STATEoF NEw YORK

DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION
Huliens POINT PLAZA
47-40 21sr STREET
LoNG ISLANDCITY, NY 11101
P H I L U PE N G ,P . E . STANLEY GEE
REGToNAL DIREcroR AcnNGCoMt4tssioNER

29, 2010
September

TO: KosciuszkoBridge ProjectStakeholders

FROM: RobertAdams,ProjectManagerS
New York StateDepartrnentof Transportation

RE: KosciuszkoBridge ProjectOpenHouseReport

On behalf of the New York StateDepartmentof Transportation,I would like to sharethis copy
of the Februmy2010KosciuszkoBridge ProjectOpenHouseReportwilh you and othermeeting
attendees.The Report documentscommunity input received at the Open Houses,as well as
during the corrment period that endedin May 2010.As a significantcomponentof the project's
public participationprogramduring final design,it detailsthe Main Spanbridgetlpe preferences
that were expressedby a broadrangeof constituentsat the OpenHouses,at CommunityBoard
presentations,andvia email. The Reportthereforeservesas a critical elementof the Main Span
Selectionprocesstlat is currently underway. Details on the selectedmain spanoption will be
providedto you assoonasa decisionhasbeenfinalized.

In the interim, if you haveany questionsaboutthe Reportor the project in general,pleasedo not
hesitateto contactme at (7I8) 482-4683or kosciuszko@dot.state.ny.us or HelenNeuhaus,Helen
Neuhaus& Associates at (212) 532-417
5 or helen@hnaI971.com.

PHoNE:(718) 482-4683 FAX:(718) 4aZ-6319 E-MAIL: ny.us

kosciuszko@dot.state.
https://www.nvsdot.oov/reg
WEBSnE: ional-offices/reoion proiect
11/projects/kosciuszko-bridoe-
 NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT

REPORT ON OPEN HOUSES

February18,2010 - Queens
February24,2010 - Brooklyn
(3:00- 8:00p.m.)

The New York StateDeparlmentof Transportation(NYSDOT) held Public Open Housesfor the
KosciuszkoBridge Projecton February 18, 2010 at Christ the King RegionalHigh School (68-02
Metropolitan Avenue, Middle Village, Queens)and February 24,2Ot0 at St. Cecilia's Church
(84 Herbert Street,Brooklyn). In preparationfor the Open Houses,a newsletterthat featuredthe
four main spanbridge types under considerationfor the new KosciuszkoBridge, was mailed to
nearly 1,000individuals,organizations,public officials, community facilities. agenciesand media
outlets. At the request of several individuals and civic organizations, including Queens
Community Boards (CB) #2 and,#5 and Brooklyn CB #1, over 2,000 copies of the newsletterin
English, Polish and Spanishwere also provided for local distribution. Display adverlisements
were placed in eight community and foreign language(Polish) newspapers.Meeting announce-
ments were also sent to four local television stations,and community calendarannouncements
were distributed for posting in community newspapersand on organizationalwebsites.

The Open Houseswere scheduledto updatethe public on Final Designactivitiesfor the Kosciuszko
Bridge Project and to receiveinput on the main spanbridge design options under consideration.
The project is focusing on the l.1-mile section of the Brooklyn-QueensExpressway (BQE)
between Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn and the Long Island Expressway (LIE) in Queens that
crossesNewtown Creek. Both meetingsopenedwith an informal sessionat which people could
view informationaldisplays,including graphicsand 3D visualizationsof the bridge designoptions,
and speak with membersof the project team. Videos illustrating each main span bridge type
helpedmeetingattendeesenvisionthe bridge from a variety of viewpoints: the BQE, local streets,
the new bridge's bikeway/walkwayand the waterfront. During the presentation(samepresentation
given at 3:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. at both venues)that fo11owed,project team membersprovided a
project update,focusingon Final Design activities,with an emphasison the main spanbridge type
alternativesunder consideration. Each sessionconcludedwith a questionand discussionperiod.
Meeting attendeesincluded residents,businessowners and representatives of community groups,
agenciesand electedofficials, with over 45 peopleattendingthe QueensOpen Houseand over 70
peopleattendingthe OpenHousein Brooklyn. (SeeAttachmentA for the attendancelistl.)

