Fishing pier by Connecticut River Bridge in Old Lyme to be removed this spring
Kimberly Drelich
Old Lyme — The fishing pier and boardwalk at Ferry Landing
State Park will be removed starting early this spring and will remain absent
for the duration of the multi-year, $1.3 billion bridge construction project to
replace the Connecticut River Bridge, according to Amtrak.
An improved pier and boardwalk will be installed at the end
of the project, which entails building a new railroad bridge between Old Lyme
and Old Saybrook and demolishing the existing 1907 bridge, said Amtrak
spokesman W. Kyle Anderson.
Trains are anticipated to begin running on the new bridge in
2029, but the overall project, including the demolition of the existing bridge
and opening of the new pier and boardwalk, is slated to be completed in 2030 or
2031, he said.
A new fishing pier is being built at Eagle Landing State
Park in Haddam, which will provide an alternative fishing spot during
construction, he said.
A sign at the entrance to the Old Lyme boardwalk tells
people that during the closure, they can fish at the new Haddam fishing pier
and at the fishing pier by the Baldwin Bridge in Old Saybrook.
Anderson said the pier and boardwalk need to be removed for
the construction of the new bridge and demolition of the existing bridge. He
said Amtrak is using some of the park property for construction access, parking
and storage. He said the removal of the pier and boardwalk is expected around
late March or early April.
The new fishing pier and boardwalk will be located slightly
west of the current pier and closer to deeper water, which will improve the
experience for anglers, and feature a new observation deck and stairway,
Anderson said.
Will Healey, director of communications for the state
Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, said the department knows
"that anglers, and members of the public enjoy the pier at Ferry Landing
State Park for fishing, and to take in the scenic views and outstanding
wildlife viewing," and the public still will be able to access Ferry
Landing during construction, but parking and shoreline access will be greatly
reduced.
Healey said Amtrak's improvements to the 1,000-foot-long
fishing pier at Ferry Landing will include extending the pier further out into
the river and widening it from 8 to 12 feet wide. The existing pier is
supported by wooden piles, but the new pier will be supported by concrete piles
with a wooden deck.
Ferry Landing State Park sees about 13,345 angling trips
each year, according to data provided by DEEP from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Fisheries’ Marine Recreational Information Program.
The park site is also home to DEEP's marine headquarters.
Construction on the new fishing pier in Eagle Landing began
in December, and the new structure is scheduled to open in early spring,
Anderson said.
Healey said the failing 100-foot pier in Haddam was
originally built as a boat dock for a cruise line and will be rebuilt as a
fishing pier with benches, rod holders, and cutting boards. The new Haddam pier
should be open to the public before demolition of the Old Lyme pier begins.
New bridge to be taller
A groundbreaking for the Connecticut River Bridge project
was held in September. Amtrak CEO Stephen Gardner said at the event that the
new bridge will be more reliable and resilient than the existing bridge. It
will have a taller span so it will need to open less frequently for boat
traffic and will be prepared for rising water levels. Train speeds will be able
to increase from 45 mph to 70 mph.
Gardner said there will be about 150 workers on average
during construction, reaching a peak of 300 workers.
An access road has been set up on Shore Road, and fencing
has been installed in the park.
Old Lyme First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker said there are
people in the community that use the Old Lyme pier as well as people from other
communities that fish there and enjoy walking along the river. Shoemaker said a
resident recently was concerned about the planned pier closure after the signs
went up and asked if the town made the decision, but Shoemaker explained that
it was not the town’s decision.
“It’s going to be missed, but it is going to be rebuilt,”
she said.
She said she thinks the pier closure will be a loss to the
community for the time being, and people will have to decide if either of the
alternatives are possibilities for them, as Haddam can be a “bit of a haul”
from Old Lyme.
Old Saybrook First Selectman Carl Fortuna, Jr. said he
assumes the change will lead to additional anglers in town, and they are more
than welcome to use the Baldwin Bridge fishing pier.
Shoemaker said that Old Lyme, which sees an influx of
seasonal residents in the summer, so far has not seen too much of a change from
the project, though the community might see some changes once beach traffic
starts. But, that said, the workers tend to be at the site earlier in the
morning.
She said one of the town's hopes is that some of the
construction workers will visit local restaurants and stores while in the area.
She added that the bridge replacement project will bring
needed improvements.
“It’s greatly needed to make sure everything is safe for
train travel, but it is going to take a long time to get done,” she said.
Montville officials urge Lamont to widen Mohegan-Pequot Bridge
Daniel Drainville
Montville — As the state Department of Transportation
designs a $32.8 million rehabilitation of the Mohegan-Pequot Bridge, town
officials have sent a letter to Gov. Ned Lamont saying the span needs to be
wider.
In its letter, the Town Council strongly urged Lamont to
consider adding two lanes to the bridge instead of just rehabilitating the two
existing ones.
The letter was signed Tuesday by Town Council Chairman Tim
May and Mayor Leonard Bunnell, then sent to Lamont, DOT officials and
legislators.
The DOT's current plan to rehabilitate the bridge, which is
in a design phase and not scheduled to begin construction until 2027, does not
include bridge widening, only the replacement, rehabilitation or upgrading of
certain components, and painting.
