Meeting Reports/Powerpoints
Meeting: Public Informational Meeting
Meeting Date: 12/16/09 - 5:30 Open House, Meeting 6:00-8:00 pm
Location: Portsmouth High School
Fatal Flaw Analysis: Round 2
Downloads
Powerpoint Presentation: December 16 Public Meeting
Meeting Minutes (click to view).
Maine – N. H. Connections
Public Informational Meeting
December 16, 2009
Portsmouth High School, Portsmouth, NH
Presenters:
Paul Godfrey, HNTB
Carol Morris, Morris Communications
With the support of:
Gerry Audibert, MaineDOT
Bob Landry, New Hampshire DOT
All slides referenced can be found in the PowerPoint for the meeting.
Meeting began at 6:05pm
*****
Carol Morris:
Welcome everyone. This is an absolutely great turnout. I would like to thank the media that helped put the word out about this public meeting as well as the folks from Seacoast Area Bicycle Routes, who sent out emails. I’m Carol Morris, and I’m responsible for public outreach for this study. Tonight, we’ll primarily talk about the results of the Fatal Flaw Analysis – what bridge options are still on the table and what is being eliminated. Perhaps you had a chance to look at the maps in the hall on the way in. We’ll go through them one by one and talk about which ones are on – and off – the table.
Bob Landry:
I’ll give a quick Memorial Bridge repair update. As most of you know, we did have something come up during inspection that needed addressing. We started repairs and reopened the bridge earlier than expected. Refers to Memorial Bridge Update slide. This repair was similar to the ones done in 2004. With a review of the structure, we still do have 1- 3 years of life available. Any questions?
Q: Is that 1- 3 years to rehab?
Bob: Yes. Engineers do debate that issue. Anything is able to be rehabbed. The question is when is it feasible to rehab vs. replace? If you were working on an old house, for example. 1-3 years is the life we see right now. If we get the TIGER funding, it will take about 2 years to construct outside of that window.
Q: What part of it is failing?
Bob: I don’t have the report in front of me. The 2008 contract plans showed replacing the lift span. That’s the worst.
Q: There was a bridge repaired recently on the southern end of Lake Champlain. When Memorial was inspected, was the underwater structure also inspected?
Bob: Yes, the piers of the Memorial are in good shape.
Q: What traffic data was collected during the closure?
Paul: We collected data on the two open bridges – the I-95 and the Sarah Long - to understand what effect the Memorial closure had on the two other bridges. We’re still reviewing it and will have an update soon. The volume of traffic on both went up.
Q: Will you post those findings online?
Paul: Yes.
Q: Why was it allowed to deteriorate to such an extent?
Bob: That’s an interesting and difficult question to answer. The major reason is that the (MaineDOT and NHDOT) departments both have financial needs that outweigh the resources. All over the US, there is not enough funding to address the infrastructure needs.
Q: Thank you. Thanks to the DOTs for the effort they made during the holiday season to get repairs done and Memorial back open. I know you worked hard and turned things around quick. During the time that it was closed, in addition to the traffic data, do you have economic impact data for the businesses in both downtowns?
Carol: I met last week with both Chambers of Commerce – on both sides of the river – and Stakeholder Committee members. When you do a study like this, you need quantitative, not qualitative, data. For example, retail sales tax data. Unfortunately, Maine reports retail sales tax via the Kittery Economic Survey Area, which goes up to Ogunquit and over to South Berwick. It did not break out the smaller section we were interested in. And there’s no sales tax in New Hampshire, so that’s not an option. Long story short, we haven’t discovered a way to measure what happened. November is also historically a bad month.
Continued: You could at least ask for input from the businesses for during that period of time? Perhaps ask the Chambers?
Carol: We talked to the Chambers. As we get further along in the study, we will do some level of economic analysis. The business folks would have to give us audited sales data for us to be able to use it. That means factual information for that time period, which is often difficult to get because it’s proprietary and so business owners have been historically reluctant to give out this type of information. Both Chambers agreed it’s not a good way to move forward now and they’ll work with us to determine how to figure it out.