Comment Cards offering pafticipants the opportunity to register their bridge type preferences,
identify bridge features of impoftance and record other project-related comments were
distributed to al1 meeting attendees. Additional copies of the project newsletter were also
available. Participantsat the Brooklyn Open House were given the opportunity to complete the
Brooklyn Parks Survey that had previously been distributed by members of the Parks
Subcommitteeof the StakeholdersAdvisory Committee (SAC). This survey was prepared in
order to ascertain community preferences regarding park features in the expanded Sgt.
Dougherty and New Active Park areasin Brooklyn.

t
NOTE: Not all attendeesregisteredon the sign-in sheets.
Presentation
The Queenssessionswere openedby Harold Fink, Acting Director of Structures,NYSDOT. In
Brooklyn, Mr. Fink and Adam Levine, Director of Public Affairs, NYSDOT, opened the
afternoon and evening sessionsrespectively. Foilowing welcoming remarks, Robert Adams,
ProjectManager,NYSDOT was introducedfor an updateon Final Design activities.

Usinga PowerPointpresentation2. Mr. Adamsprovideda brief recapol rheenvironmenlal review

process, noting that the Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS) that identified Bridge
ReplacementAlternativeBR-5 as the preferredalternativewas publishedin December2008. The
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Record of Decision on March 9, 2009,
therebyapprovingBR-5 and ganting NYSDOT authorizationto proceedwith Final Designof this
alternative.

Mr. Adams illustrated construction staging of the new bridge by explaining that initial work
would involve constructionof a new, permanentstructureon the eastboundside of the existing
bridge. Al1 traffic would then be shifted to the new structure,allowing the existing bridge to be
demolished. The westboundportion of the new bridge would be built within the footprint of the
existing bridge. In describingAlternative BR-5, Mr. Adams highlighted the following features
of the new bridge:
o lower elevationto improve roadway gradesand sight distances
. standardlane and shoulderwidths
o auxiliary lanesin eachdirection to improve merging and weaving conditions
o new bikeway/walkway on Brooklyn-boundside of roadway

Mr. Adams emphasizedthat six lanes of traffic would be maintainedthroughout construction,

resulting in no planneddetoursor diversionof traffic to local streets.

Mr. Adams continuedwith an updateon Final Design activitiesthat havebeen undertakenduring

the past year:
- Field Surveys- to identify the locations of physical featuresand gather topographic
information neededto ensurethat Final Design of the bridge accuratelyreflects field
conditions
Geotechnical Investigations - collection of subsurfaceinformation, including soil
samples,rock cores and test pits at locations in Brooklyn and Queens needed to
progressdesignand constructionof the new bridge
- Environmental Investigations- collection of soil and groundwatersamples,conduct
of asbestossurweysof the bridge and buildings to be removed or modified during
construction, and identification of materials to be handled and disposed of during
constructton
- Right-of-Wa)' Acquisition - initiation of the process to acquire private properties
neededto complete construction of the new bridge. Mr. Adams explained that this
includes three types of acquisitions: Fee Acquisition (property is acquired by the
. State),PetmanentEasement(cwrcnI owner retainsownershipof the property,but the
Statehas the right to enter the propefty for maintenancepurposesthroughoutthe life

' A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is available on the project website

(www.nysdot.sov/regional-offices/region
11/plqiects/kosciuszko ) or by contacting
Robert Adams at (l18\ 482-4683.
of the bridge) ond Temporary Easement(cunent owner retains ownership, but the
Statecan enter the propefiy during constructionof the bridge).
Parksand Open SpacePlanning- extensiveongoing coordinationwith the New York
City Departmentof Parks and Recreation(DPR) and the SAC regarding plans for a
new and improved Sgt. Dougherty Playground in Brooklyn and proposednew open
spacein Brooklyn and Queens.Mr. Adams illustrated the locations for the proposed
parks, along with possible boat launch areas,the new bikeway/walkway and areas
along local streetsthat are targetedfor enhancedstreetscaping.
Selectionof a Main Span Bridge Tlr:e - detailedreview of possibleoptions for the
main spanof the new bridge (the pofiion that crossesNewtown Creek). Although the
main span is a small porlion of the l.l-mile project, it is significant becauseof its
visibility. Mr. Adams explainedthat the aestheticsof the main spanis thereforeone of
the primary criteria that NYSDOT will use in the selectionprocess. He added that
eight possible main span options were presentedto the SAC for review at its
Oclober22,2009 meeting. NYSDOT subsequently decidedto advancethe SAC's three
main span choices: the Deck Arch, Through Arch, and Cable-Stayed options. In
addition, the Box Girder altemative will be advancedas a baseline alternative. These
four options are being presentedfor public review and cornment at the Open Houses.
[Seephotosbelow.]

Box Girder kteel or concrete)

 Through Arch (steel)

Cable-Stayed

Before turning the presentationover to Steve Bennett, ParsonsBrinckerhoff (PB), Mr. Adams
explainedthat the project team cannotproceedwith detaileddesignof the bridge until a main span
option is chosen. He emphasizedthat NYSDOT is seekinginput from the public prior to making
its final selection.

