transportation investment generating economic recovery ... · transportation investment generating...

TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT GENERATING ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT APPLICATION

September 2009

SOUTH GRAND ISLAND BRIDGES –PHASE 2 REHABILITATION AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (Bridge Identification Number 5043981)

Interstate I‐190 Towns of Tonawanda and Grand Island

Erie County, New York Congressional District: 28

Category: Urban Principal Arterial Interstate TIGER GRANT FUNDS SOUGHT:

$22 Million

Applicant:NYS THRUWAY AUTHORITY

ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS 200 Southern Blvd.

P.O. Box 189 Albany, NY 12201‐0189

(518) 436‐2810 Point of Contact: Christopher A. Waite, P.E.

Chief Engineer, New York State Thruway Authority [email protected]

DUNS #:002429355

NYSTA South Grand Island Bridge Rehabilitation Project

2

Table of Contents

I. INTRODUCTION Page 4 Project Description Project Location Project Area Context Project Challenges

II. PROJECT CONDITIONS Page 7 History Speeds Passenger and Freight Problems Level of Service Accident Analysis Infrastructure Conditions Safety Issues

III. PROJECT LONG TERM OUTCOMES Page 8

State of Good Repair Economic Competitiveness Livability Sustainability Safety

IV. PROJECT SUPPORT Page 10 Congressional Support MPO Studies TIP Listing

V. PROJECT INVOLVED PARTIES Page 11

Grant Recipient Engineering Firm

VI. CURRENT PROJECT STATUS AND SCHEDULE Page 11 Project Schedule Construction Schedule and Sequencing Direct on Project Jobs Created Environmental Approvals and Agency Coordination Technical Feasibility

VII. PROJECT FUNDING Page 13 Financial Feasibility Percentage of Cost Provided by TIGER Grant

VIII. PROJECT BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS Page 14

IX. PROJECT INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES Page 17


3

APPENDICES APPENDIX A – PROJECT LOCATION MAPS APPENDIX B – GRAND ISLAND BRIDGES ACCIDENT SUMMARY APPENDIX C – ARRA ECONOMICALLY DISTRESSED AREAS MAP APPENDIX D – CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT LETTER APPENDIX E – MPO LETTER REGARDING TIP APPENDIX F – FEDERAL WAGE RATE REQUIREMENT CERTIFICATION APPENDIX G – BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS


4

I. INTRODUCTION The New York State Thruway Authority (Authority) has prepared this TIGER Grant application to secure funding for the repair of structural deficiencies associated with the South Grand Island Bridge southbound in Erie County. This is necessary to continue maintaining a safe bridge and to promote livability and economic sustainability in the region. The South Grand Island Bridge (SGIB) southbound is in a major transportation corridor and is one of the four Grand Island Bridges that provide the only means of access to and from Grand Island. The four bridge structures consist of the SGIB northbound, the SGIB southbound, the North Grand Island Bridge (NGIB) northbound and the North Grand Island Bridge southbound. These bridges must be maintained so that the transportation corridor from Buffalo to Grand Island and Niagara Falls, and a primary connection between the United States and Canada, can remain viable. The goal of the Authority is to provide a safe, efficient highway system for its patrons and to do so in a cost effective manner. This bridge is a critical component of the New York State Thruway (Thruway); it is part of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Corridor and is a lifeline critical structure to the local area, the state, and international trade. TIGER Grant application request: $22 Million. Project Description: The South Grand Island Bridge Rehabilitation Project is considered Phase 2 of the Grand Island Bridge Rehabilitations. Due to their significance as a trade corridor and commuter and tourism route, the Authority has been actively maintaining and repairing the four Grand Island Bridges. Phase 1 work is nearing completion and includes replacement of the deck, sidewalk and bridge railings on the SGIB northbound and the following work on both SGIBs: replacement of the bearings on the girder spans, repair of all the concrete substructures and cleaning of the expansion bearings on the truss spans. Phase 2 of the Grand Island Bridge Rehabilitations proposes to rehabilitate the deteriorated bridge deck, replace the concrete overlay, replace the expansion joints, replace the nested roller bearings supporting the trusses, and install redundancy retrofits to the fracture critical pins and hangers of the SGIB southbound. In addition, the SGIB northbound will also have the nested roller bearings replaced and redundancy retrofits installed to the pins and hangers.

Photo courtesy of Wikipedia

Project Location: The SGIB southbound is located between mile post N14.35 and mile post N14.99 on the Niagara Section of the New York State Thruway, Interstate 190, in the Towns of Tonawanda and Grand Island, Erie County. A location map is included above and in Appendix A.

The two North Grand Island Bridges (northbound and southbound)

The two South Grand Island Bridges (northbound and southbound) Phase 2 includes work on the South Grand Island Bridge southbound

Grand Island


5

Project Context:

1. Local: The SGIB touches down in the Town of Grand Island to the north and the Town of

Tonawanda to the south. Land use in the vicinity of the bridge is a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, and parkland.