Continued: What if businesses volunteer that information? I know it’s somewhat anecdotal but maybe better than nothing?
Carol: I would be wary of potentially incorrect data vs. nothing at all.
Comment: Businesses on the other side of the bridge saw a decrease in sales. The DOT tried to get it done as quickly as possible.
Carol: That’s a good segue to the last bullet on this slide. Whether we get stimulus money or if the study shows the bridge needs to be rehabbed or rebuilt, it is going to take two full years of construction, during which time the Memorial will be closed to all traffic. It’s a significant impact on those businesses. The Chambers are willing to help them and us plan for it.
Q: Did you say they will be closed for two years? Meaning no pedestrians, even?
Carol: That is the way it looks.
Q: What about waterborne?
Bob: The contractors will find a way to make the river accessible.
Q: The center span remains up?
Bob: It’s up to the contractor to decide. They can either maintain the lift or remove the center span. The previous contract documents allowed closure of the navigation channel for two periods of 10 days overall. Waterborne will still be there.
Continued: So two years for bikes and pedestrians. No parking in the shipyard. How will we get people from Portsmouth to Kittery?
Bob: The previous contract identified a shuttle service from Portsmouth to Kittery, a van that would have the capability of carrying pedestrians and bikes 19 hours of the day, 7 days a week. So there’s just a period of time it would not operate in the early morning hours.
Continued: In past meetings, ferry was brought up as an option.
Bob: That was looked at and someone offered to do ferry. We didn’t specify the means. But based on the price from bidders, ferry is not economical vs. van service.
Cont: It seems that ferry would be more efficient – you wouldn’t have traffic issues.
Carol: It is a question of money. One more question, please.
Q: Two years: is that absolute, no matter what?
Carol: Yes.
Comment: In November, businesses lost substantially, up to 30 – 40%. If you do the repairs, I assume we’ll use local contractors, which is a good economic benefit.
Carol: Thank you.
Paul Godfrey:
Regarding the stimulus application, there’s not a lot of new news. Refers to Stimulus Application Update slide. The Maine and New Hampshire DOTs jointly submitted the application for the Memorial Bridge and expect a decision in January of next year (2010). How might this affect the study? If successful, we’ll modify the study to assume the rehab of the bridge as a given. Then we’ll shift to focus on Sarah Long. If we’re not successful, we continue on the same path as now. In either case, the study schedule is the same. The decision will be reached by June of next year.
Fatal Flaw Analysis: I’m going to be throwing a lot of info and maps and numbers at you over the next 45 minutes. We are happy to answer questions and if we are not able to tonight, we’ll get back to you as quick as we can. All will be posted on the study website. I do want to get out of here on time. If you need more detail, I’m happy to talk after the meeting.
The study team has been neck-deep in the Fatal Flaw Analysis the last three months. It’s a high-level assessment of the options and alternatives identified to date. These options and alternatives have not come from us, but from you: the Stakeholder and Steering Committees, and the public. Just for clarity, what do I mean by “option” and “alternative?”
• An ALTERNATIVE is a combination of a Memorial Bridge option AND/OR a Sarah Long Bridge option OR is a brand new alternative on a new alignment
• An OPTION is one piece of the ALTERNATIVE.
• An ALTERNATIVE is an entire solution.
We look at them independently because it helps us make things less confusing.
Fatal Flaw Process: We started with the Purpose and Need Statement you found on the handout table. It’s our roadmap. We created 16 different criteria, in collaboration with the public. At the end of the day, we had 63 alternatives, with 8 Memorial options, 7 Sarah Long options, and 4 new alternatives. There’s also the no-build.
Round 1: It’s just like a boxing match. We compared them against Purpose & Need, to see if the option met those points. We also looked at mobility, accessibility, and resource impacts – historic, natural, schools, homes. If you eliminate a bridge, is there enough capacity from a vehicular perspective?
We met with the Steering and Stakeholder Committees last month to review the results of the Round 1 Fatal Flaw process, and this resulted in 29 alternatives remaining (34 eliminated). What I want to do now is go through the ones that have been eliminated.
