New Bedford-Fairhaven Bridge Corridor Study
Study Advisory Group Meeting Summary
May 21, 2014
New Bedford Public Library
613 Pleasant Street
New Bedford, MA
Ethan Britland, Project Manager for MassDOT, welcomed Study Advisory Group (SAG) members. He said
that the purpose of the meeting would be to review the study’s framework and existing conditions in
the study area. Understanding base conditions is essential to move the study process forward. Ethan
said the study is a planning/feasibility study and its product will be a set of recommendations for
implementation. The study’s work will not be put on a shelf.
John Weston, an HDR consultant hired by MassDOT to conduct the study, proceeded with a
presentation on existing conditions. He asked SAG members to provide feedback on the study team’s
analysis. The existing conditions analysis included a review of land use, zoning, economic development
(including marine) in New Bedford and Fairhaven, natural, social, cultural and historic resources and
environmental justice populations.
John Weston described the condition and operation of the swing bridge, including the number of bridge
openings. The 92-foot opening width and reliability of the bridge for vessels constrains harbor
development. Despite limitations, marine traffic has steadily risen over the last decades and is expected
to continue to grow. At the same time, the number of vehicles crossing the harbor on Route 6 has
declined significantly, from 26,850 in 1979 to 11,500 in 2014. Bridge conditions for bicycles and
pedestrians and transit routes were also examined by the study team.
Issues and constraints cited by the study team included:






Bridge width – narrow navigational width limits opportunities to increase maritime-based
economic development
Bridge height – bridge clearances limits the number of vessels that can pass underneath
Bridge openings – frequent lengthy openings limits the utility of the roadway connection
between New Bedford and Fairhaven
Bicycle routes – there is not a safe route for bicyclists off the western end of the bridge
Pedestrians – the pedestrian environment along the corridor is a concern
Vehicular safety – there are safety concerns at Pope Island and along the length of the bridge
The study team identified opportunities for the corridor including, increasing the channel width at the
bridge and increased bridge clearance for vessel, utilizing enhanced variable message signs to minimize
impacts of bridge openings to vehicles and the potential to time any bridge improvement with ongoing
efforts to clean up the harbor.
1
Throughout the presentation Study Advisory Committee members posed questions and made
comments. They are listed below in italics.
There is deep water, up to 30 feet deep, north of the bridge to the EPA property. It is not part of the
federal channel maintained by the Army Corps of Engineers. The City of New Bedford maintains the
channel beyond the federal channel.
The land use on Pope's Island is not indicated as recreational on the presentation graphic. However,
there is a large park and marina on the island. This is not clear on the land use map.
How does the condition of this bridge compare to others, for example, the Braga Bridge in Fall River?
The condition of the New Bedford-Fairhaven Bridge cannot be compared to the Braga Bridge since it is a
swing bridge. It has a mechanical component, not just steel. Salt water is corrosive to steel. Bridges built
today typically have less steel and more concrete. Although there have been lane closures at the Braga
Bridge for 2-3 years, the closures are related to a fire suppression system, not the condition of the
bridge.
It is still early in the study to focus on bridge design. The goal is to have a bridge that does not break
down as much and can more efficiently close access to vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians to open the
bridge and move vessels through more quickly. There are bridge designs that have one opening, rather
than two openings, and a wider opening, which may enable vessels to move more quickly. If a new
bridge were higher, then it may not have to open as often. Raising the profile of the bridge may affect
access to adjacent businesses. Still, regardless of the design, people in vehicles will still have to wait for
vessels to pass and the length of the wait is not projected to drop significantly. SAG members said there
will need to be a lot of education because likely the public perception is that a new bridge would result
in substantially reduced traffic delays.
Personally, I’ve never minded the wait time when the bridge is opened but the average person thinks the
new bridge will significantly reduce delays. How a new bridge is advertised will be important.
From the marine side, we would like to see a wider opening for vessels than the current opening of ninety
feet. This weekend a barge hit the bridge again. There is a huge bottleneck for development north of the
bridge. If weather conditions are not right, large vessels have to sit in the harbor and wait to deliver
cargo north of the bridge. It costs $40,000 a day for a boat to sit in the harbor.
Anecdotally, the traffic feels more than ever. It is hard to believe that traffic on the bridge has actually
reduced over the past few decades.
We looked at the traffic volumes on the Coggeshall Bridge and they are significantly higher, which
corresponds to the reduction on the New Bedford-Fairhaven Route 6 Bridge.
Did your traffic analysis include bicycle and pedestrian crashes?
2
The crash data reports do provide minimal details if a bicycle or pedestrian were involved. We can
analyze further as needed.
When describing the benefits of a new bridge, the focus should be on improvements to economic
development and reliability, not speed. In the public’s eye, the frustration of having to wait in your car
while ships are going through is a big deal.
I think it will be important that the area be more park-like, friendlier to bicyclists and pedestrians, and
not a fast-moving highway.
Ethan Britland said the study is not about one thing; it will take into account economic development,
transit, vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and recreational need. MassDOT will balance these needs when it
considers recommendations. He hopes that members of the Study Advisory Group will communicate the
message of the study to their own constituents.
Meeting Attendees:
Sara Clermont, Mass in Motion New Bedford
Bill Roth, Town Planner, Fairhaven
Bill Travers, MassDOT, District 5
Diana Henry, New Bedford Historical Commission
Paul Mission, Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District
Ronald Labelle, New Bedford Director of Public Infrastructure
Ed Anthes-Washburn, Port of New Bedford
John Lobo, City of New Bedford
Mary Rapoza, City of New Bedford
Jean Fox, MassDOT (South Coast Rail)
Jim Hadfield
Al Medieros, Rep. Cabral’s Office
Michelle Paul, City of New Bedford
Christine Richard, Residence Inn Dartmouth
Kerrie Burrer, Hampton Inn Fairhaven
Project Team:
Ethan Britland, Project Manager, MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning
John Weston, HDR
Stefanie McQueen, HDR
Jill Barrett, FHI
3