COMMENTARY (with a generous sprinkling of factual information):
Last Friday, the low-ceilinged, basement conference room of the Chamber of Commerce was the site of a portentous conversation on Middletown's economic future. Nothing less than the next two years of Main Street's fortunes hung in the breach - not to mention those of our neighbors in Portland - as a packed room of city officials and businesspeople heard the report of the CT Department of Transportation about the planned replacement of the deck of the Arrigoni Bridge.
Anyone who has ever run a business in a construction zone knows that there is little respite for the individual shop-owner when major roadwork comes to call. On a project like this one, where a minimum of 14 months of significant disruption are planned, I find myself particularly grateful for the Chamber, which gives us a venue to make a united appeal for reasonable accommodations from the powers that be (in other words, the DOT).
Let's start with the facts:
The Arrigoni Bridge has recently been identified as in immediate need of repair - specifically, the asphalt and underlying steelwork must be replaced as soon as possible. In a slightly chilling reversal of typical bureaucratic delay, this project received a rapid greenlight, has already gone to bid, and contracts are expected to be awarded in May or June. After the contractor has assembled all the materials, work will begin, probably in August. The end date of the project is expected to be October 1, 2012. Overall, the plan calls for 555 days from contract to completion.
Once construction begins, the bridge will have 2 lanes open to traffic - one in each direction - most of the time. When supplies are delivered or trucks are accessing the site, there will be only one lane for travel, with signal workers in place to direct traffic. Due to the advocacy of the Chamber, the DOT is committing to limiting their contractor to shutting the third lane only at night, though they refused the request to do all work at night, due to budget.
There will be two 90-foot sections of the deck under repair at the same time. In those sections, all asphalt and the steel supports will be removed - it will literally be open to the water below. The plan is to put a signal boat in the water to direct boat traffic away from each construction area because of the danger of falling debris. Since I'm not a boater, I don't know what this means for river travel, but undoubtedly there will be some impact to recreational and commercial boating at times. Reportedly, the work will only be done on the span over the water itself, and shouldn't overhang the residential and commercial neighborhoods on both shores.
With input from the Chamber, the DOT has a plan to place variable electronic signs at several locations on CT highways, such as the base of Route 9 North; the approach to Middletown on Route 91 (Northbound in Wallingford and Southbound in Wethersfield), and on Route 691 East (click map for closeup). These signs are designed to encourage travelers to find an alternate route, such the person driving from New Haven to Colchester, who might find less traffic by going up to Glastonbury and coming down Route 2 instead of crossing through Middletown.
More locally, variable signs will notify drivers on Route 17/66 in Portland and on the Route 17 connector near Middlesex Hospital in Middletown (click map for closeup). These signs will be linked to a series of sensors that will predict wait times for crossing the bridge, based on the current travel speeds of cars.
So what does this mean?
The DOT's consultants attempted to answer this question, starting with the assumption that their signage and the general aggravation will persuade 20% of the people who currently travel in this area to just find another route.
Given their 20% reduction estimate, the consultants gave some rush hour projections: during the 14 months or so of 2-lane travel, they project that cars on the Portland side of the bridge will be backed up to Dinosaur Mini Golf. They projected it would take about 15 minutes to get to the bridge from there.
On the Middletown side, they were less specific. When pressed, it sounded like their model showed Main Street with a stack of cars going to the hospital or more, and on Washington Street, past Butternut Street. There will be an impact - maybe some gridlock - they couldn't say more. Strangely, I don't recall hearing a projection for the Route 9 North traffic that waits to turn left at Exit 16. If Hartford Avenue (that's the "on-ramp" of Route 9 between St. John's Church from O'Rourke's Diner) is crowded with Southbound cars, will we see gridlock on Route 9?
This was the first meeting that I have attended on this subject, though the Chamber had convened a number of sessions since the project was first announced. By assembling the political, public safety and business leaders from Middletown and the communities across the river, many proactive ideas have been offered to the DOT for consideration. I heard discussion on topics such as ferry boats (too little impact on reducing traffic volume), keeping 3 lanes open instead of 2 (would stretch the construction period to 3 years), and keeping an ambulance on the Portland side of the river to reduce emergency response time (seems to be a workable idea.) Other ideas, such as keeping a tow truck and police officers near the bridge to respond quickly to the inevitable breakdowns and accidents that could create epic traffic snarls, are less likely only for cost reasons. One new idea -- using an ambulance boat to get patients across the river quickly -- will be considered. Though most of these strategies are in the state's purview, only the local Police Chief has the power to consider closing or changing the direction of downtown streets, which can either limit or intensify the cut-through traffic.
One idea, both promoted and discounted by various officials I've talked to, would be to re-activate the light at the bottom of Washington Street that allowed Northbound traffic to avoid driving on Main Street to get to 9North. Since the intersections of Main and Grand and Hartford Ave. are already over capacity, it sounds like a good idea to redirect people who just want to get to Route 9.
As a North End resident, I'm worried about the impact of the bridge construction on residential neighborhoods as people will attempt to find short-cuts. I worry about the addition in pollution from idling cars as the back-ups at every downtown intersection increase.
As a downtown businessperson, I foresee parking problems on Main as people get stuck in their parking spaces by slow-moving traffic. I worry that adding a 15-or-so-minutes traffic nightmare (in either direction) will be too much of a hassle for our many out-of-town customers at Kidcity Children's Museum.
I hope that the DOT officials, who in doing their job have responsibility for unintended consequences, listen well. I hope that the state legislature is putting enough funding into this project to not only repair the bridge but mitigate the short-term impact on our region. It's all just another reminder that the relative success of our downtown - as a place to live and work - is a delicate thing. We need to be vigilant guardians of its welfare.