Alternative 1, High-level bridge: This would be a new bridge approximately halfway between the Sarah Long and Memorial. Both would be closed and removed but the Sarah Long would maintain rail. When we talk high-level, it is fixed – does not move – and is 150 feet off the water. This would allow ships to pass without opening. Alignment from Portsmouth south of Hanover and ties in at Walker St. in Kittery. Could the alignment be different? Sure, but in any case, this one is a reasonable location. Impacts – those yellow blobs – we would anticipate many impacts, including the removal of both historic bridges, the Hill District, work in the Portsmouth local historic district, numerous property impacts. Our recommendation is that this be eliminated.
Alternative 1A, new low-level bridge: This is similar to the Memorial’s height today, 20 feet off of the water. Anytime a ship comes, it would need to open, is movable with a lift span. In Kittery the movable touchdown is the same, with a connection to both Route 1 and the Bypass. Portsmouth ties in at Market Street. The impact is a little less. There is the demolition of Memorial and Sarah Long. Portsmouth historic district, 10 – 11 homes in Kittery, the wetlands. We recommend elimination.
Alternative 1B, Mid-level: At Memorial, we have 4,000 openings per year and at Sarah Long we have 3,600 per year. We took a look at openings data to get to the notion of making the bridge a little higher but not high-level. We add 50 feet of vertical clearance and reduce bridge openings by half. Impacts in Kittery are about the same, in Portsmouth we carry over farther and are grade-separated over Market Street. In Kittery, 10 – 11 homes, wetlands. We also have the Hill historic district, being impacted, many businesses and properties. Again, we recommend elimination.
Alternative 2, Tunnel: We looked at everything to make sure we did due diligence. This is a tunnel 50 feet below bedrock and 7500 feet long. Lots of impact. Rail remains on the Sarah Long. The study team recommends elimination.
Q: Is cost a criterion?
Paul: Not for Round 1.
Continued: No one talked about the costs.
Paul: We look at cost in later rounds. Right now we’re using just a few criteria and eliminating those with major impacts. Although, a tunnel costs about $200 million.
Alternative 3, Ferry: We have the potential to replace both bridges with a ferry. We’d still have rail on the Sarah Long. A ferry crossing from Portsmouth to Kittery. This option failed because it could not accommodate the traffic that needs to cross. We looked at it and we documented it. This will be eliminated.
Q: As far as ferry, is it only a car ferry option? What about pedestrians and bikes?
Paul: We cover that later in the presentation, so let’s talk about that then.
MB3, Mid-level on alignment: This is exactly where Memorial is today. Its limits are south of Chapel St. in Portsmouth and before Badger Island. There is an additional 50 feet of height to reduce openings. Impacts: mostly Portsmouth. We’d remove the Memorial Bridge, work in the historic district, potentially the Warner House, the rec center. Based on this, we recommend elimination.
Q: What do you mean by “impact”?
Paul: Impact means touches a structure or property, either all or in part. We are being conservative. May not touch a building, but a property.
MB3A, slightly upstream: The intent with this was to allow the bridge to be open during construction. End result, the Memorial is removed because two bridges in close proximity is a burden on the DOTS. Impact: similar impacts on Portsmouth side, removal of Memorial Bridge, Memorial Park, the rec center. In Kittery, buildings and residences. Again, looking at this option we recommend not carrying it forward.
MB3A, downstream: Same concept. The impact is similar. We recommend elimination.
MB4, high-level new bridge: We replace Memorial with a fixed bridge 150 feet off the water. Because of the height, the limits are sizable. Portsmouth, the impact is almost to Middle St. We have to keep the bridge from Kittery to Badger Island. As you might expect, a lot gets impacted. Memorial gets removed. In Kittery, we impact John Paul Jones Park. We recommend elimination.
SL5, closing Sarah Long: We looked at closing the Sarah Long to vehicles and keeping rail. We need to maintain rail in all options. This alternative did not survive relative to traffic. It would require 4 lanes at the Memorial. We can all imagine 4 lanes on Memorial and the impacts this would cause. This option is eliminated.