Grand Island is a suburban area with recreational facilities and tourist attractions. There are two state parks with public beaches: Buckhorn Island State Park in the north and Beaver Island State Park at the south. It is also the home of Fantasy Island, an amusement park, several golf courses, many marinas and a Yacht Club. There are ample hotels, motels, and bed and breakfasts to accommodate tourists and visitors.

Grand Island also has extensive commercial, light industrial and residential development. It is an area ripe for growth, with the local beauty of the Niagara River, close proximity to Buffalo and Niagara Falls and the convenience of I‐190 traversing the island. Businesses and industries look to locate and relocate based upon transportation convenience, along with the availability of local enhancements for quality of life issues for employees. Grand Island can offer both. In fact, the Town’s home page touts Grand Island as the “perfectly located Northeast Hub”. However, the Town relies heavily on the Grand Island Bridges as the only connection to the mainland, so the Authority is committed to maintaining and providing reliable, safe and efficient bridges to its customers living and working on Grand Island.

Tonawanda, located to the south of the bridge, is a first tier suburb of Buffalo, with riverfront and recreational areas associated with waterfront. There are parks, beaches and marinas available for the local community and for tourists. Tonawanda is also known for heavy industrial development including the General Motors Powertrain plant, the Dupont facility where they manufacture Corian, Dunlop tire, and FMC Chemical. Tonawanda, like Grand Island, has extensive retail, light industrial and commercial development. The local communities of Grand Island and Tonawanda rely on the SGIB for both commuting and recreational needs.

2. Regional: As Tonawanda and Grand Island are suburbs to the Greater Buffalo area, which includes the city of Buffalo and the city of Niagara Falls, the project context must take into account the importance of Western, New York. Buffalo is part of what is termed the “Golden Horseshoe” which is an area that extends from Rochester, N.Y. to Hamilton, Toronto and beyond.

Recent population growth in Canada presents an opportunity for Buffalo and Western NY in jobs and trade business. The predicted population growth in the region (Toronto, Western NY) means growth opportunity for Western NY, thereby increasing trade to and within the region. As such, the region must preserve and protect its transportation capacity to respond to the growth and to capture the Canadian market that will be created. The Greater Buffalo area has an opportunity to strengthen its position in the Bi‐National Region. However, a safe, reliable transportation network is the key to its success. With one of the World’s most beautiful and powerful natural features, Niagara Falls, located within 13 miles of the project, regional tourism is also of great importance. The Greater Buffalo area relies heavily on tourism, which is an important component of its economy, and the SGIBs provide vital links to the Niagara Falls tourism area. The SGIBs must remain a viable and reliable link to such an American icon for this Region to survive economically.

3. State: The SGIBs carry Interstate 190, an essential international corridor. Transportation

infrastructure is a fundamental building block required to attract investment and create jobs. Firms place great weight on transportation resources when making decisions as to where to locate.


6

Providing the necessary safety repairs and rehabilitation needed for the SGIB Phase 2 will reflect what New York State has recommended in the New York State Advisory Panel for Transportation Policy 2025; “Trade, Technology and Traffic (primarily truck traffic) are factors reshaping our future and will affect how the State’s transportation system performs in five priority result areas.” The areas include: • Mobility & Reliability – providing choices and predictable travel times. The completion

of the necessary repairs to the structural deficiencies of the South Grand Island Bridge southbound will enable the Authority to continue to provide a reliable transportation route to its local, state and international customers.

• Safety – reducing accidents and injuries. The South Grand Island Bridge southbound

has a higher than average statewide accident rate comparing similar types of roadways. Improvements to the deck will help to alleviate some of the accidents.

• Environmental Conditions – improving the environment through transportation

actions. Preventative measures to be presented by this project aim to alleviate traffic delays caused by accidents, hence improving the carbon footprint.

• Economic Competitiveness – A free flowing, reliable transportation system is one of the best strategies to improve international trade. It allows for businesses to relocate within New York’s borders, when there is a reliable system for the movement of people and goods.

• Security – strengthening our ability to prevent, mitigate and recover. Maintaining and protecting this critical structure is essential to keeping this lifeline corridor open during critical events.