Description of Bridge Tvpes

Mr. Bennett explained that a1i options under consideration provide safety, operational and
structural improvements; mitigate environmental impacts; and incorporate environmental
enhancements. He reiterated Mr. Adams' earlier comment that six lanes of traffic will be
maintainedthroughoutconstruction.

Mr. Bennettthen briefly describedthe segmentsthat comprisea bridge structure:

- Connectors- Thesesegmentsare locatedat eachend of the project limits. They may
be constructedusing retainedearth and steel girder spans(similar to what currently
exists).
- Approaches- Regardlessof the main spanoption selected,the approaches(the sections
leading to the main span) will likely be box girders constructedof either steel or
concrete.
- Main Span- [Discussedabove]
He continuedhis presentationwith a discussionof the selectioncriteria to be usedfor evaluation
of the main spanoptions. Theseinclude:
o Constructability
o ConstructionDuration
r Safety/Security
o ConstructionCost
o Life Cycle (Maintenance)Cost
o VisualAesthetics
r Other EvaluationFactors,including impactson existing wildlife and flight pattems

Mr. Bennett explainedthat the first three criteria are essentiallythe samefor all bridge types. He
noted that all options are constructible,have an estimatedfive-year construction period, and
provide the same level of safety and security. Although constructioncosts vary slightly, the
difference in total constructioncosts (main span, connectorsand approaches)between the four
options is only x4%o. Mr. Bennett reiteratedthat the main span segmentis a relatively small
sectionof the total project.He also noted that life cycle costs(regulzuinspectionand maintenance
of the bddge, including roadway resurfacing) are factored into each option. However, some
maintenancadifferencesexist dependingon the type of sflucture - e.g., steel bridges require
periodic painting, the Through Arch and Cabte-Stayedoptions would eventually require
replacementof cables. Mr. Bennett noted that all bridge types under considerationhave a
minimum 75-yearservicelile.

Bridge-Type Selection
The primary purposeof the February Open Houseswas to receivepublic input on the four marn
span bridge options under consideration. Input received at the Open Houses and during the
comment period that was extendedto mid-May 2010 is highlightedbelow:

. Comment Cards: Bridqe-Tvpe Preferences.As of May 14, 2010, 84 Comment Cards

'76
indicating a bridgetype pref'erencewere received by the project team. Comment
Cards (26 in Queens and 50 in Brooklyn) were returned at the Open Houses. Three
persons expressedan either/or preference,which is reflected in the tally of 87 votes
provided in AttachmentB.

In addition, input was recordedon Comment Cards completedat two Community Board
briefings held subsequent to the Open Houses: Queens Community Board #2 -
Transpoftation Committee on Tuesday, April 20, 2010 and Brooklyn Community
Board#l - Transpofiation Committeeon Thursday,May 13,2010.At both meetings,Mr.
Adams presentedthe PowerPointpresentation,along with video clips of the bridge type
options. Five Comment Cards indicating a preferred main span option were received at
the Queensmeeting and three were receivedat the Brooklyn meeting. The breakdown of
preferencesis also provided in AttachmentB.

r Email Comments:Bridse-Typg JrgfelgneE!. Subsequentto the Open Houses,the project

team received 34 comments (as of May 14, 2010) recording a bridge type preference.
These were forwtuded to the Kosciuszko Proiect email address
(kosciuszko@dot.state.nv.us).
Al1 Comment Card and email preferencesare included in the overall tally of 121 votes detailed
in Attachment B. The Cable-Stayedmain span option was the preferenceof 44Vo or 53 of the
peoplewho expresseda choice, followed by the Through Arch, which was favored by 3lVo or 37
of the respondents.

Additional Bridse-Tvpe Comments

The CommentCardsprovided spacefor participantsto ofler more detailedcommentson the main
spanoptions(seeAttachmentC). A numberof peoplewho weighedin on bridge type selectionby
email also expandedon their reasonsfor favoring a specificalternative.

Ouestions and Discussion

Issues raised during the Open House discussion periods primarily focused on construction
impacts,environmentalconcerns,cost,bridge maintenance,traffic, parkland and other amenities,
and the bikeway/walkway. Questionsand commentsare summarized,by borough,below:

Queens
. ln responseto a question from San Vargas, representingAssemblywoman Catherine
Nolan, regardingcosts,Mr. Adams explainedthat project funding is an 8O%federal/207o
state split. He added that project costs are included in NYSDOT's Five-Year and 12-
YearCapitalPrograms.
. A question was raised concerning whether possible teruoristactivities were considered
during design of the structure and if one bridge type would be more vulnerable than
another. Mr. Bennett emphasizedthat all bridge types are equal in terms of safety and
security.However, it was noted that the existing bridge is a non-redundantstructure;this
meansthat failure of one bridge elementcould result in coliapseof the entire structure.
Respondingto a relatedquestion,Mr. Bennettexplainedthat both New York State
and City use site-specificseismicdesigncriteriafor new sfuctures. Accountingfor
seismicactivity in new structuresis easierthan adaptingan existingbridge.
. In responseto several questionsrelating to maintenance,the project team provided the
following information:
o All of the proposedbridgetypeswould be designedwith a minimum life of 75 years.
o Steelbridgeswould needto be paintedapproximatelyevery l5 years.
o Over time, concretestructureswould requiremaintenanceto addresscracks.
o The new bridge wili include fuil-width shoulderson eachside of the bridge. This will
limit the need for lane closuresfor maintenanceoperations,including replacementof
cables.
In responseto a question, Mr. Bennett confirmed that there are no prohibitions on
constructionin Newtown Creek during specific times of the year. Mr. Adams addedthat
during the EIS phase,it was determinedthat there is very little marine life in the Creek.
A representativeof the New York City Fire Department raised several questions
regarding future accessto and from the roadway, with a specific interest in whether the
project will improve access.Mr. Adams explainedthat althoughentranceand exit ramps
will remain in their current locations, a new twolane entrance ramp at Vandervoort
Avenue is expectedto greatly improve access. He noted several other improvements:
the addition of auxiliary lanes to minimize weaving; full-width shoulders;and dedicated
auxiliary lanesfor motoriststravelling from Brooklyn to the LIE and for motoristsexiting
at Meeker/Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn. He further explained that the final lane
 configuration will include five eastboundlanes and four westboundlanes, with through
lanes in each direction for drivers traveling on the BQE, as well as the auxiliary lanes
describedabove.
. In responseto a question concerning how construction overruns will be handled, Mr.
Bennett explained that all State bids include a contingency for overuns. Mr. Adams
added that as a result ol the vast amount of geotechnicalinvestigation done to date, the
project team already has a good understandingof subsurfaceconditions, which should
limit the potentialfor costly unforeseenundergroundconditions.
. After noting that the Kosciuszko Bridge is part of a major roadway connectingBrooklyn
and Queens,Anthony Nunziato, resident/MaspethChamber of Commerce, emphasized
that the community deservesa structure that 'iooks good.' He referencedthe slight
(+49o) costdifferential betweenmain spanoptions and reiteratedthe need for community
amenities,including parkland in Queensand kayak launches.In a related comment, one
meeting attendeepresentedhis view that crossing the span should be regardedas 'an
event.' He followed up by voicing his support for the Through Arch or Cable-Stayed
options, sincethey createa more dominant impressionthan the other alternatives.
. In responseto severalquestionsand commentsrelating to open spaceissues,Mr. Adams
noted that DPR will assumeownershipof the parks following construction.He addedthat
the project team is working with DPR on design issues,including the need to provide
parking at the Queenssite, since it is located in an areathat does not have concentrated
residentialpockets.
o One meeting attendeeasked whether sculpture or historic monumentscommemorating
the original bridge or Thaddeus Kosciuszko could be installed as part of the City's
Percentfor Art Program, il it is applicable. Mr. Adams respondedthat it is likely that
future parklandwill display historic elements,including incorporationof the bridge's two
existing plaques.
. Mr. Adams confirmed that the new structurewill continue to be named the Kosciuszko
Bridge.