Q: Did you look at pushing traffic to the I-95 Bridge?
Paul: We will still need 4 lanes on Memorial. The Sarah Long Bridge carries more traffic than Memorial. 13,000 per day vs. 12,000 per day for the Memorial. It’s not enough. Also, based on the current configuration of the I-95 bridge, you could not add a lane on I-95 either.
Paul: That’s Round 1. For those of you who are on the Steering Committee or Stakeholder Committee, that is where we left off at the November 6 meetings. Now let’s move to Round 2.
Fatal Flaw Analysis Round 2: We looked at the remaining options and alternatives and again, held them up to Purpose & Need. We also looked at comparable options. By that I mean similar options such as the on-and off-alignment, the up and down stream options. Between those types of choices, we can take the one with more impact off the table if the difference in impacts is sizable. We also looked at bike and pedestrian data. We did a Bike-Ped Origin/Destination Survey, stopping them and asking where they started, where they were going, and why. The data was very helpful. So if Memorial goes away, we find out how bicyclists and pedestrians are impacted. Well, the majority of pedestrians, we found, would no longer cross. Many cyclists too. 60-70% would no longer cross or they would get in the car. That was important to see.
Carol: I think a lot of you would say this is common sense knowledge but we needed to quantify, needed to have quantifiable data for the study.
Q: I know that you discussed this at an earlier meeting. As a cyclist, I don’t go over that bridge now because of present restrictions. That number would be bigger if you could safely ride on the bridge.
Q: With a separate bike path, or having to walk across?
Paul: The discussion for any new bridge involves bike lanes and sidewalks.
Gerry: I don’t think we could do it with rehab options. In Maine, cyclists can travel in the travel lanes.
Q: What is the volume of bikes and pedestrians?
Paul: I don’t recall. I will share this afterwards. It is significant. There is a lot of use. NEW NOTE: The full bike/ped report is available at http://www.mainenhconnections.org/study_data/
Q: Did you do the survey in November?
Paul: No, we did the bike and pedestrian survey in the summer, July.
MB2A, low level upstream: The same height as the Memorial today. Immediately upstream. Impacts are: removing the Memorial, impacts to businesses on Badger Island, Memorial Park, the rec center, adverse effects to the Warner House, Portsmouth local historic district. When we compare this to rehab, this has more impact than rehab. So we recommend elimination of this option.
MB2A, downstream: Similar impacts, from Badger Island to Portsmouth. Again, we recommend elimination.
MB5, close the Memorial and remove it: We recommend eliminating this one. The reason is bikes and pedestrians. If we eliminate the bridge, there’s a sizable impact to this type of traffic, as well as to vehicular traffic. We can mitigate it (vehicular traffic) with a 4-lane Sarah Long bridge.
Audience claps.
SL4, high-level: 135 feet off the water. That’s the clearance of the I-95 Bridge. It’s a fixed bridge. What is interesting is that we have to keep the rail on the existing Sarah Long. We’d have two bridges next to each other, meaning lots of maintenance for the DOTs. Impact: Port of New Hampshire, Portsmouth, condos, residences in Kittery. Also because of the height, we’d relocate Bridge Street. Because of this and the resulting need for DOT maintenance of four bridges with no noted cost savings, we recommend elimination of this one
Now, let’s talk about the ones being carried forward.
No build: In every study, as required by the process, we must have a no build alternative. It will be carried forward for comparison purposes. I can tell you here that this does not meet Purpose & Need. The process requires keeping because we have to compare everything to it. This really isn’t an alternative because the Memorial is in dire need of repair. Doing nothing is not an option.
MB1, rehab: Rehab the existing Memorial Bridge. We recommend this be carried forward.
Q: Have we had a full engineering inspection?
Carol: Yes.
MB2, replace on existing alignment: Here we’d replace the existing superstructure with a new bridge, on the existing alignment. The study team recommends we carry it forward.
Q: Is there a difference in the timeline between these two?
Bob: Not that we have seen.
