Engineering Report Targets Bridge Safety

By MAX HART

The committee charged with studying the replacement of the Lagoon
Pond drawbridge approved an engineering consultant's report on the
condition of the bridge this week, but the central question of whether
to replace the bridge in two phases or one remains unresolved.

The report, authored by Lichtenstein Consulting Engineers Inc. of
Paramus, N.J., offers suggestions on how to repair the current structure
to reduce the risk of failure. The report now heads to state highway
officials and an array of local boards, including the Tisbury and Oak
Bluffs selectmen as well as the Martha's Vineyard Commission, for
review and comment.

Committee members approved the report at a meeting Wednesday
morning.

The report made no mention of how long the bridge might last before
failure, but the consultant has said that even with repairs, a failure
with the drawbridge mechanism is likely within six to eight years,
according to committee chairman Melinda Loberg. The bridge is a key
linchpin in the Vineyard road network, linking Vineyard Haven with Oak
Bluffs along Beach Road, and is a main artery to the Martha's
Vineyard Hospital.

The debate over how to proceed revolves around the construction of a
temporary bridge. The state wants to build a temporary drawbridge before
putting a permanent drawbridge in place. The temporary bridge would cost
$5 million and would be in place for five to six years; the permanent
bridge would cost $24 million and would not be built until 2013 at the
earliest. Some committee members fear that the temporary bridge will
become permanent, and want the state to proceed directly to the
construction of the permanent bridge, while somehow keeping the existing
drawbridge in service.

Selectmen in Tisbury and Oak Bluffs agreed to hire the engineering
consultant last summer, and the two towns split the $14,000 cost of the
study.

The drawbridge committee has asked Mass Highway whether a new bridge
could be built alongside the current span without the need for a
temporary structure. Mass Highway officials have said they would not
agree to that scenario unless the committee or either of the towns
assumed the risk if the bridge fails.

The Lichtenstein report is an attempt to gauge that risk.

Much of the meeting on Wednesday morning was spent discussing ways
to enforce existing controls, as spelled out in the report, including
restricting weight and speed over the bridge. Robert Maciel, the
drawbridge operator, told the committee that he has seen an impact from
large trucks on the bridge.

"A Falmouth Lumber truck came over the bridge one day packed
with sheetrock and the deck bowed a lot," Mr. Maciel said.
"And after it passed it sprang back up and made terrible noise. I
don't know how much of those the bridge can take."

The committee said it would send a letter to Island trucking
companies to suggest using an alternate route, and will ask the
Steamship Authority to distribute the letter to trucks coming over from
Woods Hole. The possibility of creating a designated trucking route up
State Road was also discussed.

At one point, the discussion grew heated, when county engineer Steve
Berlucchi and Tisbury selectman Tristan Israel had a terse exchange. Mr.
Israel accused Mr. Berlucchi of inhibiting a frank and thorough
discussion of the study, and he said the county engineer, who used to
work for Mass Highway, has been little more than a mouthpiece for state
highway officials.

"I take exception to that," Mr. Berlucchi fired back at
Mr. Israel. "Stop slandering me."

"We're going through a process, Steve, so let us go
through the process," Mr. Israel responded. "Not all of us
know everything about bridges like you, so why can't we just go
through the process?"

Later in the same day, at the Wednesday evening meeting of the Dukes
County Commission, Mr. Berlucchi, who is also the commission's
representative to the drawbridge committee, told the commission that the
consultant's report reinforced previous state engineering reports
on the extent of damage to the bridge. Mr. Berlucchi suggested that the
county formally endorse the two-bridge concept, even though the
engineering report did not go that far.

"My understanding is that according to Mr. Berlucchi, the
committee initially endorsed the two-bridge concept, and said the
consultant's report issued on Wednesday told us what we already
knew about the bridge - that it is getting dangerous and needs to
be fixed," county manager E. Winn Davis said yesterday.

Mr. Davis said the county commission did vote to endorse the
two-bridge concept.

Relations between Mr. Berlucchi and Tisbury town officials have been
strained for some time over the drawbridge issue. It was also revealed
this week that Mr. Berlucchi recently requested a private meeting
between himself, the county manager and the Tisbury selectmen.

In an e-mail to Tisbury town administrator John Bugbee last
Thursday, Mr. Berlucchi wrote: "As discussed today via phone, the
county manager and myself would appreciate meeting with the selectmen in
the near future to discuss drawbridge issues. We'd hope to have a
private informal meeting anywhere they would like. Preferably a small
group with a round table."

Mr. Davis said yesterday that the meeting was meant to try and move
the project along as well as to better understand some of the issues
related to the temporary bridge plan, but he said that he did not intend
for the meeting to be private.

"I didn't ask for it to be private, and it certainly did
not have to be," Mr. Davis said.

The Lichtenstein engineering report will now head to District Five,
the division of Mass Highway that handles all maintenance and repairs
for state bridges, as well as Mass Highway headquarters in Boston for
review. The committee will also present the report to the Tisbury and
Oak Bluffs selectmen and the Martha's Vineyard Commission in
coming weeks.