009069.jpg

3.
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd21/Rollercoaster1/CONEY%20ISLAND%2009/APRIL2009069.jpg

4.
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd21/Rollercoaster1/CONEY%20ISLAND%2009/APRIL2009072.jpg

[Merry]

Big Town, Big Picture: The Verrazano-Narrows Bridge

September 23rd 2009

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/09/23/alg_btbp.jpg
Aerial view of the Belt Parkway at the foot of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge.


http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/09/23/amd_btbp2.jpg
Verrazano Bridge approach is paved in forground at 85th street. Brooklyn, unpaved from 82nd to 79th streets, and paved further north.


http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/09/23/amd_btbp1.jpg
Approaches and Verrazano-Narrows Bridge under construction.

Liberty Bridge, the mighty span linking Brooklyn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Brooklyn) and Staten Island (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Staten+Island) was originally going to be called. That was back in 1928.

What with a depression and a world war and one thing after another, the excitement subsided and it was another two decades before Robert Moses (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Robert+Moses) and the Triborough Bridge (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Triborough+Bridge) and Tunnel Authority revived the idea.
Here now would be another vital link in the far-flung Moses highway network. Here now, along with the Goethals from Staten Island to Jersey, would be a direct route from New England (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/New+England+States) and Long Island (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Long+Island) to the south and west.

But it took another decade yet for work to start, since Moses had to uproot thousands of families and businesses and demolish their neighborhoods around both the Brooklyn and Staten Island anchorages; particularly in Bay Ridge (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Bay+Ridge) on the Brooklyn side, legal hurdles thrown up by legions of howling citizens blocked construction through the administrations of several mayors and governors and legislatures. They lost.

And when the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Verrazano+Narrows+Bridge) officially opened in November 1964 — the world’s longest suspension bridge, designed by old Othmar Ammann (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Othmar+Ammann) himself — it put an end to Staten Island’s 300 years of sweetly pastoral semi-isolation . Several ferry lines went out of business on the spot as boom times loomed. From now on, Brooklyn was just 30 minutes away from the New Jersey Turnpike. Unless there were traffic jams, of course.


http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/09/23/2009-09-23_big_town_big_picture_the_verrazzanonarrows_brid ge.html

[Derek2k3]

Random thought, but I'd love if they painted the bridge Staten Island Ferry orange.

http://statenislandsnorthshore.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/staten_island_ferry_12.jpg

[ZippyTheChimp]

We'd catch hell from San Francisco.

[lofter1]

Maybe if it was painted ORANGE and BLUE ...

But there's no need; the current color is perfect.

[ZippyTheChimp]

What are you thinking, Lofter?

Those are Mets colors. This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4XGjAIL--s&feature=PlayList&p=9097E7B3FA8950DD&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=2) would happen.

[lofter1]

Also the colors of another local team (http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com/nl/bdodgers/brooklyn.html) of yore ...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/62/BrooklynDodgersLogo.png

[Derek2k3]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/144/342544531_5370d6294a_b.jpg
stratushead (http://www.flickr.com/photos/45504212@N00/342544531/sizes/l/)

Well the color is a bit plain. The Whitestone and the Troggs Neck Bridges are the same color. I think for the Olympics they had plans to paint some of the bridges the colors of the olympic rings.

[Derek2k3]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2673/4110424793_e15e0809a7_b.jpg
Barry Yanowitz (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomvu/4111188636/sizes/l/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2780/4111188636_277eeb6a5d_b.jpg
Barry Yanowitz (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomvu/4111188636/sizes/l/)

[fioco]

Yes, that's a far better solution: Paint the sky not the bridge. Beautiful!