But officials from Montville and Preston, along with local
legislators, in meetings with the DOT, have urged that the bridge be widened,
and that a bike or pedestrian lane be added.
They have said the DOT should consider major developments
underway, scheduled or planned such as housing and tribal projects like the
Mohegans' Preston Riverwalk and Foxwoods' Great Wolf Lodge, which they say will
substantially increase traffic on the bridge.
During a DOT public information meeting at the end of last
year, Bunnell, state Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, and state Rep. Derrell
Wilson, D-Norwich, said project planners had not thoroughly evaluated how
development would affect the bridge's needs. They said the widening should be
done at the same time as the $32.8 million rehabilitation.
I don't think it's too late to consider that," Bunnell
said.
DOT officials indicated they had considered widening the
span as part of the project, but it had been a much costlier option.
Superstructure replacement, which would allow the widening, would cost about
$206 million, while replacing the bridge would cost about $227 million.
DOT spokesperson Josh Morgan said Tuesday that Osten and
local officials met again with the DOT on Monday and were told the department
will have a consultant look at the existing traffic on the bridge to determine
the potential impact of future development in the area.
"In the meantime, the rehabilitation project is
critical to ensure the structure remains in a state of good repair until a
future solution is identified and executed," Morgan said.
DOT officials have said certain components of the bridge
have deteriorated to below acceptable standards.
Bunnell described the letter as "kind of a plea"
to Lamont to consider widening the bridge.
"We're really kind of questioning the Department of
Transportation, and pushing them to maybe use that money more wisely and seek
to get a bigger bridge, added May.
The letter also cites various studies over the years that
identified the need and local support for widening the bridge.
Bunnell said the town is trying to persuade Preston,
Norwich, Groton and Ledyard officials to also push for widening the bridge.
New Estimates Push Madison Community Center Cost $8 Million Over Budget
Francisco Uranga
MADISON — The committee leading the project to convert the
former Academy School building into a community center concluded that keeping
the project as it was originally envisioned would require at least $8 million
more than the original budget.
This is more than the amount presented at
last week’s public hearing, where the majority of people present expressed
their opposition to the project.
First selectwoman Peggy Lyons told the audience last week
that the bids received in December were between $5.2 million and $7.6 million
over the original budget.
The revised cost of nearly $24 million is 50 percent higher
than the budget approved in
the 2022 referendum, and also exceeds the $7.6 million the project received
in state and federal grants.
Joseph Ballantine, chair of the Academy Community Center
Building Committee, explained the updated estimates Tuesday at a Board of
Selectman meeting. He said he wanted to show the board the cost of the full
project before discussing things to cut.
“You should note that we are not too far from the amount of
the grants that we believe we could do enough changes in scope or get down to
meet that,” Ballantine said. “We wanted to start with the full cost of the
project before we began to reduce the scope.”
Given the escalating costs of the project, blamed on
inflation and certain technical contingencies such as the need to replace the
septic system, the selectmen expressed their intention to call for a new
referendum on May 6 to increase the budget and maintain the project as it was
originally proposed to the community.
Built
in 1921, the Academy School operated until 2004, after which the
school board vacated it and handed it over to the town in 2011. Following years
of deliberation, town officials held a referendum approving $15.9 million to
turn the building into a community center, with the intention of seeking grants
to reduce the total borrowing required.
The original project included a gymnasium, commercial
kitchen, recital hall, additional parking lots, and town department office
space. The work included improvements to the heating and air conditioning
systems, roof and window repairs, removal of lead paint and asbestos.
Ballantine told the selectmen that after a detailed review
of project costs on Monday, the committee had reduced upgrades to the recital
hall, gymnasium and playground and eliminated other items they deemed
unnecessary. But these changes weren’t enough to bring down the cost.
During the meeting, town construction manager Ben Whittaker
also recommended increasing the contingency, or the amount of money set aside
in case a project unexpectedly becomes more costly during construction. This
would push the project cost even higher.
“What you really don’t want to do is go out to a referendum
again and then find out that your bids don’t work,” Whittaker said. “It is
painful to go back for more money.”
Lyons asked the committee to put together a list of what
items would and would not be included in the project.
Committee member Joan Walker explained that some of the cuts
included the elimination of recital hall sound equipment and the gymnasium
bleachers. But Lyons pointed out that the recital hall would not be an
auditorium-style theater.
“I just want to make sure there’s no confusion,” Lyons said.
“That room was always seen as a multi-functional room that would serve the
community, and you could do a small theater on the stage.”
Lyons proposed that at the next board of selectmen’s
meeting, a vote be taken to set the date of the new referendum for May 6. She
clarified that they would have until April 9 to determine the final amount the
town would request for the community center.
Selectman Al Goldberg asked about the possibility of
requesting the current vendors to maintain the bid they have made, which are
set to expire March 20.
But Lyons replied that she did not see a benefit in keeping
those bids.
“These bids were way off what the estimates were. The more I
think about this, why are we bending over backward to accommodate a bid package
that kind of blew our budget?” Lyons said. “We know we’re risking that these
could creep up again, but I don’t feel we’ve got great pricing that we’re
trying to hold.”