4. International: As mentioned above, the Grand Island Bridges are a component of the North American Free Trade Agreement trade corridor. According to a statement of the New York State Department of Transportation on the National Corridor Planning and Development Program and the Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program: “For years, the United States and Canada have had the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world. In 1995, that relationship resulted in $272 billion in total merchandise trade, exceeding U.S. trade with the entire European Union ($256 billion) and more than doubled the U.S. trade with Mexico ($110 billion). One third of the value of imports from Canada to the U.S. and 20 percent of the exports from the U.S. to Canada are carried by New York's transportation infrastructure and across New York's border with Canada. Traffic volumes at New York State's border crossings are significant. In 1995, nearly 25 million vehicles passed over New York State's 17 staffed international crossings, and traffic is growing. Over the last decade, there has been a substantial increase in auto and truck traffic at the New York and Canadian border. Between 1984 and 1995, the bridges crossing into Erie County experienced a nearly 25 percent increase in total traffic, with truck traffic increasing by nearly 60 percent. Total crossing activity at the four Niagara Region bridges, 16.4 million two‐way crossings in 1995, is surpassed only by San Diego, El Paso and Detroit.”

Project Challenges: The SGIB southbound was built in 1935 and has several structural deficiencies that are in need of immediate attention. While there is no eminent danger, there are several items that must be repaired in the near future in order to maintain the structural integrity of the Bridge. The maximum probable loss for this structure is estimated at $60, 147,000 according to the 2009 Valuation Report. The purpose of this grant application is to prevent the


7

need for such an occurrence, keeping the structure in a reliable state of good repair. A failure of such a critical transportation link in Western, New York, has far reaching implications beyond the local community, leading toward regional, state and international economic misfortune.

II. PROJECT CONDITIONS

History:

The SGIB southbound consists of five truss spans and twenty‐two girder spans totaling 3383 feet in length. The truss spans are comprised of a series of anchor spans, cantilever spans, and suspended spans. The bridge carries two 12’ lanes of traffic, a sidewalk on the west side of the roadway; there is no right shoulder. The horizontal alignment of the bridges is tangent and the vertical profile consists of 4% grades with a 600’ crest vertical curve. The original bridge deck was replaced in 1988.

Speeds:

The current posted speed limit within the project limits is 55 mph. A travel time and delay study was conducted on I‐190 for the northbound and southbound directions during August 2001. The overall operating speed for northbound and southbound traffic was nearly or slightly greater than the posted speed limit with the exception of the influence area of the toll barriers and ascending grades of the bridges.

Passenger and Freight Volumes:

Existing and future traffic volumes were examined for the project. Traffic volumes were projected to the Estimated Time of Completion (ETC) (2010), ETC+10 (2020), and ETC+20 (2030). Table I‐1 summarizes the existing and projected future traffic volumes for the SGIBs.

TABLE I‐1 South Grand Island Bridges ‐ Traffic Volumes Southbound Traffic

AADT DHV

Existing (2001) 33,100 3,773

ETC (2010) 39,099 4,457

ETC+10 (2020) 45,764 5,217

ETC+20 (2030) 52,429 5,977

The Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) reported in the tables represents the one way traffic volume. The percentage of trucks is approximately 9% with peak hour percentages for trucks at 7.5% in the AM peak hour and 7.6% PM in the peak hour. Level of Service (LOS): Based upon analysis, the LOS from existing conditions completed in 2001 and projected up to 2030, the LOS falls within the category of “F”, a condition of severe congestion. A decision to not proceed with this project could result in further deterioration of the deck and more congestion due to spot maintenance. Accident Analysis: The accident rate is above average. The greatest percentage of accidents that occurred on the bridges was generally rear end type. Refer to Appendix B for tabulation of the accident data.


8

Infrastructure Conditions:

The 2008 Biennial Bridge Inspection Report noted that the SGIB southbound has a General Recommendation of “5”. A rating of “5” means minor deterioration, but functioning as designed. However, the bridge has some elements that rate much lower. The expansion joints on the bridge are in poor condition with all joints receiving ratings of “3” or “4”. A rating of “3” means that the bridge element has serious deterioration or is not functioning as designed. A rating of “4” is used to shade between a rating of “3” and “5”. The bridge joints are in need of replacement; the failure of a major joint would cause significant user costs. The bridge deck along the fascia has ratings of “3” and “4” in all twenty‐seven spans and is in need of repair. The wearing surface has ratings of either “3” or “4” on over half of the bridge’s length and should be replaced. Safety Issues: The bridge has multiple non‐redundant pin and hanger systems in the truss spans which make up approximately half of the bridge’s 3,383 foot length. These pin and hanger systems are critical to the structural integrity of the bridge. The Authority has added redundancy systems to the two North Grand Island bridges to increase the safety to the traveling public, and funding to provide this redundancy to the two SGIBs would allow the program to continue in a timely manner.

III. PROJECT LONG TERM OUTCOMES

State of Good Repair:

As noted in Section II.F, the bridge components included in this project currently have ratings indicating minor to serious deterioration. If left unattended, these components will deteriorate further leading to more costly repairs that may become critical in nature. Repairing or replacing these components now will reduce the overall life‐cycle costs to maintain the bridge in good condition. The Authority currently has a project under construction during the 2009 and 2010 construction seasons to replace the bearings on the girder spans of the bridge and repair the entire substructure concrete. Work on the adjacent SGIB northbound is also included. The project has an overall construction cost of $48.2 million and approximately $8.7 million of that amount is for work on the southbound bridge. This TIGER Grant would allow additional improvements to be made during Phase 2 of the Grand Island Bridge Rehabilitations, to keep the SGIB southbound in good condition.