Brooklyn
e In responseto a questionfrom Jack Wallace, United Forties Civic Association,regarding
right-of-way acquisition,Mr. Adams explainedthat all impactedpropertiesin Queensare
locatedbetweenthe BQE and 43'd Street. This includes three residentialpropeftiesand
approximatelya dozenbusinesses. He addedthat the residentshave alreadybeenrelocated,
and negotiationsarecontinuingwith businessowners.
o Several questions and comments referenced future traffic conditions, specifically the
location of entranceand exit ramps. Mr. Adams reiteratedthat the location of the ramps
will not changebut that safety and traffic operationsin the area will be improved. In
responseto a relatedquestionfrom an Apollo Streetresident,Mr. Adams explained that
improvementsto the Apollo Street intersection include a realigned, two-lane entrance
ramp and signal timing changes.
. Commenting that Varick Street and other local roadways are in poor condition, Henry
Burney, SuperiorFiber Mills, a Lombardy Streetbusiness,askedif thesestreetswould be
repaired prior to the start of construction. In response,Mr. Adams noted that a recent
letter from the New York City Department of Transportation(NYCDOT) indicated that
 funds are not cuffently available for local street repairs. Responding to a follow-up
question,Mr. Adams assuredMr. Burney that no detoursare plannedduring construction.
Noting his opposition to 'plain concretecolumns,' Mr. wallace expressedinterestin the
visual impact of the bridge and its approacheson the neighboihood. Mr. Bennett
acknowledgedthe importanceof the visual element and repofied that the project team's
architectsare identifying opportunitiesfor visual enhancements.In addition. SAC inout
on aestheticsand visual corridors will continue to be incorporatedthroughoutthe design
process.
In responseto questionson the height of the new structure,Mr. Adams explained that
although the new bridge will be lower, this will only be evident in rerms of viewing the
main span and a few of the approachsectionson either side of the span. The remainder
of the approachesand connectors will appear basically the same as in the current
condition. As a follow-up to these questions, Mr. Bennett added that opening the
Brooklyn connector to provide parking was consideredduring early stug"sof th" prilect.
The idea was discardedbasedon strong oppositionfrom arearesidents.
A number of questionsand comments related to environmentalissues,including noise
levels and air quality during construction. Mr. Adams and Mr. Bennett. alons wilh Rick
Hart, EnvironmentalPlanning& Management, Inc., the team'senvironmentaiconsultant,
provided the following information:
o Air monitoring will occur in the immediate vicinity of the work, as well as at
designatedstationswithin the community.
o Asbestoswill be abatedprior to demolition of the bridge and impactedbuildings;
asbestosmonitoring will continuethroughoutconstruction.
o Air monitoring datais not currently being collected. As part of the community air
monitodng program, a baselinewill be establishedprior to the stafi of work, and
datawill be collectedthroughoutconstruction.
o The new bridge will shift the BQE away from residencesin Brooklyn by up to 50
feet. This will reduce noise and vibration levels in the area. In addition, the
contractor will be required to meet all appropriate noise codes during
construction.
o Afier one residentnoted the presenceof oil beneathhomesin the area,the project
team explained that the oil is located approximately40 feet below the surface,
well below the areaof bridgeconstruction(i0-15 feet below ground).
o Commenting on the recent proposal to designateNewtown Creek as a superfund
site, TheresaCianciotta,representingAssemblymanJosephLentol, questionedthe
impact of designationon the bridge project. Mr. Adams indicated that based on
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,s (EpA) current schedule, bridge
construction will be completed before work begins on clean-up of the Creek.
EPA, therefore,foreseesno conflict betweenthe projects.
In response to questions regarding construction and maintenance costs, Mr. Adams
reiterated that the projecr is being built with federal (807o) and stare (2ovo) funding.
Following completion of the bridge, NYCDOT will be responsible for day-to_day
maintenance, includingstreetsweeping;NySDOT will addressany major repairs.
Karen Beringer, resident,expressedconcern about rodents during construction and the
potential for property damagedue to construction. Mr. Adams indicatedthat the contract
will include provisions for extermination at the start of and throushout construction.
 With regard to potential propefty damage,he explained that pre-and post-construction
photographswill be taken of propertiesin the vicinity of the work area.This will protect
property owners by ensuring appropriate documentation, if it is determined that a
propefty was damaged due to construction. In a follow-up comment, one resident
suggestedthat two sets of pre-consfuction photographs--oneeach for the homeowner
and NYSDOT-be prepared.After agreeingwith this suggestion,Mr. Adams addedthat a
full-time community liaison will be on site throughoutconstructionto handle day-to-day
issues.
o In responseto a questionfrom a residentof Van Dam Streetregarding new parkland in
Brooklyn, Mr. Adams reiteratedthat designsare being discussedwith DPR. He added
that NYSDOT would build the parks; DPR would own and maintain them following
construction. In addition, the project team is working with the SAC on park design. This
has alreadyincluded SAC assistancewith distribution of a parks survey to determinethe
community's preferencesregarding specific elementsfor each park. Mr. Adams noted
that copies of the Brooklyn Parks Survey were available at the Open House for anyone
interestedin completing the questionnaire.
r A number of questions and comments related to pedestrian and bicycle issues. Mr.
Bennett indicatedthat the bikeway/walkway will be 13 feet wide. Although they will not
be physically separated,the areas will probably be demarcatedby striping. Several
personscommentedthat physical separationof bicyclists and pedestriansis neededfor
safety reasons. One person askedwhether "Walk Bikes Across Bridge" signs could be
postedif physical separationis not possible.
o Evelyn Cruz, representingCongresswomanNydia Yelazquez, raised several questions
regarding the service life of the bridge and maintenanceissues. Mr. Bennett reiterated
that all bridge types under considerationare designedfor a 75-year life, adding that all
options will requireroutine mainten:urceduring that time.
o In responseto a question, Mr. Adams noted that the contractor will be encouragedto
minimize fuck traffic on loca1 streets by using barges for delivery of supplies. Off-
loading of materialsis expectedto occur on both sidesof Newtown Creek Mr. Bennett
addedthat debrisremoved from the site, which will be recycled,will also be transported
by barge. NYSDOT will work with NYCDOT to assignTraffic EnforcementAgents to
key intersections.
o In responseto a questionregardingconstructionstaging,Mr. Adams indicatedthat traffic
will be transitionedbetweenbridgesat night in order to minimize impacts.

