Date: Fri 20-Mar-1998

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

DOT-Housatonic-bridge-NU

Full Text:

Residents Sharply Critical Of DOT Plans For New Housatonic Bridge

(with map & photo)

BY ANDREW GOROSKO

Area residents are criticizing the state's proposal to build a new

$37.3-million bridge to carry Route 34 across the Housatonic River upriver of

Stevenson Dam, saying the state instead should rebuild the deteriorated bridge

that sits atop the dam.

About 350 area residents attended a public hearing sponsored by the state

Department of Transportation (DOT) on March 12 at Masuk High School in Monroe

to discuss the bridge issue.

Residents who spoke said they doubt that a new bridge upriver of the existing

bridge is necessary, adding that improving the existing bridge would be

sufficient to deal with traffic flow problems.

Several people expressed fears that new bridge construction would lead to a

general widening of Route 34, resulting in the road carrying much heavier

traffic between Sandy Hook Center and New Haven.

Also, speakers said they feared that installing bridge piers in the Housatonic

would dislodge riverbed silt contaminated with the toxic chemical PCB, causing

the PCB to travel downriver below Stevenson Dam, extending the area of PCB

contamination in the Housatonic. During past decades, PCBs entered the

Housatonic near a General Electric electrical transformer factory in

Pittsfield, Mass.

Paul Esposito, representing the Connecticut Light and Power Company (CL&P),

said CL&P supports the DOT's proposal for a new bridge. Placing a new bridge

atop the dam is not a practical solution, he said. CL&P owns the dam.

Karyl Lee Hall, an attorney for the Connecticut Fund for The Environment,

stressed that CL&P is contractually obligated to let traffic flow across its

dam. Eliminating traffic from the dam is apparently a financial issue for the

power company, she said, noting the existing bridge can be made safer. Ms Hall

said the state did not do enough testing of riverbed sediments in planning for

the proposed new bridge. Ms Hall's remarks were met with loud applause from

the audience.

Mike Ceruzzi of Monroe asked why DOT would want to insert a section of

"superhighway-grade" roadway in Route 34. "I don't trust the DOT...I'm against

it," he said.

Ruth Malins of the Housatonic Valley Association (HVA), an environmental

group, said the state did insufficient testing on PCB levels in riverbed

sediments. The environmental assessment prepared by the state was one of the

poorest quality assessments HVA has ever seen, she said. More extensive

testing is needed, she said. Ms Malins asked whether DOT has considered

building a suspension bridge across the river to minimize disrupting the

riverbed sediments.

HVA questions DOT's planning work on issues including the purpose and need for

the bridge, its environmental consequences, air quality, water quality,

aquatic habitat, stormwater runoff, socioeconomics and local land uses.

Joe DeMarco, who lives downriver of the dam, said the project would require

the removal of about 2,000 cubic yards of sediments contaminated with PCBs.

Past riverbed test borings done by the state caused a "horrid" smell in the

area, he said. He expressed concerns that construction work would cause

PCB-contaminated sediments to move downriver of the dam.

Edward Kisluk of Shelton, chairman of the Housatonic Lake Authority, said

authority members believe the roadway should remain atop the dam. He termed

the DOT's proposal "a grandiose solution to a modest problem." If DOT is

anxious to build a new bridge, why doesn't it replace the traffic-clogged

Quinnipiac River Bridge in New Haven, he asked.

James Olson of Oxford said doing construction work in the river will disperse

PCBs into it, rendering it useless for recreation. The existing bridge should

be rebuilt with CL&P paying half the costs, he said.

Lyndon Mayers of the Housatonic Rainbow Club said the existing bridge should

be renovated to protect the trout fishing area downriver of the dam.

In response to a resident's question, Brian Cunningham, DOT's project manager

for building a new bridge, said that if Stevenson Dam were to fail, a new

bridge upriver of Stevenson Dam would not collapse.

One man suggested installing traffic lights at the existing bridge to allow

alternating traffic to flow across it, thus reducing traffic hazards there. He

also questioned the veracity of a videotape which DOT presented to illustrate

traffic hazards there.

Richard Kopf of Oxford, chairman of The Concerned Citizens for the

Preservation of The Housatonic River Basin, said, "The (DOT's) environmental

assessment is inaccurate, incomplete, and in many places deceptive." A

complete environmental impact study is needed, he stressed. The citizens group

opposes the wide bridge proposed by DOT, he said. Rebuilding the existing

bridge is the best solution, he stressed.

The citizens group charges that building a new bridge would: create PCB

pollution hazards; increase commercial traffic in the area; result in

increased development; pose unnecessary costs; adversely affect area

recreation, and contaminate river fish with PCBs.

DOT Proposal

Construction of the proposed bridge is detailed in a draft federal

environmental assessment of the bridge's replacement prepared by DOT and the

Federal Highway Administration. The report finds there would be "no

significant environmental impact" in connection with the bridge project which

would link Monroe to Oxford by a multi-span bridge almost 250 feet upriver of

the existing Stevenson Dam Bridge.

DOT wants to replace the aging bridge to ensure the long-term safety and use

of the river crossing. It estimates the existing bridge's useful life

expectancy to be three to five years. "The substandard bridge and approach

road geometry... contribute to vehicular operational problems and appear to

contribute to frequent accidents," according to the draft report.

Rehabilitating the existing bridge atop the dam would be relatively costly and

would not improve bridge safety or traffic flow, according to the report.

Building a new bridge on the dam would be very expensive, complicated and

would require heavy maintenance after construction, it adds.

The preferred two-lane bridge would be designed for 37-mile-per-hour traffic.

The bridge would have road shoulders and a sidewalk. The $37.3-million

construction cost of the bridge does not include the cost of subsequently

removing the existing bridge atop the dam. Traffic would flow across the

existing bridge until a new span is open. A new bridge would be designed to

provide 50 years of service. The $37.3-million cost estimate is in 1995

dollars.

According to DOT, its preferred bridge alternative would have minimal

long-term effects on air quality, noise, vegetation, wildlife, threatened and

endangered species, wetlands, floodplains, residences, businesses and land

uses.

The Route 34 bridge atop Stevenson Dam was built in 1919. The overall

condition of the narrow span is listed as poor.