Q: Is there a difference in the cost?
Paul: Yes. We’re still working on it. Bridge costing is very detailed.
Q: What is the condition of the structure that is underwater?
Bob: It’s in good shape, especially the Memorial.
Q: What is the impact for these two alternatives?
Paul: Most notable is the replacement. We’d remove the Memorial Bridge, which is historically eligible.
Q: What would a replacement look like?
Paul: We are not there yet.
Carol: If that turns out to be the study recommendation, we’d start the design process and would get public input.
Q: What’s historic about the Memorial? Is it just because they are old?
Paul: The Memorial and Sarah Long Bridges are historic structures eligible to go on the National Register.
Carol: A large part is their age.
Comment: And the design elements are historic.
Bob: The report is on the NHDOT website, if you want further information.
MB6, ped/bike: This would be a low-level bridge for bikes and pedestrians only, with some possible vehicles – service vehicles and the like. If we carry this forward, it needs to be tied to a 4-lane Sarah Long bridge.
Q: I think this option appeals to a lot of people who use Memorial now. I agree with it.
Q: Would that be on the existing alignment?
Paul: We’d have to look at the finer details. I’m not sure yet, but most likely yes.
Q: Has there been any consideration to parking for the pedestrians crossing?
Paul: Not yet. That would be further down the line.
SL1, rehab Sarah Long on existing alignment
Q: Have you considered how to better connect Sarah Long to traffic from downtown Portsmouth? It’s a big issue.
Paul: We recognize this issue.
Q: I live near the shipyard and believe the rail is a spur to the shipyard. Could the rail be located somewhere else? Other than on the Sarah Long?
Paul: We have coordinated with the Naval Yard. It cannot be relocated. Rail must remain on the Sarah Long with all options.
Carol: We looked at other naval shipyards in the country. They all use rail. There is a reluctance to use other options.
Continued: Can we use barges instead of rail?
Paul: Given the material being transported, rail is the preferred option.
Paul: Our intent here is considering what happens for bikes and pedestrians.
Comment: Without any changes to the Kittery side roads, replacing Memorial would no doubt impact business on Route 1 in Kittery. It is not appealing to some people.
Comment. The access on the Kittery side needs to be improved.
Q: Can you make Sarah Long into four lanes in its existing state?
Paul: We’d have to replace it. A rehab cannot increase the bridge to four lanes. To do that we would need to build a new bridge.
Comment: In addition to impacting Kittery, those of us who live near the Sarah Long may have homes destroyed.
Q: How bad is the condition of the Sarah Long?
Bob: Reports are due back soon. It’s not as bad as Memorial. Many of you saw the press release. Maintenance crews are working there right now. We are looking at it and trying to do something before it’s too late. We don’t have a date of life on the Sarah Long right now.
Q: Both of the options that keep traffic on Memorial give bikes and pedestrians a way to cross. So what do we lose with this bike / pedestrian bridge? No cars into downtown Portsmouth?
Paul: Yes. And as comparison, the rehab of Memorial keeps essentially what is there today in terms of width. There is no opportunity for new bike lanes and so on. With a replacement, we can do some enhancements.
Bob: Even with a rehab, we could remove the open deck, so bikers can ride across. It would still be narrow: a 3-foot shoulder next to a 12-foot travel lane. We would remove the open grid deck.
Gerry: Bikes are vehicles by law in Maine and are expected to travel in the roadway.
Comment: It is the same in New Hampshire.
Q: In terms of a rehab, could we get a wider walkway, or a mixed-use path?
Bob: We looked at that. Right now, the rehab option gives the existing footprint.
Paul: Let us look into it.
Q: Could you have a downstream pedestrian lane and upstream bike lane?
Bob: How would you get them back to the proper side once you crossed? Bikes have an issue there.
Carol: We’re not there yet.
Q: I’d stress a cantilevered multi-use path. We have pushed that a lot. The Hawthorne Bridge in Portland (Oregon) is an example. We can support you with more material on it. Please take a closer look.
Paul: That would be helpful.
Carol: Could you please email that information to me?