In closing the sessionsin Queensand Brooklyn, Mr. Adams encouragedmeeting participantsto

submit their main spanpreferences.
 AttachmentA

KosciuszkoBridge Project

Queens Nicole Davis Daniel Grulichx

February 18,2010 Hardesty& Hanover New York City Department
of Parksand Recreation
Michael Abrahams NathanDuke
ParsonsBrinckerhoff Times Ledger JessameHannus
Transpol1ationAlternatives
Robert Adams* Felice Farber
New York StateDepaftment GeneralContractors Richard Hart
of Transportation Association EnvironmentalPlanning &
Management,Inc.
Vincent Arcurix C. Faniella
QueensCommunity Board #5 New York Daily News Robert Holden
JuniperPark Civic
Gregory Aura Harold Fink Association
Resident New York StateDepartment
of Transportation Joe Ibrahim
Michael Barbagallo Right Time Realty
ParsonsBrinckerhoff Gary Fredericksen
Martin Luther High School Gulrukh Irani
Marvis Belfon New York StateDepartment
Helen Neuhaus& Julie Frietas of Transportation
Associates ParsonsBrinckerhoff
Muhammad Izhar
JohnBelo Welland Fullerx SI Engineering
Kaplon-BeloAssociates,
Inc. Office of Assemblywoman
Margaret Markey SamuelKing
SteveBennett NY1
ParsonsBrinckerhoff Joe Giulietti
Calvary Cemetery SergeyKadinsky
Heywood Blaufeux QueensChronicle
Brooklyn A.I.A. C. PeterGoslett
New York City Depaftment Greg Lemko
Andy Campbell of Transportation Resident(Brooklyn)
The Brooklyn Paper
Keith Griesing David Lenko
LeonardCotugno Hardesty& Hanover Resident
Resident
Ted Gruber Adam Levine
Lillian & Michael Cyran Long Island City New York StateDepartment
JuniperPark Civic CommunityBoathouse of Transporlation
Association

* Denotesmember of the StakeholdersAdvisory Committee (SAC).

GenaroLozano Donald Passantino
ParsonsBrinckerhoff QueensCommunity Board
#5 - Transpoftation
John Maier Committee
RidgewoodProperty Owners
& Civic Association/Queens Gail Pizzigati
Community Board #5 ParsonsBrinckerhoff
JoeMalinowski Robert Pozarycki
MJ Engineeringand Times Newsweekly
Land Surveying
Domenick Rafter
Helen Meng QueensTribune
World Joumal
Leigh Remizowski
Kenny Mercado* New York Daily News
Office of SenatorMartin
Malave Dilan Lillian Robertson
New York StateDepafiment
Mark Mohrmann of Transportation
Hardesty& Hanover
Lary Rodriquez*
CaseyMorgan Office of SenatorMaftin
GeneralContractors Malave Dilan
Association
SobnerSaintDic*
Angela Miraglia New York City Department
New York StateDepartment of Transportation
of Transporlation
JoyceSowinski
JosephE. Nelson,P.E. New York StateDepaftment
Calvary Cemetery of Transportation
HelenNeuhaus Manny Steier
Helen Neuhaus& Resident
Associates
SorenSuver
AnthonyNunziato* PhelpsDodge Refining
Resident/MaspethChamber Corporation
of Commerce
Walter Szulecki
CharlesO'Shea Resident
New York StateDepafiment
of Transpoftation JeanTanler*
MaspethIndustrial Business
Solutions
SanVargas*
Office of Assemblywoman
CatherineNolan
LawrenceWaters
Resident(Brooklyn)
Don Weston
Resident(Brooklyn)
ChristineWilkinson
Newtown Historical
Society
Anita Wright
Helen Neuhaus&
Associates
Carol Wynperle
ParsonsBrinckerhoff
Nicole Zaidi
New York StateDepaflment
of Transportation
Brooklyn
February 24, 2010
Michael Abrahams
ParsonsBrinckerhoff
Roberl Adams*
New York StateDepartment
ol Transportation
Alla Albert
Brooklyn ChapterAIA
Michael Barbagallo
ParsonsBrinckerhoff
Rich Barone
RegionalPlan Association
CharlotteBeetz
Resident

* Denotesmemberof the StakeholdersAdvisory Committee(SAC).