Phase 2 of the Grand Island Bridge Rehabilitation will improve the bridges and therefore the trade corridor’s condition and performance. The project will improve the condition and performance of the bearings, expansion joints, wearing surface and structural deck as well a provide redundancy to the bridge’s most critical structural elements. Repairing or replacing these bridge components now, while the deterioration is minor to moderate, will reduce the increased future costs of work if these needs are left unattended. In addition, adding redundancy to the pin and hanger systems on the bridge will provide an added level of safety to this fracture‐critical, non‐redundant bridge detail.


9

The Authority’s primary source of revenue comes from tolls. Tolls collected along the Thruway are used to reinvest in the System’s highways and bridges. As such, toll revenue would be used to continue to maintain and operate the Authority’s portion of the I‐190 and the Grand Island Bridges.

The Authority utilizes a 20 year management plan which will optimize the Grand Island Bridges’ long term costs.

Economic Competitiveness:

According to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the City of Buffalo falls under the areas determined to be “Economically Distressed.” While the SGIBs fall under a different township, they provide a direct link to Buffalo. See a copy of the ARRA Economically Distressed Areas Map in Appendix C.

Maintaining the Grand Island Bridges will improve the long‐term efficiency of the trade corridor, commuting route and tourism path. The Bridges are a lynch‐pin in the region’s tourism and freight/logistics industries. The tourism industry, for example, supports more than 45,600 jobs in the region and $2.1 billion in annual spending, with $1.15 billion of tourism dollars supporting direct, indirect, and induced income. Impacts to the flow of traffic and tourism dollars would have far‐reaching implications, with a loss of 1% in tourism spending potentially jeopardizing upwards of 450 jobs. The Grand Island Bridges are also a major component of the region’s economic competitiveness. These structures provide a critical connection for international and regional freight movements, contributing to $10.8 billion in trade activity with Canada.

The continued growth and expansion of the regional economy will be heavily dependent upon the movement of people and goods along the I‐190 corridor between Canada and the New York State Thruway mainline. The cities of Niagara Falls and Buffalo continue to undergo a transition from a reliance on manufacturing to a growing dependence on tourism and logistics. Reliability and efficiency in the transportation system will be an important factor that contributes to decision making by potential businesses and visitors.

Livability:

When considering the impacts of a project on livability, there are many components to take into account. One obvious consideration is the affect on those who utilize this transportation infrastructure daily for commuting purposes. When an accident occurs on this bridge, the delays can at times be quantified in hours as opposed to minutes. Commuters, freight carriers and tourists rely on the SGIBs, and expect a transportation system that is reliable.

The SGIBs are essential structures with respect to the tourism of Niagara Falls, the connections to the waterfront of the Niagara River, and the surrounding attractions and businesses. On the Canadian side of the Niagara River, the entire corridor contains a parkway that has extensive bicycle and pedestrian usage. This bridge connection is vital to the Bi‐National movement to these amenities. The Niagara Frontier Transit Authority runs a Metro‐Link that traverses the South Grand Island Bridges. This Metro‐Link is a small bus transit system that is tailored to the needs of individuals and small groups, thus making it a viable option for those with specialized transit needs.

Sustainability:

The completion of the South Grand Island Bridge project Phase 2 will improve energy efficiency, reduce dependence on oil and reduce greenhouse emissions by providing a new bridge deck and improved riding surface. Providing a new deck surface could minimize the number of accidents caused by users swerving or slowing down due to deck deterioration. As stated previously, the bridge is often the source of congestion in the corridor with a high accident rate and therefore its contribution to the carbon footprint is greater than when traffic is free flowing.


10

The SGIBs are nesting locations for peregrine falcons. The Bridge and the falcons have a symbiotic relationship: the nesting boxes provide falcons with a high perch and the falcons keep pigeons away from the bridge. Pigeon droppings are detrimental to the paint, and consequently, the steel on the Bridge. The falcons currently have their own nest created on the South Grand Island Bridge and 4 chicks hatched this year. Phase 2 will include a permanent nesting box to promote the use of the bridge for the peregrine falcons.

Safety:

The Authority is focused on maintaining the safety of the traveling public. While the SGIB southbound was designed and constructed to meet standards and safety requirements; it is comprised of a total of twenty‐seven truss and girder spans. Each span is supported by either two trusses or two girders, classifying the bridge as fracture critical and non‐redundant. Within the truss spans there are multiple pin and hanger systems. In order to provide necessary redundancy to the system, thereby increasing safety, retrofitting of the hanger systems is proposed.