[splicing]

By Maura Yates (http://connect.silive.com/user/meyates/index.html)

January 26, 2010, 6:34AM


STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- More than 20 years after they collected their last toll, the defunct Brooklyn-bound Verrazano-Narrows Bridge toll booths will be torn down starting this spring, the MTA announced yesterday. Brooklyn-based Paul J. Scariano Inc. was awarded the contract for the $2.5 million project, which involves demolition of eight toll booths, which long ago outlived their usefulness and serve only to slow morning traffic. The contract also includes the removal of the booths’ concrete islands, utilities, canopy structures and electronic signs, as well as electrical, concrete and asphalt restoration work. The first of the booths are slated to meet the wrecking ball in April, and the entire project is expected to be completed early next year. The booth removal, coupled with upcoming major improvements to the Staten Island Expressway, “will significantly improve traffic,” said MTA Board Member Allen Cappelli. But before the payoff comes the pain. “There is no way that there is not going to be some impact,” Cappelli said, but the project will be done in stages to keep traffic flowing. 2 AT A TIME
The booths will come down two at a time, starting with the ones to the far right of the plaza. Traffic lanes will be shifted during the work to accommodate the demolition, and the same number of lanes will be maintained during rush hours.

A second phase of the project will remove the last three Brooklyn-bound toll booths and complete the realignment of the roadway, which, coupled with the state Department of Transportation’s plans to improve the Staten Island Expressway’s on- and off-ramps, is expected to ease traffic flow.

This second phase, set to begin in 2011 and wrap up in 2014, will include construction of a new connector ramp leading from the Expressway directly onto the lower level of the bridge.

Improvements are also planned at eight Expressway entrance and exit ramps nearest to the toll plaza, along with a realignment of the stretch of roadway where the highway and toll plaza meet the bridge.

These fixes are expected to cut down on dangerous weaving maneuvers by drivers entering the bridge’s two levels.

Also, the two-lane Fingerboard Road overpass will be replaced with a new, wider roadway including left-turn lanes, to improve traffic flow leading to and from the Verrazano.

“This project marks the most significant changes in the physical design of the toll plaza since the lower level of the bridge was opened in June 1969,” said Jim Ferrara, acting president of MTA Bridges and Tunnels, which runs the Verrazano.

“Removing these outdated, deteriorating structures that have not been used since 1986, when one-way tolling was instituted, will significantly improve traffic flow through the plaza and onto the bridge,” Ferrara said.

“This is one part of a major transportation initiative funded with stimulus funding to a great extent that represents some of the most serious transportation investments in my memory,” Cappelli said.

“I am pleased that the MTA has moved this project forward along with these federally funded improvements in an effort to facilitate the eastbound traffic for Staten Island commuters,” said Rep. Michael McMahon.

Assemblyman Lou Tobacco hailed the news as the beginning of a series of improvements that will reduce traffic congestion and improve a frequently arduous commute for Islanders.

“A quicker commute, less pollution and our construction workers back at work; this is a victory for Staten Island,” said state Sen. Diane Savino.



http://www.silive.com/eastshore/index.ssf/2010/01/end_is_near_for_obsolete_verra.html#_login

[Merry]

MTA moves ahead to get rid of Verrazano’s phantom toll booths

By Andy Campbell

One of the most frustrating ways to get into the borough is one step closer to being fixed, now that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has hired a contractor to remove the phantom toll booths on the Brooklyn-bound side of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge.

Even though one-way tolling was instituted in 1986 — giving drivers a free ride into the Borough of Kings — unmanned toll booths have remained, forcing drivers to slow from highway speeds, slide through the booths and then re-accelerate as they make their way back to the promised land on the east side of the Narrows.

The $2.5-million project kicks off in spring.

“This work is really going to change the traffic flow,” MTA spokeswoman Joyce Mulvaney said — and she means it in a good way.

The removal of most of the booths, which should be done by early 2011, is just the first step of a four-year project that will shift lanes, remove the remaining Brooklyn-bound toll booths, and build new connector ramps to and from the bridge to correct traffic problems.

“When you’re pulling stuff out of the ground, it’s going to take some time,” Mulvaney said.

The work is the most significant change to the toll plaza since the lower level of the bridge opened in 1969.

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/7/33_07_ac_verrazano.html

[Merry]

MTA refutes claim on Verrazano Bridge

Agency stresses that its youngest and longest span is one of its soundest physically and financially; statement comes in wake of watchdog group’s report.

By Marine Cole

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/CN/20110331/REAL_ESTATE/110339971/AR/Verrazano-Narrows-.jpg&q=100&MaxW=800
(http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/CN/20110331/REAL_ESTATE/110339971/AR/Verrazano-Narrows-.jpg&q=100&MaxW=800)
Verrazano called NY's most dangerous bridge (http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110330/REAL_ESTATE/110339991)

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority insisted Thursday that its longest and youngest bridge, the Verrazano-Narrows, is also one of its soundest.