Marvis Belfon Nicole Davis ThomasKrupski
Helen Neuhaus& Hardesty& Hanover Resident
Associates
Luke DePalmax Julie Lawrence
SteveBennett Office of Brooklyn Borough Brooklyn Community
ParsonsBrinckerhoff PresidentMarty Markowitz Board#1

Karen Berenger NoreenDevine L.Y. Letzkus

Resident Resident Resident

EstelleBlakitis Cecilia Dzirko Gary Lettya

Resident Resident Resident

Henry Burney TheresaDzirko Adam Levine

SuperiorFiber Mills, Inc. Resident New York StateDepartment
of Transpofiation
Fred Carillo Phillip Eng
FMC Company New York StateDepaftment Vincent Lomonte
of Transportation GrahamAvenue Block
TalisaChang Association
GreenpointGazette BernardEnte
Newtown Creek Alliance Kerry Lowe
Michele Chesnicka New York City Depaftment
Resident Harold Fink of Parks& Recreation
New York StateDepartment
JackChiang of Transportation Michael Lydon
Resident(Queens) Resident
Lori Ann George
Guido Cianciotta Resident Ali Mallick
ConcernedCitizensof New York City Department
Withers Street CharlesGozdziewski of Design and Construction
Hardesty& Hanover
TheresaCianciotta* Leopoldo Manzi
Office of Assemblyman Keith Griesing National Grid
JosephLentol Hardesty& Hanover
Evelyn Matechak
Louis Como Richard Hart Resident
Resident EnvironmentalPlanning &
Management,Inc. Anthony Matusewicz
Evelyn Cruz+ Resident
Office of Congresswoman Laura* and Mike* Hofmann
Nydia Velazquez GreenpointWaterfront ChristopherMcBridex
Associationfor Automobile Associationof
Todd Culver Parksand Planning America
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan
LLP GerardKacynski Edmund Michaleski+
Resident Oak StreetBlock
Rev. Robert Czok Association
St. Anthony/St.Alphonsus

+ Denotesmemberof the StakeholdersAdvisory Committee (SAC).

Mark Mohrmann Michael Seabrook Mitch Waxman
Hardesty& Hanover ParsonsBrinckerhoff Newtown Historical Society/
Newtown Pentacle
GeorgeJ. Mueller Aaron Short
StobierskiLucas CNG Courier LawrenceWeiss
GardenviewFuneralHome A.J. McNulty & Company,Inc.
JorgeSilva
Dorothy Neary Judlau Contracting Robert Weiss
United Fofties Civic A.J. McNulty & Company,Inc.
Association R. Smith
Simple Math Ed Wexell
Helen Neuhaus Resident
Helen Neuhaus& David Summa
Associates Judlau Contracting Carol Wierzbicki
Resident
CharlesO'Shea Dorothy Swick*
New York StateDepartment St. Cecilia'sChurch H. Worlh
of Transportation Meeker Saleslnc.
Grantley Thornhill
Nancy Petrullo AccurateBuilding Inspectors Anita Wright
Resident Helen Neuhaus&
Marin Tockman Associates
Alfonso Pettenato Resident
Resident Carol Wynperle
Alton Treadwell ParsonsBrinckerhoff
Diane Piatko New York StateDepaftment
Resident of Transporlation

Gall Pizzigati Andrea Torre

ParsonsBrinckerhoff Resident

Lillian Robertson Andrew Turco

New York StateDepaflment RegionalPlan Association
of Transportation
Alvin Ubell
Tobias Russo AccurateBuilding Inspectors
Office of GovernorDavid
Paterson VincentVespole
Resident
AnnMarie Sacharsky
Resident DzrmonVictor
One Stop Blue Printing
SobnerSaintDicx
New York City Depaflment Jack Wallace
of Transportation United Forties Civic
Association
Patrick Sbano
MTA-Bridges&Tunnels Daniel Wan
Hardesty& Hanover

+ Denotesmemberof the StakeholdersAdvisory Committee(SAC).