The bridge has two 12‐foot wide lanes with essentially no shoulders, so any vehicle breakdowns or obstructions in the road will back traffic up for miles within a few minutes, especially if the incident occurs during the morning or evening rush‐hours. These unanticipated back‐ups increase the potential for rear‐end collisions, since drivers are not anticipating slow or stopped traffic on a freeway. Replacing the deck wearing surface and repairing the underlying structural deck and bridge expansion joints will minimize the potential for the wearing surface to deteriorate to a level that would cause drivers to swerve or slow down, which could result in a decreased number of accidents.

IV. PROJECT SUPPORT

Congressional Support:

This TIGER Grant has the full support of Congresswoman Louise Slaughter whose letter of support is contained in Appendix D.

TIP Listing:

The South Grand Island Bridge complex is recognized by the Greater Buffalo‐Niagara Regional Transportation Council (GBNRTC) as an integral part of the region’s Bi‐National trade corridor and is noted in the Long Range Plan 2030 as a major project in the plan duration. The GBNRTC has been made aware of this TIGER Grant application and is in full support. The GBNRTC will amend the TIP to include this project upon selection by the USDOT for the TIGER Grant. A letter from the GBNRTC is included in Appendix E.


11

Legislative Approvals: The Authority has been authorized to charge tolls on the NYS Thruway. No additional legislative approvals are necessary for the project to proceed to construction, or for the bridge to be operated and maintained as intended. Other Support: In 2005, there was a joint strategy developed between the NYS Department of Transportation and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, along with federal, state, provincial, and local government agencies and industry stakeholders from both the U.S. and Canada. Specific goals were set in this strategy titled, “Bi‐National Niagara Transportation Strategy for the Niagara Frontier”. These strategies directly relate to the needs reflected in this TIGER Grant Application:

• “Commuters and other travelers enjoy safe, predictable, and efficient trips across the Niagara Region”

• “National and regional economies expand and prosper with rapid and safe movement of goods and people through the region”

• “Goods and people move more securely and the infrastructure is secure”

V. PROJECT INVOLVED PARTIES

The grant recipient is the New York State Thruway Authority, a public corporation organized and existing pursuant to Article 2, Title 9 of the New York State Public Authorities Law for the purpose of financing, constructing, reconstructing, improving, developing, maintaining and operating a highway system known as the Governor Thomas E. Dewey Thruway. The powers of the Authority are vested in and exercised by a seven member Board appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate. The Thruway is a 570‐mile superhighway system crossing the State and is the longest toll superhighway system in the United States.

VI. CURRENT PROJECT STATUS AND SCHEDULE

Project Schedule:

Preliminary Design‐ October 2009‐January 2010 SEQRA/NEPA review – 3‐6 months

Final Design‐ January 2010‐July 2010 Final Design Approval ‐July 2010

Advertise Project: 8/3/2010 Letting and Award: 9/10/2010 Begin Construction: 11/10/2010 End Construction: 11/18/2011

Construction Schedule and Sequencing:

Project component Dates of Construction Truss Bearing Replacement 11/15/2010 – 10/21/2011 Truss Hanger Redundancy Retrofit 11/15/2010 – 10/21/2011 Deck Overlay Replacement and Deck Repair 3/14/2011 – 11/18/2011 Approach Slab Replacement 3/14/2011 – 11/18/2011 Joint Replacement 3/14/2011 – 11/18/2011


12

Direct, on project jobs created:

3rd Quarter 2010

4th Quarter 2010

1st Quarter 2011

2nd Quarter 2011

3rd quarter 2011

4th Quarter 2011

18 34 34 120 118 32

Environmental Approvals and Agency Coordination:

