Matthew Mandell is a Representative Town Meeting member from District 1.
It includes Saugatuck — and the Cribari Bridge.
Late last night, Mandell sent out a Paul Revere-style email. Referring to the state Department of Transportation (DOT), he wrote:
THE DOT HAS GONE TO BID FOR THE DESIGN OF THE (NEW) BRIDGE
I think this comes as news to all of us. We were waiting for a follow up meeting after the December meeting that left most nonplussed.
Here is the bid, due back March 5.
Cribari Bridge (Drone photo/Alex O’Brien)
The question is: How can the DOT go to bid if the Environmental Study is not complete, as well as the Section 106 Federal Historic Study also being incomplete?
Maybe they can, but it seems out of order. It certainly catches us all by surprise. (For a previous”06880″story on Section 106, click here.)
There is also a DOT meeting set for Westport on March 19. I surely had not heard about this one either, but there it was on the site. Click here to see the flyer.
Here is the whole DOT site to read about all aspects of the bridge and project.
This is a bit befuddling for sure.
Timing is everything. In the last few days, hearing from concerned residents regarding the bridge, RTM Districts 1, 4 and 9, as the closest districts to the bridge, were planning to have a public meeting to discuss the bridge.
We wanted to also hear from the public as well. in a different venue than that of a DOT meeting. There has not be something close to a resident discussion since the PAC in 2018.
While there are different views on what should be done, the idea of large trucks seems to be a common thread. We are working on a date toward the end of the month. It will be via Zoom.
(Other RTM districts, hold tight. I spoke with the moderator. Let’s get this one going and have it not be a meeting of the body. Attend if you want of course, and it can expand if needed as we move forward.)
I always say we need to remain vigilant. Thanks to a diligent ally who went to the site to simply take a look at what might be up.
Thanks Matt. So much for all those recent promises from DOT for transparency and public engagement. Don’t piss on our back and tell us it’s raining. We’re in a fight. Period.
The lack of transparency and commitment to engaging the community in this project that will impact the quality of life for everyone in Westport is breathtaking. Thanks to Matt for organizing us on the RTM to discuss how we might be able to impact the course of this project, which seems to have gone into overdrive. Many of us were at the last (frankly surreal) meeting held by DOT over the holidays, and yet none of us seem to have been alerted to these movements.
Wow. This is very disturbing and disappointing. In reading the request for bids they emphasize making sure that the firm selected has experience and certifications for making sure the bridge will have the ability to hold “heavy loads”, unless I’m reading it incorrectly. They seem to weight this portion heavier than others. They do say they will weight the concerns for bridge mobility, for marine traffic even more though. Only concerned with public communication for 10%.
What’s clear is that the DOT plans to steamroll right over us. If they have their way, they are going to build a bridge that will accommodate spillover I-95 traffic, including huge trucks. And anybody who believes that they have been transparent clearly hasn’t been following the process. (They didn’t even invite the public to the last meeting, which by law was supposed to provide the public an opportunity to participate.) We can all agree that the bridge needs to be updated, but do we really want to invite even more traffic? All Westporters–and especially our town officials–need to wake up.
My comment has nothing to do with whether I am for or against this project. But, before everyone get’s all bent out of shape. This bid that is being referred to is literally only asking for a letter of intent to have a chance to design this bridge. You need to come up with designs before a project can be approved or denied or changed. This letter of intent does not mean the DOT is ignoring anyone or that they are ready to work on this tomorrow.
I just want to stop the panic and misinformation before it spirals. This is the very first step of many, many steps before anything can happen to the bridge.
Don’t forget to get the approvals (or rejections or changes), they need at the minimum, a basis of design. Which, this is before that step.
Fred, the DOT’s Environmental Assessment (EA) was a “step” too. Ditto for the Sec.106 MoA. What happened to those steps? We keep being told that there’s PLENTY of time to weigh in on the bridge. But this soft shoe shuffle routine is exactly what I would do if was the DOT and I wanted what I wanted. We call it boiling the toad but there are less family friendly terms that come to mind.
DOT’s heavy handedness and utter lack of transparency when it comes to our Cribari Bridge has always been a serious issue. Remember that back in 2015 they took a simple request for some “spot painting” on the bridge and morphed that request into a plan to destroy the bridge and replace it with a new $40 million bridge (now somewhere in the range $100 million.) All we wanted then and now was DOT to provide basic maintenance.and a bit of “spot painting.”
Even if the inevitable new bridge accommodates 18-wheelers plus all the Waze followers, not to worry, as Saugatuck’s new, 8-30g & HB 8002-improved, less-than-16-Unit, multiple “Mini-Hamlets” will force residents to park on-street, and the resulting clogging will prevent those tractor-trailers from maneuvering through to or from Exit 17.
Please, Matt, don’t forget Saugatuck once up there in Hartford!
There are clear federal regulations insisting on public hearings BEFORE the stages of planning CTDOT has completed and is now executing.
The petition to ask for oversight on this federally funded project in a national historic district is still active and will be brought once again to the attention of our Congressman and Senators. Please sign if you want a chance of having Westporters’ voices heard:
https://c.org/xM7ZPdyV82
I am glad to hear that our local representatives are taking action. We need everyone from our RTM to the First Selectman to advocate for our rights—
To be heard
To be safe as pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers
To a healthy environment
CTDOT does not enjoy an enviable reputation—even our local projects suffer from unconscionable delays, jury determined negligence, and thoughtless desecration of the environment.
.
Now that we have so many newly elected Town officials, I think it is incumbent upon ALL of them, and I mean ALL, to issue a written statement as to their positions respecting the Cribari Bridge. The statements could be simple, “maintain all the key aspects of the existing bridge”, “build a new bridge that allows for the largest trucks” or “let’s see what the DOT proposes”. The last of my list of alternatives being for me the worst.
I agree with Fred Roberts that there’s nothing here to panic over.
It makes all the sense in the world to identify a qualified engineer at this stage of the process who can assist in the regulatory phase and interact with the public before proceeding to the final design phase. This alarm is less Paul Revere than it is Chicken Little.
The plan was laid out like a recipe—step-by-step, easy to follow, and posted online for all to see. Then Marpe threw in a plot twist requesting to slash funds for feasibility studies, essentially hitting the snooze button on the inevitable, additionally the pandemic didn’t help the timeline.
Transparency has been shining brighter than a stadium spotlight, and there’s no reason to cater to wild demands. I.E. ” The bridge is fine as is”.
The mission is simple: Deliver a safe suitable span before it decides to audition for a disaster movie.
The options? Work together for a design that serves the community or join the circus of misinformation and political gymnastics. Now, with Jonathans bowing out, the stage is set for a new politician to cut the ribbon. Matt will you be in the line up?