This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
02/21/2017 07:30 AMMany drivers have probably crossed the short Lynn Road bridge over the Falls River and admired its original stonework. When inspectors looked at the bridge more closely, however, they found less to admire—the condition of the stonework was poor and compromised safety—so the town in 2014 sought funding to design a replacement for the 1939 Works Progress Administration (WPA)-built bridge.
The project was released to bid in December, but on the day the bids were opened, a state historic preservation officer (SHPO) checked out the bridge and found it of historic significance, a finding that now stops all work on the safety fix.
With this SHPO finding, the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) wrote a letter to the town ordering work to stop; no state or federal permits will be issued and no further grant funds released. Now what?
“On Feb. 3, ConnDOT said to stop work on the project because the SHPO visited the bridge and found it to be historically significant and eligible for listing on the National Historic Register,” Scott Medeiros of Woodard and Curran, the town’s engineer for this project, told the Board of Selectmen on Feb. 14. “As of today, ConnDOT indicated they have halted the budget process.”
First Selectman Noel Bishop then asked Medeiros to confirm whether this means the state now will neither sign the contract with the town’s chosen contractor, nor release the promised grant funding or award needed permits from the state or the federal government. Scott said that Bishop’s understanding was correct.
What is unclear is why the state of Connecticut’s environmental review process took so long to complete. ConnDOT engineers had reviewed and discussed the construction plans for the bridge throughout 2016 with Woodard and Curran. Questions were raised and addressed with plan revisions. By December 2016, the plans were deemed 100 percent complete and the town decided to release project for bidding so work could be completed in the 2017 construction season.
Nonetheless, even though the project was released for bidding, both the town and the town’s engineer were aware that ConnDOT’s official environmental review, including the cultural and historic resources assessment, was still open.
“The problem you have is that you [now] have a project that the state says will need significant re-design and you don’t have access to the funding. You don’t have a project. You don’t have approval from the state,” Town Attorney Michael Wells told the selectmen. “It’s outrageous that the state inspects [the bridge] on the same day that the contract bids were opened.”
Old Colonie Construction owner Michelle Neri urged the Board of Selectmen not to reject the project bids yet, despite the setback about the a possible historic register designation. Old Colonie had been the apparent low bidder on the project and according to Neri, had already spent thousands of dollars preparing its bid.
The Board of Selectmen decided to wait until the middle of March to decided whether or not to reject the bids. This would give Medeiros time to work with the state SHPO office on the level of project re-design that would be needed to address SHPO’s finding of historical significance.
The ConnDOT webpage www.ct.gov/dot states, “The Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) view archaeological sites and historic structures as important components of the cultural heritage of the state...ConnDOT makes every effort to identify resources which are on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and to avoid affecting them...Bridges may, in addition, be determined historic because of their type of design or construction.”
A section 106 review under the National Historic Preservation Act, administered by SHPO and the National Park Services, is triggered when a finding of historic significance is made. This requires photographic and written documentation of the historic resources potentially affected be made and ways to minimize or avoid harm be developed.
“In a project containing Section 4 (f) resources [e.g., a historically significant structure], an alternative which avoids impact to such resources must be included and assessed,” the ConnDOT webiste states.
This is the new work the town must now complete if it is to move forward with the Lynn Road bridge replacement.
Medeiros said, in defense of Woodard and Curran’s work, that the new bridge did incorporate a relocation of the historic WPA stone. But for SHPO, this accommodation was not enough, given what the inspector deemed was the bridge’s historic significance.
Had the construction project bids and permits been awarded this month, the Lynn Road bridge replacement would have begun in early spring. According to Medeiros, due to the planned work to replace the bridge abutments and extend the bridge 13 more feet, Lynn Road likely would have been closed to through traffic for much of the construction season and perhaps through fall 2017.
Now, that schedule is on hold and whether the bridge will be replaced at all, uncertain.
Background
The town voted in May 2013 to authorize $900,000 in bonding authority to pay for design and engineering services for two town bridge replacement projects, the Lynn Road Bridge and the Winthrop Road Bridge, and for bridge improvements and repair to the Flat Rock Place bridge. In June 2016, the voters approved a supplemental bonding authorization of $105,000 for the Lynn Road bridge project and $130,000 for the Flat Rock Place bridge work. State and federal transportation grant funds were promised to complete the construction budgets for these projects.
According to Medeiros, the state, though it has stopped work on the Lynn Road bridge replacement until the historic resources mitigation question is resolved, did agree to extend the award period for the town’s grant award funds out one more year.