It is anticipated that this project will be classified as a Class II Action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as implemented in 23 CFR 771. The FHWA would be the NEPA lead agency. This project will be submitted for approval as a NEPA Programmatic Categorical Exclusion on the basis that significant environmental effects will not result from the project. This project is expected to meet all of the prerequisite criteria to be classified as a Type II project under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 617. The project is considered a bridge rehabilitation involving no significant changes or expansions to the existing structure. The Authority plans to declare itself as the lead agency for SEQRA. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation adopted the Section 106 Exemption Regarding Effects to the Interstate Highway System on March 10, 2005. However, the Grand Island Bridges are included in the Final List of Nationally and Exceptionally Significant Features of the Federal Interstate Highway System, as they are “significant for their engineering design and as part of the New Deal era funding programs with the Niagara Frontier Authority.” It is assumed that this makes this structure eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The proposed project will maintain this bridge and its historic integrity, and should not encounter any delays in the Section 106 consultation process. Assuming concurrence as a National Register eligible structure, the bridge would also be considered as a Section 4(f) resource. It is anticipated that the FHWA will determine that the proposed project will have de minimis impacts to this Section 4(f) resource in accordance with Section 6009(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA‐LU). The project is located within the New York State Coastal Zone. The north end of the South Grand Island Bridge southbound touches down in the Town of Grand Island and the south end touches down in the Town of Tonawanda. Both of these communities have a Coastal Local Waterfront Revitalization Program which is in the process of being approved. The project would therefore require Federal consistency review by the New York State Department of State as a result of Federal funding. Since the project will maintain the bridge, it is anticipated that the coastal consistency review will be accomplished in a timely manner. Since the project is anticipated to qualify as a SEQRA Type II action, a State consistency review by the Authority is not anticipated to be required. Based on wetland mapping and a field visit by a qualified wetlands specialist on September 11, 2003, there are no State or Federal wetland areas on the north or south sides of the bridge. The project will not involve any fill materials being placed in the Niagara River (a navigable waterway). A Section 10/404 permit will therefore not be required for the project. As contained in 6 NYCRR, Chapter X, Part 701, class and standard for the Niagara River is “Class A‐Special (A‐S) fresh surface waters." A U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Section 9 Permit is not required for this project. However, coordination will be required with the USCG, especially where barges are needed to perform portions the work.

It is possible that temporary supports may need to be placed in the river during construction, which would normally require an Article 15 permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). The Authority is not required to obtain individual permits for projects regulated by the Environmental Conservation Law Article 15 Protection of Waters. However, the NYSDEC will be consulted to coordinate with the Authority to be sure the project complies with any permit conditions.


13

Construction at the bridge has little potential to cause adverse impacts on the surface waters at the site. It is assumed that established staging areas at both ends of the South Grand Island Bridges would be used. These areas are already set up to minimize adverse effects from erosion. No adverse impacts area anticipated by the proposed project to any of the endangered or threatened species identified, or to the critical habitat areas.

Technical Feasibility: The repair of the structural deck, replacement of the wearing surface, replacement of the approach slabs, replacement of the truss expansion bearings, replacement of the expansion joints and the addition of redundancy systems to the truss pin and hangers are routine design and construction tasks that can be completed easily and successfully for this project. With the exception of the replacement of the truss expansion bearings, all of the other work tasks have been completed previously on the other three Grand Island Bridges.

VII. PROJECT FUNDING Federal Wage Rate Requirement Certification:

The Thruway Authority will comply with all Federal requirements, including subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40 USC. (Appendix F)

Financial Feasibility: If the project does not receive TIGER Grant funding (in whole or in part), the Authority will fund the project through toll revenues. A contingency of 10% has been reserved as a project cost item. The Authority has successfully managed federal funds for other projects larger than this on the Thruway. Projects include:

• Interchange 17 on I‐87 (providing a direct connection between Interstates 87 and 84) • South Grand Island Bridge southbound Rehabilitation

Project Funding for Phase 1 and 2 (TIGER Grant is requested for Phase 2)

TIGER funds (requested)

TIGER % (requested)

NYSTA Funds NYSTA %

Total Funds

Project Approval/ Environmental Document

$880,000

31%

$1,929,200

69%

$2,809,200

Plans, Specifications & Estimate

$1,320,000

31%

$2,893,800

69%

$4,213,800

Right of Way (capital and support)

Not

applicable

Not

applicable

Not

applicable

Not

applicable

Not

applicable Construction (capital and support)

$19,800,000

$43,407,000

%

$

Total $22,000,000 31% $48,230,000 69% $70,230,000


14

VIII. PROJECT BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS (For full report see Appendix G) Background: Due to its age and current life expectancy, the South Grand Island Bridge southbound is proposed to have its concrete wear surface replaced, along with other critical safety improvements. These improvements are needed to keep the SGIB functional and operating at the service level needed to support the local, regional, and national economies. Failure to repair this bridge in a timely fashion could force the closure of this span, with wide‐reaching implications for the region’s transportation system and the economy. Additionally, with a replacement cost estimated at $60,147,000, it is prudent to keep the bridge in optimum condition.

