Bonner Bridge plan stalls again

A team of state and federal agency representatives have again failed to agree on how to replace the aging Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, automatically kicking the decision to a higher level while the project remains stalled. Of the 13 merger team members, only two – the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration – concurred Wednesday, said Rob Hanson, eastern project development engineer for the state Department of Transportation. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office abstained, he said. Beth Midgett, chairwoman of Dare County’s Citizen Action Committee to Replace the Bonner Bridge, said she was “beside herself” about the team’s additional delay, especially in light of the recent bridge collapse in Minneapolis. “Obviously, it’s a turf war; they’re protecting their own egos,” Midgett said in a telephone interview after the one-hour meeting. “They care less about the people that have to drive over this bridge every day. I think they’ve lost sight of the mission to protect the public safety.” The Bonner Bridge, opened in 1963, has long passed its expected life span. Plans for its replacement began 16 years ago, but the process has been mired in controversy over its location and the potential impacts to the environment and recreational access. Meanwhile, the concrete and steel bridge has incurred deterioration in the inlet’s salt water and powerful currents. The bridge has a sufficiency rating of 2, with 100 being the best, and its condition is poor. But state transportation officials say it is inspected regularly and is safe to cross. Based on recommendations by engineers after an in-depth inspection last year, a repair project is scheduled to start this fall. In a prepared statement issued after the meeting, Dare County Board of Commissioners Chairman Warren Judge said encouraging progress has been made in the planning that considers the environment, the funding, the safety concerns and the immediacy of the need. “I cannot see the logic behind having to postpone the start of construction any longer,” he said in the statement. The merger team, which has met three previous times, had been asked to pick the preferred alternative out of a total of seven. Proposed bridges range from a short bridge built parallel to the existing one to two versions of a long bridge that spans 17.5 miles and bypasses Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge. The short version also includes various long-term maintenance options for N.C. 12 south of the bridge, including combinations of beach nourishment, short elevated bridges and road relocation. Whatever the choice, the new bridge is targeted for completion in 2013. In May, the DOT announced that it was recommending what it called the phased approach to replacing the 2.5-mile bridge. The first step would be to build a bridge at about the current location, and then add smaller bridges on N.C. 12 as dictated by the erosion rate. The fact that the higher-level meeting was scheduled even before Wednesday’s merger team meeting may indicate the depth of conflict that has been evident throughout the prolonged planning process.But with the urgency of the project, the mid level part of the approval process has been skipped. “Typically, it will go to a merger implementation team,” said DOT spokesman Ernie Seneca. “It’s going to bypass that and go straight to a review board.” Hanson said the review board is scheduled to meet Aug . 27. The members are upper-level officials with the Army Corps of Engineers, the DOT, the Federal Highway Administration, and the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources. And that’s where the process stops. “Basically, the project cannot proceed until that board reaches agreement,” Hanson said.