Kleiner urged that a mass transit feasibility study be undertaken before the MTA and Thruway begin an environmental impact statement for the Tappan Zee II plan, and called for restoration of passenger rail service on the West Shore line. Kleiner said that MTA must answer why it is not supporting the West Shore project. Others attending agreed it is outrageous for the MTA to dismiss the West Shore project, seemingly because of reluctance to cooperate with NJ Transit. Westchester legislators agreed that West Shore commuter rail would be an important means to reduce traffic from Rockland using the Tappan Zee and I-287. The I-287 Task Force report found that about 30% of peak Tappan Zee traffic from Rockland County is destined for New York City - this is the market for the West Shore line.

In an interview in a recent Westchester Business Journal, Construction Industry Council chair and Tappan Zee II backer Ross Pepe said, "Once you get away from that sensitivity at the base of the bridge, Nyack, Grandview and Tarrytown, where people are concerned about property takings and things of that kind, once you get away from those bases where there is a strong resentment and opposition for the fact that the bridge is even located in their community, people begin to use more rational judgement and they are a little bit more informed because they know that the transportation system is important."

Someone better at building support for his position might have characterized the concerns of others more charitably, but Pepe's facts seem faulty as well. In Rockland County, the Rockland County Civic Association and the Save Torne Valley committee, which are not river-front groups, have expressed strong concern about potential impacts of the Tappan Zee II plan. Signs also point to growing concern across Westchester, particularly in the I-287 corridor. This broad sentiment is translating into action by elected officials in both counties. As we have reported (MTR #269) Rockland County Executive C. Scott Vanderhoef has called for independent review of the Task Force's recommendations, and county legislators on both sides of the bridge are seeking to raise more questions about the proposed projects. State legislators from Westchester were also represented at a recent information session with Thruway director John Platt at Marymount College .

Some officials and columnists are increasingly discussing the issue of a Tappan Zee tunnel. State transportation officials enthusiastically say the option can be examined in a Tappan Zee II environmental impact statement. However, a tunnel is simply a variant of river crossing, and whether an expanded Tappan Zee span is over water or under the river-bed, it does not change outstanding questions about mass transit feasibility and additional traffic and sprawl development. Discussion of a Tappan Zee tunnel vs. a new bridge assumes a major new crossing will be built - a question far from decided.