 AttachmentB

BRIDGE-TYPE PREFERENCES

COMMENT CARDS (87)*

OueensOpenHouse
Box Girder 3
DeckArch 5
Through Arch 1l
Cable-Stayed 9
BrooklvnOoenHouse
Box Girder 8
DeckArch 8
Through Arch 16
Cable-Stayed 19
QueensCommunityBoard#2 (5)
Box Girder
DeckArch
Through Arch 2
Cable-Stayed 3
Brooklvn Communitv Board #1
Box Girder 1
Deck Arch
Through Arch
Cable-Stayed 2
EMAIL COMMENTS (34)+
Box Girder I
DeckArch 5
ThroughArch 8
Cable-Stayed 20

TOTAL COMMENTS
Box Girder 13
DeckArch 18
Through Arch 3'7
Cable-Stayed 53
TOTAL: 121

*Includes both preferencesrecordedby four respondents(Box Girder/Deck Arch; Deck ArcMThrough

Arch; Through Arch/Box Girder; Through Arch./Cable-Stayed)
 AttachmentC

KosciuszkoBridgeOpenHouses
February2010
CommentCards
Bridge-TnreComments

Box Girder (BG)

1. Keepingall structurebelow the deckwould be desirable.

2. Cable-Stayedis most aestheticallypleasingbut seemsexcessiveandtoo expensive,considering

currentbudgetproblems. ThroughArch gives somenice visual interest. Deck Arch doesn't
have enoughvisual differentiation from Box Girder to be worth addedexpenseand large
obstructingbase. Box Girder is simplebut fine.

3. Cleanestappearancewith least visual impact (to drivers and view of city). Long-term
maintenancecostshouldbe on the lower endofthe choices.

Deck Arch (DA)

1. Sinceit's concrete,
maintenance
shouldbe less.

2. No adverseimpactto bird flight/migration.

3. Planesfollow the BQE and LIE to LaGuardiaand fly low when clouds are low, so we don't
want anythhg sticking up to crash into. Deck Arch looks strongestin caseof overweight
trucks.

4. Visually pleasingstructurethat doesnot extendtoo far over the deck.

5. Keepthe skylineclearl Cablemaintenance

isabighassle(evenif it's in75 years)

6. Ask that exits and approachsupportsbe visually appealingon Brooklyn and Queenssides.

7. Appearsto be more solid construction;leastobstructsskyline; opennessfor the drivers is clear

andcrisp; appealingprofile aesthetically.

8. Keepsthe view of Manhattanopen;no distractionwhen driving over bridge.

9. [SeeBox GirderComment# 1]

Throueh Arch (TA)

1. The ThroughArch option presentsa hint ofthe existingstructue while presentinga new look
anda lessostentatiousoption than the Cable-Stayedspan.

2. DeckArch wouldberny secondchoice.

3. Exit andentrancerampson both sides.

4. View of skyline(How high is bridge?).

5. Oflers identity for the bridge while nof overwhelmingthe skyline.

6. Navigationalredlightsfor LGA flight lair,1navel guidance.

7. Strongbuilding-steel drivingoverthebridge.
bridge;3-dimensional

8. Like the 3 archesdrivingoverthe KosciuszkoBridge;spectacular

view.

9. Elegantbut a lot lessexpensive

thanCable-Stayed
bridge.

10. [SeeBox GirderComment#2]

11. Add a line down the bike/pedestrianlane(separatingusers)!

Cable-Stayed(CS)
1. Could becomeal iconic image for Brooklyn and Queens,especiallysince it joins the two
boroughsandframesthe Marhattanskyline when viewedfrom the east.

2. is anactualbridgeandis anacceptable
Cable-Stayed replacement
for this old bridge.

3. SignatureBridge, to west City Skyline/Safety-Eliminatevertical curve/Structurallysound.

4. We needa modemlook in our City, plus it will be somethingyou can seefrom a distance.

5. The Deck Arch is not dramatic.If the Cable-Stayed is deemedtoo costly,betterto be elegant
and simpleand go with a Deck Arch. However,I think the Cable-Stayedcould becomea part
of the city's visualidentity,getspeopleto look up, changesperspective,so it's my pick.

6. Aestheticallythe bestbut hopeit's not too high to interferewith air haffrc.

7. Many, many yearsago,the LenapeIndianslived in this area(they were here first). The Cable-
Stayeddesignremindsme of an Indian dancingwith his headdressof featherson, and each
cablerepresents oneofhis long feathersflowing from his costume.Also, the art decodesign
at the top ofthe bridgefits in with the feeiing.

Brooklynneedsanotherbeautifulbridgeofcables- thethreesisters:the BrooklynBridge,the

Yetazano Bridge, andnow the KosciuszkoBridge.

With a cablebridge you have a location on the bridge where you are. Also from a distance,
we will seeour new beautiful bridge to be proud of and evenmore so at night with the lights
on (white cableandwhite lights)

8. The cablesshouldbe decorativesimilar to the one in Bradenton,Florida.

9. The design looks rich and complementsthe Newton Creek Water Pollution Control Plant
digesters,which arealsobecomingan attraction.

10. Kayakingon both sides.

costis sameassecondpick (TA)

11. As long asmaintenance