The comments came one day after the publication of a report on structurally deficient bridges across the country from Transportation for America, a coalition working toward transportation reform. An official at the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, a nonprofit that is part of the coalition, had labeled the Verrazano as the state’s “most dangerous” span.

“The Verrazano-Narrows is completely safe and any suggestion otherwise is a gross misinterpretation of inspection records,” said a spokeswoman for the MTA, which operates the bridge. She also cited the most recent, 2010 inspection of the bridge, noting it concluded that it is “structurally sound with no red flags or imminent structural problems.” A red flag is an issue that needs to be addressed immediately. “It appears the data in the (Transportation for America) report came from a 2008 inspection,” she added.

In recent years, the agency has spent hundreds of millions of dollars maintaining the span, which links Brooklyn and Staten Island. The agency has $620.5 million in its capital budget for future repairs and maintenance. That money comes from tolls on the bridge, currently $13 for motorists paying cash, and from the sale of Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority bonds backed by tolls.

“Every bridge will have structural deficiencies, but it doesn’t mean it’s about to fall down,” the MTA spokeswoman said. She noted that the fact that the bridge has structural deficiencies and is the most trafficked in the state doesn’t make it the most dangerous. “It’s very alarmist," she said.

Kate Slevin, the executive director of Tri-State Transportation Campaign, agreed with the MTA.

“We don’t want to scare people,” she said. “The bridge is in need of repair but the numbers don’t show it as the most dangerous bridge.”

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110331/REAL_ESTATE/110339971#

[lofter1]

Before the bridge was built, our own Guantanamo ...

Fort Lafayette

http://www.nytstore.com/assets/images/ExtraLarge/NSAP1976_EXTR.jpg
The Narrows and Fort Lafayette, Ships Coming Into Port (1868), by Samuel Colman

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Lafayette)

Fort Lafayette was an island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island) coastal fortification (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortification) in the Narrows (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Narrows) of New York Harbor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Harbor), built offshore from Fort Hamilton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hamilton) at the southern tip of what is now Bay Ridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Ridge,_Brooklyn) in the New York City (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City) borough (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borough_(New_York_City)) of Brooklyn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn). The fort was built upon a natural island known as Hendrick's Reef.

Construction on the fort began during the War of 1812 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812) and was finally completed in 1818, the fort originally named Fort Diamond was renamed in 1825 to celebrate the Marquis de La Fayette (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_du_Motier,_marquis_de_La_Fayette), a hero of the American Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution) who was returning to his native France (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France) after his year-longgrand tour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visit_of_the_Marquis_de_Lafayette_to_the_United_St ates_(1824-25)) of the United States.

Construction of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verrazano-Narrows_Bridge) caused the fort's destruction in 1960; the Brooklyn-side bridge pillars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Column) now occupy the fort's former foundation site.

Civil War prison

Before 1861, the fort's 72 heavy cannon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannon) commanded the primary approaches to the harbor, but during the Civil War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War), the casemates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casemate) were used to house Confederate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_Army) prisoners of war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_war) andpoliticians opposed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copperheads_(politics)) to the administration's policies, detained under Abraham Lincoln (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln)'s selective suspension of the writ of habeas corpus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus). Fort Lafayette came to be known as the "American Bastille".

Robert Cobb Kennedy formerly a captain in the 1st Louisiana Regular Infantry CSA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_Army) was one of the Confederate conspirators in the plot to burn New York on November 25, 1864 and was the only one caught. He was imprisoned and hanged at the fort on March 25, 1865. The plot to burn New York was to be retaliation for Sherman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_T._Sherman) burning Atlanta.

***

1858:
14354

1861:
14355

1862:
14356

***

THE PLOT TO BURN NEW-YORK

ARREST OF FOUR CONSPIRATORS. THEY ARE TO BE TRIED AS SPIES.

COURT-MARTIAL AT FORT LAFAYETTE.

Travels of a Hotel-Keeper. The Testimonial Business An Imposition on Ill.-Paid Clerks.

