Utility Bridge Over Ash Creek

1
Utility Bridge Over Ash Creek

• Ash Creek Conservation Association, Inc.
• October 10, 2006

2
Contents

• The proposed design
• Other alternatives
• Background
• ACCAs actions plans
• What you can do
• Additional resources

3
Utility Bridge Rendering
Developed by ACCA based on current plans
submitted to siting council for approval. Length
160 feet, height 8 2 above roadway bridge,
width 9 2, looks like elongated doghouse with
concrete abutments on either end with two chain
link fences (5 and 8 high) no mention of
barbed wire in current plans.
4
Utility Bridge Location
Parking Lot for The Blues
22 feet to North of roadway bridge
5
Utility Bridge Visual Impact
Utility Bridge
Line of Sight of Person on Bridge
Roadway Bridge
Individual standing on North side of roadway
bridge would only be able to see a small amount
of water below the utility bridge and the sky
above the utility bridge
6
Where Did We Get Our Info?

• CLP submitted plans to siting council in their
  application which are available on the Internet
• CLP held two mock-up demonstrations at Ash Creek
  at the request of the Town of Fairfield

7
Utility Bridge Mock Up

• On 9/5/06, CLP at the request of the Town of
  Fairfield provided an orange mesh mock-up of the
  utility bridge
• Orange mesh was stretched out for part of the
  length (about 100 of the 160), height (82),
  and distance (20) from Ash Creek bridge
• Provides sense of amount of visual obstruction
  (although you can see through the orange mesh and
  you will not be able to see through the utility
  bridge, of course)

8
Utility Bridge Mock Up
CLP used cherry pickers to stretch out the
orange mesh screen
9
Utility Bridge Mock Up
View looking North towards Grassmere section of
Fairfield
10
Utility Bridge Mock Up
View looking straight ahead from sidewalk nearest
utility bridge
11
Other Alternatives

• Attachment to the bridge (not a likely
  alternative for Ash Creek given that roadway
  bridge is 100 years old)
• Underwater route (most likely alternative)
• Overhead route (need to watch out for this
  alternative)

12
This seems so obvious

• You may be wondering why this huge, ugly utility
  bridge is now considered the best option for
  crossing Ash Creek by CLP
• Why not cross Ash Creek by attaching to the
  roadway bridge or going underwater?
• To understand, we need to provide some background
  information, we wont bore you, there is enough
  intrigue and drama to maintain your interest and
  well keep it short

13
Background - 2003

• In 2003, the Connecticut Siting Council held
  public meetings to find out citizens concerns
  about routing new high voltage power lines called
  the 345-kV Middletown-to-Norwalk Transmission
  Line Project
• At that time the plan was to run the power lines
  under the waterways using the Horizontal
  Directional Drilling (HDD) method
• There was no public outcry over this as there
  would have been no visual obstruction at Ash
  Creek or the other two waterways in Fairfield
  (Mill River Sasco Creek)

14
Background - 2004

• In July 2004, CLP applied to the DEP for
  permission to cross the three waterways in
  Fairfield, including Ash Creek, by attaching the
  lines to the roadway bridges
• They subsequently decided this was not the best
  method because of the age of the Ash Creek
  roadway bridge (built in 1910) and due to
  objections from ConnDOT (October 2005) about
  safety and maintenance issues
• As a result, CLP decided again to use underwater
  routes using the HDD method

15
Background - 2005

• After discussions with the DEP, CLP decided in
  April 2005 to revise their application to include
  a utility bridge as an option, but it was their
  least preferred option for crossing Ash Creek,
  they still planned to use the HDD method

16
Background Jan-May 2006

• In February 2006, CLP again revised the DEP
  application, still recommending underwater
  tunneling using the HDD (Horizontal Directional
  Drilling) technique
• In May 2006, they further revised their DEP
  application, this time they recommended a utility
  bridge for Ash Creek for reasons that are not
  entirely clear
• Of the 13 water crossings by CLP in Connecticut
  the only 3 using utility bridges are located in
  Fairfield

17
Background July 2006

• On July 5, 2006 representatives from CLP gave a
  presentation to the Black Rock Homeowners
  Association on the transmission line project
  detailing the route and the traffic disruptions,
  but when questioned on the plans for crossing the
  Ash Creek waterway gave the impression that there
  would be some kind of conduit close to the bridge
  that would not result in any visual obstruction
• No mention was made of a utility bridge

18
Background August 2006

• The public notice by DEP in August 2006 did not
  mention a utility bridge for Ash Creek, it said
  the underwater HDD method would be used the DEP
  states this was a clerical error and that anyone
  examining the file (which is over 500 pages long)
  could readily see that a utility bridge was being
  proposed for Ash Creek

19
Background August 2006 (contd)

• The Ash Creek Conservation Association, BRHA, and
  the residents of Black Rock remained unaware of
  the utility bridge plans until an article
  appeared in the Connecticut Post on August 1,
  2006 that the Town of Fairfield had some concerns
  about the utility bridges
• Our common council representatives, Tom Mulligan
  Donna Curran, got involved immediately
• The City of Bridgeport joined Fairfield in the
  discussions, but did not object to the utility
  bridge

20
Background Aug/Sept 2006

• The DEP public comment period for the utility
  bridge application lasted from August 3 to
  September 13, 2006.
• ACCA worked quickly with other grassroots
  organizations in Fairfield and with the Black
  Rock Homeowners Association to gather signatures
  on a petition to force the DEP to hold a hearing
  on this issue
• Over 700 signatures were sent in to the DEP,
  which will likely result in a public comment
  session in the Bpt/Ffld area and caught the
  attention of our legislators

21
Background September 2006

• Fairfield Board of Selectmen passed a unanimous
  resolution opposing the utility bridge and sent
  it to CLP, DEP Siting Council on September 6
• ACCA asked CLP to give a presentation on its
  plans for the utility bridge on September 6 to
  our members and the public, unfortunately both
  the photos of the mock-up and their rendering did
  not coincide with their plans or what we saw at
  the mock-up session (see next two slides)

22
CLP Version of the Utility Bridge at Ash Creek
23
ACCA Version of the Utility Bridge at Ash Creek
Based on CLP plans submitted to the siting
council on September 8, 2006
24
Background Sept/Oct 2006

• CLP then submitted their Development and
  Management Plan to the Connecticut Siting Council
  on September 8, 2006 which includes the plans
  for the Ash Creek utility bridge.
• The Connecticut Siting Council public comment
  period ended on October 6. There is now a 45 day
  review period by the siting council. This means
  the siting council may need to make a decision on
  the utility bridge prior to the DEP hearing on
  the utility bridge. If they do so, they will be
  making a decision without all the facts.

25
Siting Council Public Comments

• ACCA, Fairfielders Plan, and the Black Rock
  Homeowners Association sent in letters against
  the utility bridge
• Town of Fairfield and City of Bridgeport sent
  lengthy and detailed letters to the siting
  council against the utility bridge
• Many residents and legislators sent in letters as
  well

26
What You Can Do

• Contact your legislators Rep. Chris Caruso,
  Rep. Bob Keeley, Rep. Bill Finch, Gov. Rell
  tell them you expect them to keep up pressure
  against the utility bridge
• Show up at the DEP hearing (date TBD, probably
  late October) keep an eye on this website for
  the date

27
Additional Resources