Last week’s Friday’s Flashback — a look at the 1985 effort to save the Bridge Street (now Cribari) Bridge from a state Department of Transportation plan to replace it with a larger span, allowing tractor trailer traffic — drew over 2 dozen comments.
Many hoped for a similar response today. Forty years later, the future of the Cribari Bridge is still in doubt.
Larry Weisman is not sure that’s the right reaction.
The longtime attorney and town observer writes:
I think that the enthusiasm for saving the Cribari Bridge — which reached its peak in 1985 — is outdated.
It should be replaced by an effort to improve the safety and efficiency of the bridge, preventing its use by oversized vehicles, and preserving what some value as its aesthetic properties.
That is exactly what the state – which owns the bridge – is trying to do.
Below is a chart that outlines 6 carefully considered alternatives, as well as DOT’s preference among them.
As can be seen, the options in the two righthand columns headed “Replacement”, (one with “Alignment” — the preferred alternative — and the other without), check all the boxes for the thoughtful criteria in the left-hand column.
Click on, hover over or pinch to expand.
If the bridge is replaced in accordance with the preferred alternative, the results would include:
- Increased horizontal and vertical clearance, with electrical equipment located above 100 year flood elevation
- Safe bicycle and ADA compliant pedestrian passage
- Safe guardrails and roadway barriers
- Increased clearance when closed, reducing frequency of openings
- Compliance with historic criteria
- Right and left turn lanes at the Saugatuck end of the bridge.
It seems to me that ConnDOT has done a conscientious job of establishing reasonable and realistic criteria; assessing available alternatives, and the need for structural and operational improvements, and has listened to and taken into account public concerns expressed in earlier forums.
This is not to say that there are not traffic issues on the roads leading to and from the bridge.
But those problems must be addressed separately, and apart from any decision about the bridge itself. The bridge is not the only problem.
The town controls all of the roads that affect bridge traffic, except for Compo Road South (Route 136). The town is in a position to prevent or limit truck traffic on Imperial Avenue and Greens Farms Road. Along with height and weight warnings and alarms, that would go a long way toward effectively addressing the concern about 18-wheelers.
We only have 3 ways to drive across the river. It is imperative that each of them operates safely and efficiently for cars, bicycles and pedestrians.
I believe that the “preferred alternative” shown below in the second column from the right is the best solution. It should be widely supported — even though it would be difficult to synthesize on a t-shirt.
(Our “06880” Opinion pages are open to all. Email submissions to 06880blog@gmail.com. To make a tax-deductible contribution, clikc here. Thank you!)