Economic Costs: Regional/International Trade The Buffalo‐Niagara region is a critical link for international trade between the United States and Canada. In 2008, trucks using the Buffalo Niagara crossings carried $10.8 billion of goods across the U.S./Canadian border. According to the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, the Queenston‐Lewiston crossing north of the Grand Island bridges accounted for roughly 30% of all traffic volume for the four international bridges in this region in 2006. Highway access to and from the Queenston‐Lewiston Bridge is dependent upon the Grand Island Bridges. The closure of the southbound span of the South Grand Island Bridge would force northbound and southbound traffic onto a single two‐lane span, causing significant delays for international and regional freight movement. Potential trade losses as a result of a closure of the southbound SGIB, could be significant. For example, the loss of 1 truck crossing each day at the Queenston‐Lewiston Bridge, at $14,700 per truck, would equate to $5,365,500 annually. According to FHWA, by 2030 freight moved by truck is expected to increase by 78% as a result of increases in employment, employee productivity, and international trade. Forecasted traffic for the Queenston‐Lewiston Bridge is expected to increase by 135% by 2035. Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Jersey are the leading destinations for Canadian originated motor carrier traffic passing through the region, and are expected to remain the primary destinations in 2035. The Buffalo‐Niagara Region is the logical international crossing for shipments to these destinations, further supporting the need to retain the South Grand Island Bridges as the region’s Lifeline Bridges for continued economic prosperity. Tourism Industry In 2008, travelers and visitors to the Buffalo‐Niagara Region spent $2.1 billion, with the tourism industry supporting over 45,000 jobs, according to a recently published study by Tourism Economics completed for the NYS Association of Convention and Visitor’s Bureaus. Tourism in the Buffalo‐Niagara Region generated $1.1 billion labor income, and generated $267 million in state and local taxes in 2008. The I‐190 corridor that connects the Queenston‐Lewiston Bridge with Buffalo via the Grand Island Bridges is a primary conduit for tourism travelers heading to and from Canada. The Grand Island Bridges offer the most direct and efficient connection between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, including their respective restaurant and retail establishments. The potential economic impact of a closure of the southbound SGIB upon the tourism industry is unknown. However, even a modest impact of 0.5% would equate to losses of $10.5 million or more per year. It is probable that delays and congestion along the primary highways and at the international crossings due to a southbound SGIB closure would deter a small percentage of travelers, most likely those making spontaneous or unplanned day trips across the border from Canada to the United States.

Local The closure of the South Grand Island Bridge southbound span would cause significant harm to the local economy of Grand Island, as well as to the regional and statewide economies along this critical international trade route.


15

It was found that Grand Island residents have approximately $182,500,000 of expenditures outside of Grand Island, and thus need to cross the Grand Island Bridges to execute these transactions. Also, approximately $38,000,000 of sales from non‐residents takes place on Grand Island, with the assumption that these transactions also require a commute across the Grand Island Bridges. It is unknown how the closure of the SGIB southbound span would actually impact personal choices and the travel patterns of on‐ and off‐island residents. However, the following conservative estimates were utilized to determine the local economic impact of the bridge closure:

• 1% decrease in off‐island trips for Grand Island residents at $41.36 of economic activity per trip • 5% decrease in trips for non‐island residents to Grand Island at $23.12 per trip.

Based on data from the MPO TransCAD model, Claritas Retail Market Place data for Grand Island, and findings from the 2001 National Travel Survey (Buffalo MPO add‐on), it was estimated that Grand Island residents would spend $1,934,500 less, and generate $147,989 fewer dollars in tax revenue. Non‐island residents were estimated to spend $2,014,000 less and generate $176,255 fewer dollars in tax revenue. In total, it is estimated that the closure of the bridge would result in an economic loss of $4,272,714. Travel Volumes and Speed: Table VIII‐1 depicts modeling results for the closure of the Southbound span in 2013, which estimates a significant disruption to flows on the Southbound and Northbound spans of the SGIB, with Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes cut nearly in half. Traffic volumes to surrounding critical connections were also significantly impacted, with River Road and Niagara Falls Boulevard receiving approximately double the vehicle ADT. The number of vehicles utilizing the Queenston‐Lewiston Bridge and Peace Bridge increased more than 10%, indicating a change in travel patterns due to the closure. Travel speeds also show meaningful delays to traffic at the South Grand Island Bridges as well as Niagara Falls Boulevard and River Road. Table VIII‐1. TransCAD Model Results for South Grand Island Bridge Closure

Volume Speed

Null Closure Change Null Closure Change

Segment ADT ADT ADT MPH MPH MPH

1) South Grand Island Bridge SB 40314 21995 (18,319) 50.2 46.2 (4.00)

2) South Grand Island Bridge NB 41536 21692 (19,844) 49.4 46.8 (2.60)

3) North Grand Island Bridge NB 33502 17531 (15,971) 54.9 60 5.10

4) North Grand Island Bridge SB 33588 19144 (14,444) 54.8 60 5.20

5) Peace Bridge (To Canada) 12177 13978 1,801 60 Unch. ‐

6) Peace Bridge (From Canada) 12633 14307 1,674 60 Unch. ‐

7) Rainbow Bridge (To Canada) 4220 2400 (1,820) 60 Unch. ‐

8) Rainbow Bridge (From Canada) 4487 2929 (1,558) 60 Unch. ‐

9) Queenston‐Lewiston Bridge (To Canada) 6207 6930 723 60 Unch. ‐

10) Queenston‐Lewiston Bridge (From Canada)

6196 6777 581 60 Unch. ‐

11) Niagara Falls Blvd (Walmore Rd to Witmer Rd)

28332 45927 17,595 28.3 25.5 (2.80)

12) River Rd (Williams Rd to Witmer Rd) 9551 21196 11,645 35 25.8 (9.20)

Value of Time: The value of time was calculated for those roadways and bridges with a change in speed resulting from the closure of the SGIB southbound span utilizing the AASHTO guidance User Benefit Analysis for Highways, 2003 (Table VIII‐2). Upon a closure of the southbound span of the SGIB, it is anticipated that delays from congestions would total $8,542,949 annually, with the most significant impact to time lost from congestion experienced on Niagara Falls Boulevard and River Road.


