 |
|
By Mary Losure
August 2, 2000
|
RealAudio 3.0 |
The U.S. Department of the Interior now says it may not require the removal of the Stillwater lift bridge after a new bridge opens. Its previous determination that the 1931 bridge needed be removed as environmental mitigation had driven a wedge between environmentalists and historic preservationists, and was another hotly-contested issue in an already controversial project. For state transportation officials, however, keeping the bridge might just be too expensive.
 |
|
|
|
||
|
||
The historic lift bridge is on the National Register of Historic places and has a host of defenders. Among them is Minnesota Congressman Bill Luther.
Luther has been meeting with Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt and other federal officials to try to work out a compromise that allows the new bridge to move forward, but would save the lift bridge itself.
"My hope is that by taking a big picture view of this, we can succeed," Luther said. "It's very important that people not do something that allows something like this to be destroyed by taking a very narrow view rather than the big picture.
On August 1, Destry Jarvis, a representative of Babbitt's office, told local officials the Interior Department is willing to reconsider its stance.
"It's more than just willing to negotiate, its a flat-out statement that the old bridge doesn't need to be the tradeoff for the new bridge, that there are other ways to produce an effective mitigation for this new bridge."
The Interior Department is proposing that Minnesota and Wisconsin offset the effects of the new freeway-style bridge by setting up programs to preserve scenic areas in the St. Croix River valley and to prevent urban sprawl.
The new, four-lane bridge is expected to spread development from the Twin Cities across the St. Croix and into western Wisconsin.
Jarvis told local officials the federal government would be willing to provide some funding, but both states would also need to share the cost. Jarvis, however, had no estimates of what that cost could be.
|
"It's more than just willing to negotiate, its a flat-out statement that the old bridge doesn't need to be the tradeoff for the new bridge, that there are other ways to produce an effective mitigation for this new bridge. "
- Destry Jarvis, U.S. Interior Department | |
Jarvis said that option would require less mitigation than keeping the whole bridge intact. Minnesota Department of Transportation deputy commissioner Doug Wieszhaar says Mn/DOT has already set aside $10 million for mitigating the effects of the new bridge and is concerned about the added cost of further mitigation.
He says if the cost is too high, Mn/DOT may consider scapping the project all together.
"We need to decide internally and with the governor, or his staff, what are the boundaries of what we are willing to spend on this project, as compared with all the other transporation needs in Minnesota," Wieszhaar said. "We may have to not go forward with the project because its more than we can reasonably expend on projects of this nature."
Mn/DOT hopes to have the new bridge built by the year 2004, for a cost of $148 million, including mitigation. The bridge's projected cost has been mounting with the delays. Two years ago, it was estimated at $112 million.
© 2013 | Home : Terms of Use : Your Privacy RightsRadio Listening : News & Features : Events Calendar : Your Voice : About Us