The Virginian-Pilot
©
CHESAPEAKE
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers condemned the design for the proposed Jordan Bridge in South Norfolk as "unacceptable," saying that the clearance height and width of the replacement bridge do not meet current or future federal navigation requirements.
"To reconstruct a bridge... with the same minimum navigational clearances that were acceptable over 80 years ago is short-sighted and does not provide for future growth within the region," reads an Army Corps letter sent to the U.S. Coast Guard.
Until this month, a private group's plan to replace the Jordan Bridge had met little opposition. But the corps' June 22 letter is the second major challenge to the project design, echoing the Virginia Maritime Association's concern that the bridge dimensions won't accommodate water traffic as ships and barges are built bigger and wider.
Advocates for the project contend that it is far more important to restore the road link from South Norfolk to Portsmouth, and that the new fixed bridge actually will be easier on mariners because they won't have to call for a bridge lift as they did for the old Jordan Bridge.
"It almost sounded as if the letter was written by someone who's not very in touch with the project or anything else that's going on in Hampton Roads," said Philip Shucet, a former Virginia Department of Transportation commissioner who is leading the development team that wants to replace the bridge.
Shucet contends that the new, 145-foot-high bridge will have the highest vertical clearance of five bridges that cross the Elizabeth River's Southern Branch.
"If the South Norfolk Jordan Bridge doesn't meet 'current or future federal navigation requirements,' then not one single bridge across the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River meets those requirements either," Shucet said.
The corps letter said that the proposed bridge clearances are "in direct conflict" with a priority project to deepen and widen the channel, which would allow for larger ships. Shucet said he didn't think there was any money available to do that.
The corps and Maritime Association's objections set up a difficult decision for the Coast Guard, which is facing pressure from both sides trying to influence whether the federal agency approves an important permit for the bridge.
If that permit is delayed, then the project could die, the bridge's developers say.
Along with Shucet, the private development team includes Figg Bridge Developers, which helped to
build the replacement bridge for the one that collapsed in Minneapolis in 2007. A Miami-based investment firm will be financing the project.
Shucet said his group could build the bridge for less than $100 million without any taxpayer dollars.
His group wanted to open the bridge by July 4, 2010, but Shucet said Tuesday that a more realistic completion date would be later next year.
The bridge could have a toll of about $2.
The city of Chesapeake has become one of the fiercest advocates for the private project. The City Council
earlier this year approved the bridge plan and voted Tuesday to send a letter to the Coast Guard urging expedited approval of the permit. The Hampton Roads Chamber of Commerce also is backing the private plan.
Mike Saewitz, (757) 222-5207, mike.saewitz@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Bridge not good enough? Are you people for real?
When I read this article that stated the Army Corps of Engineers say this replacement bridge isn't good enough I had to start laughing! Not only is 175 ft tall a huge bridge and would be the tallest for the southern Elizabeth River, I'm at a loss of why this bridge won't do?
Currently there are two railroad truss lift span bridges on either side of the old Jordan Bridge that will remain for the forseable future. The Gilmerton is in the process of being replaced. That leaves only the I-64 High Rise and Steel Bridges as impediments. Is the ACOE planning on replacing the Great Bridge Locks and dredging/widening the Intercoastal Waterway as well? If they want a 55' channel, I'm not sure if both the Midtown and Downtown tunnels can support that depth. If not, is the ACOE going to pony up any $$ to replace these structures? I applaud Mr. Phillip Shucet for forming a group to replace this vital link in our transportation network. The only thing that would make this project better would be to make it a six lane structure with tie ins with I-264 (in Portsmouth)/I-464 and I-264 in Norfolk. You would then create a great downtown tunnel bypass and all of the gridlock it would relieve.
The bridge cannot be built
The bridge cannot be built until the ACOE can figure if the bridge can accomodate low flying barges.
Jordan Br
BUILD IT...this project has been public for quite a while and lets face it the Southern Branch is never going to be a big artery for water borne goods...Unless they are going to widen and deepen the Intercoastal Waterway.
Anne
Please explain why making a couple hundred people drive an extra 20 minutes through the tunnel makes a "unbelieveable great hardship" You must be in politics to make a statement that stupid. To the person that made the statement about I64 bridge, it opens!
Jordon Bridge Project
I must be missing something here? Is it poor planning, poor communications or poor reporting. A reputable company spends all this time and money planning and designing this project without inquiring as to what government restrictions must be met. It makes for interesting news but should it have happened in the first place?
What size ships...
can get thru there now? These things have manifested themselves before in other locations. The solutions usually involved masts that folded down to clear such bridges. It's hard to imagine a superstructure reaching the height of this bridge. Do aircraft carriers move up and down that channel? Are they planned to?
Get rid of Figg and Phil
The Florida financing outfit will put the money up for anyone building the bridge. Raise the height of the cross sections by 20 feet and let the traffic run through the cross section instead of on top of it. That will bring traffic down low enough to meet pavement on both sides of the river. Put bicycles and foot traffic on top of the cross section. Make the span wider and eliminate one of the uprights. That will make the wider span and one less upright, a wash.
Make sure none of our politicians (or their families) get to own any of the shares of the corporation that owns the new bridge.
Let the same local contractors who would build the bridge for Figg get to build the bridge even with Figg and Phil gone.
bridge height
according to the art. the bridge will be 175' above water, Can the army or the CG tell what heights the ships of the future will be??? If the tree huggers get there way the ships will not be able to use crude oil for fuel so the ships will get smaller!. What is the height of I64 bridge??? Will the CG or the ARMY pay for a new one?? Where is all the dredge material going to go (CRANEY) For the ship to be higher and wider they will need more draft!. But the Tunnel depth for both DT and MT tunnel will be the determining factor's as to ship size. Maybe OBAMA has plans to replace all the bridge's and tunnels by the year 2120!. This is what happens when they hire people with no COMMON Sense!!!
The Process Was Backwards
The problem here is the planning process was circumvented by this developer who announced a proposal (but no plans) for a bridge in December and threatened to pull it if not accepted by January. Chesapeake failed to study the plan because it was so scared they would lose the proposal--check city engineers files to see if any engineering was done. All these issues, like current and future Corps requirements, not to mention design specs and the like would get raised in a normal planning process if there had been one. It's only been 6 months of what is typically a much longer planning/comment period so don't blame the Corps and other maritime interests for protecting the harbor when the problem is those trying to ram through a project for private gain. Wonder when the developer will tell what the toll will be since all they have said is it "may be $2 each way". Also, wonder how long before the developer goes to the State and City to ask a monetary contribution to cover these "new" requirements to meet current standards (while still ensuring their profits)? This is a flawed process and the City and State should acknowledge it, back up and submit the bridge project to bidding by o
Never going to happen
The Jordan Bridge, the third crossing, widening the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel, re-building the Downtown and Midtown tunnels.....these projects will never happen. The state will not pay for it and local cities cannot agree on who would pay for it and even where the location would be. The last major transportation structure built in this area was the Monitor-Merrimac and that will be the last.
Politicians just throw it into the budget every year just to cut it at the end of the year. It keeps the public thinking that it might happen one day.