16

Ownership and Operating Costs: Ownership and operating costs were calculated utilizing AASHTO’s User Benefit Analysis for Highways Manual, August 2003. Similar to the Value of Time exercise, ownership and operating costs increased dramatically for users of Niagara Falls Boulevard and River Road as a result of increased traffic and congestion due to the closure of the southbound span of the SGIB. Total Ownership and Operating Costs are estimated to increase $1,780,762 annually. Accident Costs:

Accident data was determined utilizing state average collision rates and 2013 traffic volumes provided by the MPO TransCAD model. It was predicted that a significant increase in collisions would take place along Niagara Falls Boulevard and River Road due to increases in traffic volumes. These two roadways accounted for nearly 100 % of accident cost increases, which totaled $14,216,312. Air Quality Costs: The closure of the southbound span of the SGIB will result in a 7% increase in volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions, at an increased cost of $64,614 in comparison to the Null Alternative. This increase is the result of increased vehicle miles traveled, and decreased travel speeds. As a result of incomplete traffic data for the region stemming from the closure of the bridge, it was prematurely determined that overall air quality costs will actually be decreased by $18,840. Toll Revenue Costs:

Based on data from the New York State Thruway Authority, the Peace Bridge Authority, the Niagara Fall Bridge Commission and MPO TransCAD model predictions, an estimated $22,868,001 in regional tolls will be lost on an annual basis as a result of the closure of the South Grand Island Bridges southbound span. Total Benefits: Table VIII‐2 depicts total annualized negative costs that would result from a closure to the southbound span of the SGIB.

Table VIII‐2. Annualized Benefits of Project

Totals

Value of Time $8,524,949

Ownership & Operations Costs $1,780,762

Accident Costs $14,216,312

Toll Revenue $22,868,001

Local Economic Activity $3,948,500

Local Sales Tax Revenue $324,214

Air Quality Costs ($18,480 )

Totals $51,644,258

Benefit‐cost ratios based on the amortized cost and annual payments for 20, 30, and 50 year bonding terms were determined. The ratios are summarized in Table VIII‐3. Based upon the Annualized Cost and the Annualized Benefits, a bonding strategy of 30 year pay back at a 5 percent interest rate indicates a benefit‐cost ratio of 36.44.


17

Table VIII‐3 Benefit‐Cost Ratio

Interest Rate 20 Year 30 Year 50 Year

5% 29.64 36.44 43.08

6% 27.31 32.63 37.16

7% 25.23 29.40 32.51

8% 23.39 26.66 28.80

IX. PROJECT INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES To minimize the impacts to the highway users in terms of both actual cost and time delays, consideration will be given to night‐only construction for the replacement of the expansion joints and deck overlay as well as the repair of the structural concrete deck. To accomplish this, traffic would be transferred to the adjacent bridge each work day from 9 pm until 6 am. The adjacent bridge would carry one lane of traffic in each direction for this time period when traffic volumes are low enough to only minimally affect the Level of Service. As a result, the contractor will be able to accomplish the work in a shorter time period and impact to the traveling public will be minimal. With this type of construction the highway user cost is minimized. To accomplish overnight concrete repair and open to traffic each morning, rapid setting concrete with good freeze‐thaw properties is a necessity. One new state‐of‐the‐art material that will be considered for use for the concrete repair material is Ductal. This material has very high strengths and can meet the requirements for this project.


18

APPENDIX A – PROJECT LOCATION MAPS


19

Regional Map

SOUTH GRAND ISLAND BRIDGES

General Project Area


20

APPENDIX B – GRAND ISLAND BRIDGES ACCIDENT SUMMARY


21

APPENDIX C – ARRA ECONOMICALLY DISTRESSED AREAS MAP


22

The City of Buffalo is noted as an economically distressed area.


23

APPENDIX D – CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT LETTER


24

APPENDIX E – MPO LETTER REGARDING TIP


25

APPENDIX F – FEDERAL WAGE RATE REQUIREMENT CERTIFICATION


26

FEDERAL WAGE RATE REQUIREMENT CERTIFICATION


27

APPENDIX G – BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS

transportation investment generating economic recovery ... · transportation investment generating...

Documents