SL1: rehab Sarah Long on existing: We are recommending a carry forward. This would be a 2-lane rehab. The Memorial must remain open with this option. Rail, again, would remain on this bridge.
Q: As a part of this, can you straighten the channel under the bridge?
Carol: No. This is a disadvantage of this option.
Paul: We could do that with a replacement of the Sarah Long. We could realign and get rid of the skew.
SL2, replacement: Replace Sarah Long.
SL2A, lower-level replacement: This is the same height as today, with vehicle and rail traffic. Why not downstream? There is a turning basin, which we cannot impact. All new Sarah Long alternatives are upstream for that reason. There are impacts on the Portsmouth side: condos, but not Albacore Park or the Jackson House. In Kittery, we have residences impacted.
Q: Would you widen the bridge in this case?
Paul: We could do either 2- or 4-lane in this case.
Continued: Which one is more impact?
Paul: We have a 4-lane right of way proposed, so either is doable.
Q: Why upstream instead of on-alignment?
Paul: Upstream allows us to keep the bridge open during construction. Ultimately, with a new upstream bridge, the old bridge would be removed.
Comment: This option lets you straighten the angle so pilots have a straighter run.
Q: If it’s four lanes, would that affect more properties?
Paul: The footprint is wide enough to accommodate a 4 lane. But you are right. There’s less impact with 2 lanes. But no more houses are impacted with a four lane.
Q: How long could a 2-lane bridge sustain traffic? Is it a good idea to put in 2 lanes?
Paul: For 30+ years, a 2-lane does accommodate the need. Not sure when we need to widen.
Gerry: We look at putting in a bridge to last 100 years. But bridges can be built so we can easily add capacity (widen) as needed later on.
Q: Have you considered a toll bridge?
Paul: Identifying the potential of a toll is not part of this study.
SL3, mid level on alignment: Here we get an additional 50 feet of vertical clearance, reducing bridge openings for river traffic by 50%. This one’s tricky because we’d have two rail lines in close proximity to each other. We find it to be feasible. Limits are Albacore Park in Portsmouth. We have more impacts than the low-level: condos, but not the Jackson House or Albacore Park. In Kittery, we’d have residences and businesses, and the relocation of Bridge St. We do recommend carrying forward at this time. We see impacts but also opportunities. Less openings, navigational benefits. Enough to keep it on the table.
Q: This one has impacts similar to other options but has less operational costs over time. When does the impact to community get considered?
Paul: We look at that here. We’re not saying there are no impacts. We see benefits. Not enough to say it’s off the table. There are still enough benefits here.
Q: Have you looked at cases where other bridges have neighborhood impacts? What happens in those instances? Is there a public outcry?
Paul: We’re not making light of the fact that we are dealing with homes. It’s about balance. We are assessing the pluses and minuses. Any time you take property, there’s an outcry. Always.
Carol: We try to quantify that later on. Now, we are looking in a general sense. Later, we consider dollars and numbers of homes or businesses being impacted.
Q: Will there still be turnarounds under the bridge?
Paul: We haven’t looked at that at this point.
Q: This bridge assumes rail is low-level. What does that get us?
Paul: Both the rail and road will be 50 feet higher than today. This eliminates 50% of openings.
Q: Can we use a detachable rail span?
Paul: We have talked with structural folks. There are options relative to that. If this goes forward, we’ll look at detachable spans. That detail comes later.
Q: Can you shut down the rail for long enough to rehab this?
Paul: With careful planning, yes.
Comment: With this option, there will be a long, ugly ramp.
Paul: Yes, a visual impact.
Carol: Aesthetics are part of the Purpose & Need, so that is a consideration.
Q: Would a visual impact like this be compensated?
Paul: No.
Q: Will there be more filling of the river?
Paul: No. It stays as-is.
SL3A, midlevel upstream: We still recommend this one because it gives us the option to keep the Sarah Long open through construction. Traffic would be moved to the new bridge when it opens. There are more impacts with this option, more properties up to the north of Route 1 and the Port of New Hampshire.
