Brian Stern spent nearly 4 terms on the Board of Finance — including serving as chair from 2014 to 2022.
He moved to Westport in 1977, and spent 40 years with Xerox. Since 2008, he has been an entrepreneur.
He is keenly aware of the political process for a project like repair of the Jesup Road bridge. He knows how to get it done — and what can slow it down. Brian writes:
Two weeks ago, an intense rainstorm severely damaged the Jesup Road Bridge. Logistically, it is super important to downtown activity and emergency services.
The timing of repairs is consequently an urgent priority for us all. This week I interviewed the Public Works Department director, Larry Roberts, to assess the process and issues related to the project. I thank him for the open and factual discussion.
The Project: The Jesup Bridge was constructed in 1950. It has a small span of 12 feet, and was constructed on pillars of stacked granite native rocks packed with local dirt and fill.
On September 14, the water pressure from Deadman Brook was so intense that fill was eroded and granite rocks were shifted, some over 1000 pounds, which rendered the span structure and integrity of the bridge dangerously fragile.
Compounding the problem are the hydraulics of a stream that floods frequently, combined with the impact of two tides per day.
The bridge cannot be repaired. It requires complete redesign and replacement, taking in to account the environment complexities of its location. Likely the new bridge will be wider, and certainly more substantial.
Jesup Road Bridge, before it was damaged.
The Interested Parties: The engineering complexity is compounded by the number of regulatory bodies impacted. At the state and gederal level these include the Army Corps of Engineers, state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, the Flood Recovery Board, and the State Bridge Program (Department of Transportation).
At the local level: the Flood and Erosion Control Board, Conservation Commission, Planning & Zoning Commission, and Architectural Review Board.
Funding bodies also get into the loop; the Board of Finance, Representative Town Meeting and Board of Selectpersons. Obviously, this spaghetti of legitimately interested parties will need to be deftly aligned.
The Design Process: In the past 2 weeks, discussions have commenced between the federal, state and local commissions.
Today, an RFP will be published to invite engineering firms to bid on the critical design phase. This will include the design itself, soil testing, hydraulic planning, the permitting applications, estimated costs and key elements of project management.
This bidding process will take 21 days, and will include site visits, etc. The successful bidder will be judged on cost, expertise, prior experience and timing.
The design phase itself will take approximately 45 days and is estimated to cost $172,000.
Damaged underside of the Jesup Road bridge.
The Construction Phase: Immediately following design approval, the project will go out to bid with expected completion in 30 days.
Then starts the construction, which from a standing start will take about 180 days with the availability of materials being critical to a timely completion.
Additionally, reviews and amended specifications will be potential sources of delay. My suggestion is for residents who have specific asks — for example on architectural aesthetics — to speak up now, and not when the train is in motion.
The Review Process: We are informed that the chairs of the relevant commissions are engaged, and prepared to fast track their specific area of responsibility.
The trick here is to ensure that the review process is performed in parallel to the design, bidding and construction phases. Clearly this requires careful orchestration, and an ability to force these interested parties to expedite with due regard for quality, long term sustainability, and safety. The essential ingredient is timely and clear communication with the public.
In our experience public confusion is the lifeblood of review delays. As of today, we have seen no articulation of the plan and the stages at which the public can input. We anticipate each relevant committee chair will publish their review plans, in coordination with the 1st selectman’s office. This public review is the wild card in the timing of project completion.
The Funding Process: The administration informed us that it is unlikely the federal government has funds applicable to the new bridge construction, but there maybe 50% matching by the state. (Stay tuned on this source of funding).
At the local level the Board of Finance has an approval pending for the $172,000 initial design costs at their next meeting, October 7. This delay will not impact the design RFP timing.
The RTM is due to meet the following day to confirm the recommendation of the BOF. Importantly, the tone of urgency by all funding bodies has been set.
A Call to Action: If one accumulates the days of actual activity, the project time would total 276 days from Monday. (21 days for design RFP response, plus 45 days for design completion, plus 30 days for construction bids, and then 180 days for construction).
This assumes zero delays, and excludes any review time. Given the these assumptions we have received, 276 days is a very best case. As a frequent user of the bridge this already a very frustrating time frame.
The town’s management non-trivial task is to anticipate and forestall any physical activity delays and eliminate delays due to interested parties’ reviews and public input.
This can only be achieved with
- 1) the full force and articulation by the 1st selectman
- 2) the cooperation of all committee chairs
- 3) the full and speedy cooperation of State and federal agencies
- 4) and most important, a documented plan where all parties understand their specific responsibilities and can be held accountable.
The urgency of the project demands a call to action. This is not business as usual. In this regard, I believe Westport residents of are ready to be led.
Stay tuned.
(“06880″‘s Opinion pages are open to all. Submissions may be emailed to 06880blog@gmail.com. To support this hyper-local blog, please click here.)
