That's good news for those who are eager to see ground broken for a new bridge across the Niagara River, because with the plaza decision closer to being made, more attention can turn to the other big questions: How big will the new bridge be? And what will it look like?

The two favorites are among a short list of new plaza options unveiled by City Hall and the Peace Bridge Authority. Each option returns five acres to Front Park and creates other parkland by putting U.S. Customs and Immigration screening on the Canadian side of the Peace Bridge.

"This represents significant forward progress for a process that has seemingly been stuck for a while," said Rep. Brian Higgins, D-Buffalo.

In May, Higgins imposed a deadline for results and threatened to pull $10 million in federal aid unless it was met.

Separately, Peace Bridge officials said they are changing how a previously announced bridge design competition will be run. The changes are meant to give those selected for a design jury a greater say in shaping bridge parameters that designers will be required to meet. The parameters include whether the bridge should be a replacement or companion span.

The design jury, to be made up of residents as well as technical experts, is still being put together by the mayors of Buffalo and Fort Erie, Ont. Its first meeting is expected by month's end.

For now, though, the new plaza alternatives are dominating recent talks between City Hall and the Peace Bridge Authority.

Agreeing on the new concepts puts City Hall and Peace Bridge officials in a better position to ask for federal aid for the project from Sens. Charles E. Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton and the rest of the congressional delegation.

"I have $10 million now," Higgins said. "My ability to get additional money will be based on showing progress sooner rather than later. This is a clear sign to me and to Sens. Schumer and Clinton that progress is being made and a consensus is developing."

Mayor Anthony M. Masiello and Peace Bridge Authority Vice Chairman Paul Koessler of Buffalo sent a joint letter Friday to the congressional delegation asking for $25 million.

"We are pleased to have been able to arrive at a united front about the look and function of our new gateway," the two officials wrote. "We believe that we have arrived at alternatives that will work for all the constituencies affected. With your help, we are ready to work together to finalize the planning and design, and implement solutions."

City favors moving plaza

There are major differences between the two shared-border plaza choices.

Masiello said he prefers, at the moment, an option that relocates the plaza north and relies on Niagara Street and Massachusetts Avenue to handle bridge traffic.

The other option uses more of the existing plaza and relies on Porter Avenue to get traffic on and off the bridge.

The Episcopal Church Home at 24 Rhode Island St. would relocate to Porter under both concepts.

"We think these are the two best alternatives," Masiello said. "They give a clear vision of the many benefits of a shared-border accord and deliver the great gateway that we all want for the Peace Bridge."

"I think we can live with either of the two options," the mayor said.

Both options will be studied further during the next phase of the environmental study for the Peace Bridge expansion project.

In all, five plaza alternatives will be reviewed in the next stage of study, including two that would retain all customs screening in Buffalo. The non-shared-border options cost more. For example, the estimated cost of connecting roads in a northern plaza relocation without shared border management is $78 million. Under a shared-border accord, it would be $40 million.

The shared-border alternatives also include $25 million for community enhancements, money not included in the other options.

A third shared-border plaza option was also developed and will be studied. It's similar to the Porter proposal but avoids taking anyone else's property and keeps the Episcopal Church Home on Rhode Island Street. This third option has no support from City Hall.

"If it wasn't to satisfy a legal requirement, it would not have made the list of options," Masiello said. "I'm not supporting it at all."

Masiello noted the cooperation between the bridge authority and City Hall in crafting the shared-border plaza alternatives. The options come just six months after the federal government gave the go-ahead for shared-border management at the Peace Bridge.

Home eager to move

Episcopal Church Home officials will be glad to move under any of the plaza proposals.

The nursing home's property is too close to the existing U.S. plaza, said Edward C. Weeks, president and chief executive officer of the Episcopal Church Home on the city's West Side.

"We've had enough vibrations to shake us out of that place," Weeks said.

The Episcopal Church Home is willing to move to Porter and has a preliminary design for a new facility.

"We have an idea how much money we will need in order to make that new building a reality," Weeks said. "But until we work out an acceptable settlement with the Peace Bridge, we'll just have to wait on it."

City officials expect questions about the plaza options from West Side property owners and civic leaders involved in the Peace Bridge debate. Some of those questions will be answered as consultants dig further into the concepts in the draft environmental impact statement phase of the study.

Move north backed

Moving the plaza north appeals to Jeff Belt, a Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy board member who has been active in the Peace Bridge issue since 1999.

"I'm happy with the concept, but I feel we can do better" by refining the idea during the next stage of the review, Belt said.

The northern plaza option released by City Hall looks "unnecessarily large," Belt said.

Ron Rienas, the bridge authority's general manager, said the downside of the Massachusetts option is that it takes more homes.

"And it is the most expensive option," Rienas said.

Belt said he dislikes the use of Porter in the other option.

It's the only Olmsted parkway that reaches Lake Erie, he said. Allowing bridge traffic onto and off of Porter makes it unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists, he said.

But the Porter option's "major advantage is it keeps the trucks as far west as we can possibly keep them from the neighborhood," Niagara Council Member Dominic J. Bonifacio said.

Despite the flaws Belt sees in the options, he is pleased with how much City Hall and the bridge authority have accomplished.

"The glass is about 90 percent full," Belt said. "It has been a very long time to get here, but the simple fact we'll be able to implement shared-border management is an incredible win for our border crossing."

Design review widens

Rienas last week said a design competition, first announced last November, will have new guidelines. Now, a single jury - whose 16 civic members will have equal representation as technical members - will also be asked to weigh in on some of the fundamental issues of the bridge design.

The jury will be asked to review all of the design work that has been done thus far by Swiss bridge designer Christian Menn, the Figg Engineering Group of Tallahassee, Fla., and Modjeski and Masters of Poughkeepsie and Buckland & Taylor of North Vancouver, British Columbia.

"They will come back and say it should be a cable-stayed bridge, or it should be a suspension bridge, or it should be a steel arch bridge or a concrete, segmental bridge," Rienas said. "They're also going to deal with the issue of companion or replacement as part of their deliberations."

The jury's recommendation will be sent to the group spearheading the bridge expansion, composed of officials from the Peace Bridge Authority, City of Buffalo and Town of Fort Erie.

Under the previous plan, the jury was to have simply scored the entries of bridge designers picked for the design competition.

"We're putting the public in the front end instead of the back end," said Masiello, who endorsed the new design competition's new setup.

e-mail: plakamp@buffnews.com