By Ken Valenti
NEWINGTON, CT–The preferred solution for the problems with the William F. Cribari Bridge is to replace it, according to state and federal environmental documents.
An environmental assessment release last week from the Connecticut Department of Transportation (DOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), explores five alternatives for the span over the Saugatuck River deemed “structurally and functionally deficient”: doing nothing, two options for rehabilitating it, replacing the bridge where it is now and building a new bridge north of the existing one, which would be torn down.
The two replacement options are the only ones that address all the bridge’s structural and functional issues, the report says.
“Additionally, the two Replacement Alternatives also provide enhanced pedestrian and bicyclist user experiences by adding wider sidewalks and bike travel lanes, and they also increase the ease of mobility at the Bridge Street/Riverside Avenue intersection and increase the service life of the bridge to greater than 50 years,” the assessment reads.
The off-site replacement would require obtaining several properties, reducing parking area – impacting two businesses – and removal of a private dock.
Many residents oppose removing the historic bridge, and DOT spokesman Josh Morgan said last week that no decision has been made. The agency is collecting public input on the project through April 17 and has scheduled a public hearing for 6 p.m. March 19 in Westport Town Hall.
Representative Town Meeting districts 1, 4 and 9 – those nearest the bridge – have set up a Zoom meeting for tonight at 7 p.m. for the community to talk about it as well.
A new bridge at the location of the existing one would take 3 years to build and would cost $78 to $86 million, the assessment said. A temporary bridge would serve as a detour during construction.
The assessment was signed by John McAvoy, FHWA division administrator, Connecticut, and Christine Xenelis, a state DOT Transportation Assistant Planning Director.
An unsigned FHWA assessment of the project describes a complete replacement of the bridge as the only solution to its structural deficiencies that would solve all of its problems.
Rehabilitation of the span would still leave it with a 12-foot, 7-inch clearance, which is lower than Connecticut standards; 14 feet, 3 inches for existing bridges and 16 feet, 3 inches for new bridges, according to an unsigned FHWA assessment that is among the documents posted with the environmental assessment. The span is also too narrow to allow a bicycle lane, and holds its mechanical and electrical equipment underneath the span, where it can be partially submerged and damaged by a 10-year storm, the documents say.
The curb-to-curb width is 19.5 feet, less than the 28-foot standard.
Some 13,100 vehicles daily drive the span carrying Connecticut Route 136 – Bridge Street – over the Saugatuck River. It is 26 feet wide, although its only 19.5 feet curb to curb.
Deterioration of posts 2 and 3 caused the DOT to lower the vehicular weight limit to 20 tons, which is considered substandard for spans on Connecticut routes, the FHWA assessment says. Further deterioration would eventually render the structure incapable of supporting critical vehicles such as firetrucks and school buses, the environmental assessment says.
At the same time, the state has called on engineering firms interested in working on the project to submit proposals by March 5. The documents also call for proposals from anyone interested in obtaining the bridge, moving it to a new site and putting it to use, should the decision to replace it at bridge prevail.
Built in 1884, the historic swing bridge was placed on the National Register of Historic Places for two criteria – its connection to events in history and its design. A 1991 renovation, however, replaced the load-bearing truss system with a steel girder superstructure. The trusses that remain are ornamental and do not meet standards for resisting wind, said the assessment.
In 2017, the state determined that the renovation diminished the historic designation under the design criteria. It retains its listing based on the “events” criteria. The bridge is also a contributing aspect of the Bridge Street Historic District.
Ken Valenti
A career journalist and lifelong resident of the New York City region, Ken Valenti has enjoyed decades of reporting local, regional and national news in New York and Connecticut. Topics of special interest are development, the environment, Long Island Sound and transportation. When not reporting, he’s always on the lookout for the perfect coffee shop or used book sale.
The structural and code issues described in the assessment are real. But meeting today’s design code does not automatically mean the project has fully evaluated its long-term consequences.
The current bridge’s weight and height limits function as physical constraints on heavy truck traffic. A replacement built to full modern clearance standards would remove those constraints. The environmental assessment states that no additional truck traffic is anticipated — yet it does not appear to include detailed modeling of how route choice might change once those barriers are gone.
Before concluding that “to code” equals “better,” the public deserves a transparent analysis of how traffic composition, noise, and neighborhood safety could shift over time in this corridor
Please correct this tid bit of info. Its imperative we stay fact based .
“Rehabilitation of the span would still leave it with a 12-foot, 7-inch clearance”.
In ALL configurations the weight rating will be returned back to 40 tons once again and the height will be returned to 13’8″ thus allowing all legal loads to pass… Again that’s in all options.