The latest news about Maine lakes and ponds.

Naples Waterfront Bridge Controversy Proceeds to Non-binding Referendum in May

April 03, 2008 - NAPLES -- You choose: moving bridge, or fixed bridge.


Naples voters who cast ballots in the May 20 referendum will participate in a non-binding vote could help decide what has increasingly become a controversial issue.


Selectmen are developing two extra questions for the ballot and will ratify the wording next Monday, to meet the April 8 deadline for filing local referenda questions. There will be time for a public hearing on the questions, allowing for input and arguments, before the May 20 straw vote.


When the projected budgets for moving bridge options blew well past the amount the Maine Department of Transportation has set aside for a new Bay of Naples Bridge -- there was $11 million available, but moving bridge options range in cost from about $14 million to $18 million -- other options were explored. MDOT deputy commissioner Bruce Van Note told Naples Selectmen Monday that only a fixed bridge would meet current budget limitations. Besides, a fixed bridge would also be "much, much" the superior option for "ground transportation," he said.


And there's the rub. Concern has been expressed in Naples, the heart of the Lake Region, for continuing the heritage of a moving bridge, with proponents citing the economic and ancillary benefits of free-flowing marine traffic under and through the same small opening on Naples Causeway.


Because no moving bridge fit into the budget for this biennium, Van Note said the department wanted focused local input on the type of bridge preferred by Naples people, and by other Lake Region residents. While Naples received support for its desired course of action, officials in Raymond and Bridgton who responded to DOT questions about the Naples Causeway bridge concerns, clearly did not support sending more local funds to the state to assure completion of a moving bridge project.


Naples Selectmen also did not support more local funding; the bridge is on a federal road and it is the state's responsibility to reconstruct it, they said Monday. Local options, such as possibly sharing costs of bridge operations, are not seen as viable, either.


Around Naples, a slowly growing dissenting argument to the moving bridge option has been more frequently heard, selectmen Chairman Christine Powers said Monday evening. A number of people have passionately pleaded for a new moving bridge, citing historic and economic reasons, she said. But she may have heard twice as many people "more quietly" asking for the town to accept a fixed structure, she said.


Advantages of a fixed structure focus on road traffic: 15 minute holdups are common in the summer months when Route 302's only moving bridge opens, and when traffic is at its thickest.


Selectmen Bob Caron, who has worked on the bridge and thus knows it's deteriorating condition, said his electrical contracting business does does lose time to the bridge. "I chalk it up to the cost of doing business in Naples," he said Monday.


Whatever happens, the current, cranky bridge must be replaced or least refurbished, or it will fall below acceptable safety standards, the MDOT engineer said.


Naples Selectmen first asked MDOT officials Monday to replace what is there with a similar structure.


Van Note said that the "overwhelming" feeling from people at a January public hearing was for replacing the current bridge with a moving structure. No fixed structure could be built high enough to allow passage of the Songo River Queen II, sailboats with fixed masts, and the very largest powerboats; marine businesses worried about commercial disruptions and associated economic effects of a fixed bridge. River Queen operators said revenue losses would result from the closing of the passageway from Long Lake to Brandy Pond. There was some support expressed that January evening for a fixed bridge; but MDOT officials estimated the local support for a moving bridge at that meeting ran at 80% to 20%.


The arguments advanced since for a fixed bridge focus principally on improved vehicular traffic flow, however, as 20,000 cars a day move over the bridge in the busy summer months.


Bay of Naples Bridge Project manager Jim Wentworth estimated Tuesday, that about 90% of the watercraft now using the waterway could pass under the 14 foot high span propose in a concept design.


A fixed bridge project would have a budget of about $8 million, Van Note said. The fixed bridge project area would include a longer distance along both ends of Route 302, he added; the swing bridge replacement proposal allows only 400 feet from the bridge deck on either end, he said. The larger project area probably would allow for some Causeway improvements, including upgrades to the seawall, the underdrain, amenities such as railings and lighting, parking and pedestrian safety, and so on.


A higher fixed bridge profile would "bump up," and it's humped roadbed probably would "calm" traffic -- as well as give the bridge some character, MDOT representatives noted Monday. Town manager Derik Goodine said he favored a moving bridge, but if a fixed bridge were to be designed, it should offer "the right kind of character," he said. There should be a "wow factor," Goodine said, since the swinging bridge for half a century has added "character" to the Causeway, as well as marine utility. People "don't want some concrete monolith that doesn't fit the character of Naples," the manager said.


Were the highway construction industry not facing historically stratospheric project costs, the MDOT would have gone ahead with its planned replacement structure in this biennium. But the lift -- drawbridge design costs exceeded DOT expectations by about 50%; the swinging bridge option is it least $3 million too costly for the budget, at this point. The fixed bridge design is the only one that makes it under the budget, and so, Van Note indicated, work could proceed on it in 2009. There is not enough money to build any moving bridge next year, he said.


There is "a lot of lemons and apples and oranges" involved in comparing fixed bridge projects to moving bridge projects, Bob Caron observed. Selectman Dana Watson wondered how much the state wanted from the town of Naples to swing the swing bridge deal; he didn't think the town should have to contribute anything. Van Note said, "there is no question that the state doesn't have the money" to build a swing bridge. "The taxpayers can't afford to come up with $1 million or $2 million or $3 million, either," Caron responded.


Since designs are not finalized, however, the current road's alignment ("much more drivable," the DOT Deputy Commissioner said) might be strictly adhered to, so that a higher, wider bridge can fit into the current Causeway footprint most efficiently. Using the current alignment would entail the need for new temporary bridge to handle traffic.


To more effectively counter the MDOT's arguments, one citizen Monday suggested the town would be wise to hire its own consulting engineer, to represent local interests.


The uncertainties worried Naples Selectmen, who talked after the meeting about developing "fair" referenda questions. They also discussed asking for a solid, written guarantee from the state assuring that, whatever the final bridge design, it would include the elements agreed upon during the negotiation process.


Rick Paraschak said the fixed bridge versus moving bridge debate has "kind of divided our community." A separate grass-roots group was formed to argue the merits of a moving bridge project. Other voices have been raised since the January meeting, speaking for the fixed bridge option -- even if, as Christine Powers noted, many of these voices were speaking softly.


"We have a joint problem," Van Note summed up. "The money is not there. Is there going to be any significant contribution locally? If the state's paying, it's probably not happening next year."


Selectmen decided to set up the non-binding vote, though Goodine was concerned about being able to generate fair questions "comparing apples to apples" in just a few days.



This article first appeared in The Bridgton News, April 3, 2008.

Lakes: Brandy Pond, Long Lake, Sebago Lake
Regions: Sebago


Print this story

Email this story

return to Lake News