DEP delays approval of new S.B. bridge
Agency asks DOT for info on alternate replacement span
BY LIZ SHEEHAN
Correspondent

The N.J. Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has notified the state Department of Transportation (DOT) that it is temporarily denying the DOT's application for approval to demolish the 75-year-old existing drawbridge that connects Sea Bright and Highlands and replace it with a fixed bridge that is 30 feet higher.

In a Jan. 25 letter to Richard Hammer, assistant commissioner of the DOT, from Amy Cradic, the assistant commissioner of Natural and Historic Resources at the DEP, said, "I am clear that the existing bridge fails to provide a safe and reliable crossing" and that "NJDOT has demonstrated to my satisfaction, that rehabilitating the existing bridge ... is simply not economically and technically feasible. Thus, I believe that replacing the bridge would result in public benefits in terms of improvements to public and traffic safety."

But Cradic said that she wanted "additional justification on DOT's preferred 65-foot high replacement bridge," as the only "feasible and prudent alternative to address the existing problems with the Route 36 Bridge."

She said that DOT had submitted, as one alternative, a 55-foot-high movable bridge, and asked for "additional information," as to why that bridge would not be "a feasible and prudent alternative."

Specifically, Cradic said, she wanted information on the Twin Light's view shed from both the 65-foot high bridge and the 55-foot bridge.

The N.J. Historic Sites Council, an advisory board of the DEP, had recommended that the DOT's application to replace the existing bridge be denied because it would have an adverse effect on the views of and from the Twin Lights, a National Historic Landmark.

The council also said in the resolution that recommended denial that the DOT's "Application for Project Authorization failed to adequately demonstrate that rehabilitation of the existing bridge would not be prudent and feasible, thereby avoiding adverse effects on the Twin Lights."

This was directly opposite the finding by Cradic.

Earlier this month, Darlene Yarosh, a spokeswoman for the DEP, said DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson would have to make the decision whether to accept the recommendation of the Historic Sites Council to deny the application.

The letter from Cradic said the DOT would have 60 days from the date of the temporary denial to submit the additional information, but could submit it before that time.

Besides asking for information about the 55-foot alternative, Cradic also requested that the DOT address design concerns about the bridge that were raised by the National Park Service, including the color of the bridge and the proposed pedestrian overpasses.

She also said that DOT was required to use, when feasible, '"historic features from the existing bridge and from the original plans for the bridge produced in 1932 as models to guide the design features for the replacement bridge."'

Both Sea Bright and Highlands have passed resolutions opposing the demolition of the existing bridge and have hired an attorney, Janine Bauer, New York, to represent them in dealing with the issue.

Last week, Bauer and Sea Bright and Highlands officials met with DEP Deputy Commissioner Adam Zellner to discuss the bridge and were told there would be a postponement of the decision so more information could be obtained.

On Monday, Sea Bright Councilwoman Maria Fernandes said, "We're just very happy [with the DEP's decision]. This is what we expected."

"We're pleased it's a step in the right direction." she added.

Asked about the alternative movable bridge that Cradic had requested information about, Fernandes said she would prefer a drawbridge to the fixed bridge proposed by the DOT.

Opponents of the replacement bridge say that the additional height of the 65-foot bridge would result in steep slopes that would be unsafe in icy and wet conditions.

They also cite the resolution in which the Historic Sites Council recommended rejecting the DOT application that said "accidents on or near the [existing] bridge are well below the state average for similar crossings."

The resolution passed by Sea Bright opposing replacement of the bridge said that "the information regarding the need for the destruction of the Highlands to Sea Bright Draw Bridge that was provided to the public by the New Jersey Department of Transportation, has been called into question and is reportedly different from the information provided to the government."