Refers to Fatal Flaw Round 1 and 2 slide.
You have heard our recommendations tonight. We’ve reduced down to 15 alternatives, 3 options for Memorial, 5 options for Sarah Long: MB1, 2, and 6; and SL1, 2, 3, 2A and 3A. And the no build. That’s where we’re at. The Steering and Stakeholder Committees have given their endorsement to Round 1. They did ask us to remove additional alternatives, which we left in at that time. We can’t remove something just because someone doesn’t like them. We have to document everything so we won’t have to start from scratch later. In this round, those were taken out.
Fatal Flaw Round 3: We are underway with this. The Life Cycle costs will be for 100 years out. We will find out if this study area can survive without the Sarah Long open. At the bottom of the slide, you see the criteria you helped us put together. Whatever number of alternatives comes out of this round, we’ll carry it forward to further detailed assessment
Next steps: Tonight you have given feedback. Are there other considerations we’ve missed? These are our next steps:
• Public Information Meeting: Feedback from Public tonight on alternatives/options
• Round 3 Fatal Flaw analysis in December/January
• Alternatives passing Fatal Flaw to have a detailed analysis against all evaluation criteria between January and March/April 2010.
• Next Public Meeting – likely January/February 2010.
There will be more opportunity for feedback and review, and another public meeting at the end of Round 3. Now, most of what we’ve eliminated so far are the easy ones. The next step involves more details. That’s why we want you involved. Any questions?
Q: How does the stimulus decision factor in?
Paul: As mentioned, if we get a thumbs-up on the Memorial Bridge, we just take that as a given to rehab the bridge and focus only on the Sarah Long. If it’s a thumbs-down, we evaluate both.
Q: What is the life expectancy of a rehab vs. a new bridge?
Bob: 50 years. Even a new bridge takes some effort to extend life. There are major milestones for deck replacement and such, especially with lift bridges.
Q: What’s the major cost between the two options?
Bob: Construction is approximately 20% higher with replacement. And there are other factors.
Paul: Replacements have less operational and maintenance costs. We’ll share that in mid-January.
Q: Memorial was built when things were built solid. They don’t build like that anymore.
Paul: All bridges have a life.
Q: How is the final decision made? A vote?
Paul: At the end of the day, we hope one stands above the rest.
Carol: The two DOTs make the final decision.
Paul: That’s why we’re doing meetings.
Q: Was the stimulus application made by both states as a team?
Paul: Yes.
Q: If we don’t get a stimulus grant, where does the money come from?
Paul: It will be the task of the two DOTs to find this money.
Comment: I’m a business owner in Kittery. The York Chamber is the only business member of your Stakeholder Committee. They have a big area to cover and have had staffing cutbacks. I propose you solicit input from other business owners in Kittery.
Carol: Great idea. Can you talk to me afterwards?
Q: When do you consider the economic impacts?
Paul: During the more detailed evaluation.
Q: I assume that over the last 50 years, bridge technology has changed dramatically since the Memorial was built. Are you aware of any big differences?
Paul: Bridge materials aren’t my forte but we will be doing that if we rebuild any of the bridges.
Bob: A great example is the truss of Memorial. Today you’d look at a section made like a tube, better for long-term maintenance. It extends deck life. There are great techniques to extend concrete life. The balancing act is this is a historic structure.
Comment: I wrote an article recommending a new high-level bridge where the Sarah Long is today. Somebody replied to me and said that was “silly.” Why is it silly? The Memorial Bridge has been down for weeks and I saw no impact. I think this would adjust. I say, get rid of that old rusty junk.
Carol: We did look at a version of your proposal and it is not recommended to be carried forward. You can come look closer and we can discuss it.
Continued: Many said it was silly but it would save thousands. People come to Portsmouth to see Portsmouth. Closing Memorial has no commercial impact. And Kittery is just a small little street. It’s nothing.
Carol: Thank you for your input. Thanks everyone else so much for coming out this busy time of year. Please put your emails on the list to receive updates. And the slides will be on the website by the end of the week.
Meeting adjourned at 7:48 pm.