NEW YORK TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/1865/01/17/news/plot-burn-new-york-arrest-four-conspirators-they-are-be-tried-spies-court.html)
January 17, 1865

Gen. DIX and his subordinates have had an object in view in striving, as they have done since the night of the incendiary attempt to lay our city in ashes, to create the impression that they were making no movements with a view to the apprehension of the incendiaries. And the event proves their action to have been judicious at least, if not the most gratifying that the newsmongers could have conceived for, now that the vail has been partially lifted, we discover four prisoners against whom the accumulated proofs are said to be overwhelming, and learn that our officials have gathered such facts as will enable them, in due time, to establish a clear case against many another rebel who now reposes in fancied security.

Immediately on promulgating the memorable order of Nov. 26, instructing military officers in the Department of the East to deal summarily with rebel raiders and incendiaries, Gen. DIX called Police Superintendent KENNEDY to aid him, and the Superintendent was authorized to employ such and as many men from his force as he might think proper. Mr. KENNEDY lost no time in detailing a number of his ablest detective policemen, and these, under the leadership of Chief Detective YOUNG, were promptly sent to the Canadian border, under instructions giving them discretionary power. The men had been absent a fortnight before any person remarked the circumstance; but at length their prolonged tarry naturally excited the curiosity of frequenters at the Central Department of the Metropolitan Police; yet the secret was well kept, and not until the officers had reached town with their prisoners, and seen them securely boiled within the walls of Fort Lafayette, did a lisp escape his lips.

Chief YOUNG and his men went hence direct to the Canada line, and put themselves in communication with the detective officers in the chief cities from Lewiston, New-York, to Port Huron, Michigan; and having done this, they separated, but were careful to keep within telegraphic ball of one another -- some going into Canada, and others remaining on our side of the line. The secret having been entrusted to the authorities on the border, these gentlemen entered into the work with much spirit, keeping an eye upon persons whom they suspected, giving our officers now and then a useful hint, tendering them speedy transportation to such points as it seemed desirable to reach, and, in short, aiding them in every way that lay within their power.

Nearly a fortnight passed in apparently fruitless search; not altogether fruitless, however, since every day's wandering paved the way toward the object which our officers had ultimately in view. So they groped onward patiently -- now in the gaming houses, now in the bar-rooms and drawing-rooms of rebel-haunted houses of entertainment, now here and then there; indeed, making themselves almost ubiquitous, until at the opening of the third week they struck the trail of the rebel Capt. BELL, and a party of his satellites. BELL was flourishing at a fashionable Canadian hotel, under the pseudonym of Baker; but, unluckily for him, there were loyal citizens of the United States at his elbow who knew him too well, and they contrived a plan to get him over the line, and then, dissemblance being no longer necessary, they revealed their knowledge, and delivered him into the hands of Detective YOUNG and his assistants.

The apprehension of Capt. BELL was followed in brief time by the capture of three other rebels, one of whom is known to have been engaged in the attempt to burn our hotels on the night of Nov. 25. The prisoners were found passing under names which they assumed for the occasion; but their real names are known, and are to be given to the public whenever Gen. DIX shall have made other arrests which the capture of these rebel emissaries has rendered necessary.

A general court-martial is to be convened immediately, at Fort Lafayette ...

***

A VAST AND FIENDISH PLOT (http://www.amazon.com/Vast-Fiendish-Plot-ebook/dp/B0031W1DX2/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2)

By Clint Johnson
Publication Date: March 1, 2010

New York City, November 25, 1864. Confederate officers attempt to destroy the city with a series of lethal fires that will forever diminish it to a mere speck of an island. What fueled these Southern patriots' rage? And what if they had succeeded?

This terrifying scenario almost became a reality following what the New York Herald declared "a vast and fiendish plot." Infuriated by the Union's killing of their beloved General John Hunt Morgan and the burning of the Shenandoah Valley, eight Confederate officers swore revenge. Their method: Greek fire. Their target: Manhattan's commercial district. The daring mission could have changed the course of American history.

In the first book to bring to life this bold conspiracy in full detail, Civil War expert Clint Johnson reveals shocking facts about the treacherous alliances and rivalries that threatened nineteenth-century America. Here is the truth about this stunning event, the spirit that fueled it, and the near destruction of the world's most influential city.

http://www.strandbooks.com/resources/strand/images/products/partitioned/5/7/7/0806531312.1.zoom.jpg