Comment
to
the
Draft
Environmental
Impact
Statement U.S.
Department
of
Transportation F.P.
ID
Number:
210255-1
Introduction This comment to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which was prepared by Theresa Segal for the Save Our Bridge Committee, will specifically address public opinion and participation in the Section 106 review process for the Bridge of Lions project. According to the guidelines for this process, public participation should be integrated to the "maximum extent possible" with the administrative process of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and other participating agencies. It appears, and is easily gaged, that the FDOT has fulfilled its responsibilities to date in regard to the "programmatic coordination" of public participation. However, the weight given to public opinion as applied to the process is unclear. Of the few direct references to public opinion in the draft, there are some statements made which attempt to gage public concerns. The "Areas of Controversy" which are touched on in the draft deal with the issues of aesthetic, traffic, and historical significance. There are no direct references in the text of the draft concerning how the public feels about the issue of safety, although in more recent months this issue has become one of the more talked about aspects of the restoration vs. replacement controversy.
Local citizens rely on a variety of sources for their information, not just the public forums set up by the FDOT. As a result of misstatements by and through the media as a well as a deliberate campaign by special interest groups to inspire fear, the public has been mislead to believe that a restored bridge would be unsafe, that a replacement bridge would improve the traffic situation, and that the Bridge of Lions is not historically significant. The forming of the Save Our Bridge Committee in cooperation with the Friends of St. Augustine Architecture was a direct reaction to the confusion of the general public with regard to the facts at the heart of this debate. Our goal is to educate the public on the issues surrounding the Bridge of Lions project. We promote FDOT’s Option 1A for the Bridge of Lions project in a manner that will preserve as much of the original structure as possible while addressing the issues of marine and vehicular safety and maintaining the Bridge of Lion’s status on the National Register of Historic Places. We feel that a well educated public overwhelmingly supports this goal. To illustrate this, our committee has circulated a petition in support of Option 1A. The results of this petition drive will be discussed in this comment and the complete petition is included as well (See Appendix A).
Highlights of The Debate When the FDOT first began discussions on what to do about the aging Bridge of Lions in the early 1970’s, a group of local citizens had formed the Friends of St. Augustine Architecture to address concerns on just such issues. As soon as the notion of tearing down the bridge was mentioned as an option, the "Friends" immediately voiced their opposition, as did the many other local citizens. Throughout the history of this debate (which is indeed "historic" in and of itself) there have been many ideas proposed and abandoned; the scale tipping in favor of restoration or replacement several times. Now the FDOT takes the position that it is currently "standing upright"; not leaning one way or the other on this issue. Although the FDOT now states their position with confidence, the previous waffling of the agency, the local government and the media has resulted in the widespread confusion of the general public.
In April of 1996, headlines in the St. Augustine Record read "Bridge Restoration Option Hits Snag". It was at this time that the U.S. Coast Guard announced it’s desire for a wider span. The Coast Guard followed up their announcement of the new 125 ft. "guide clearance" with a letter to the FDOT in December, 1997, threatening to invoke the obscure Trumman-Hobbs Act (Draft EIS, p.J-1). John W. Winslow, Chief of the Coast Guard’s Seventh District and author of this letter, had participated in a public forum hosted by the Junior Service League earlier that month. During this event, Mr. Winslow made several statements about barge traffic and tonnage passing through the Bridge of Lions, particularly in reference to fuel oil. The public became very alarmed and speculation began to circulate throughout the community about the possibility of an oil barge striking the bridge and causing an environmental catastrophe. The Citizens for a Safe New Bridge, Inc. (advocates for a replacement option) fueled the fears of local citizens by creating a scenario of an oil barge splitting in two as it strikes the Bridge of Lions and causing "an environmental disaster of major proportions" in a flier which was circulated as an insert in the local paper (See Appendix B). However, upon examination of the figures provided by Mr. Winslow and contained in the draft EIS on tonnage and traffic along the Intracoastal Waterway (the subject of T.J. Tremmels comment to the Draft EIS), it was discovered that the statistics had been grossly exaggerated. Indeed, the chances of an "accident waiting to happen" (See Appendix B) have greatly decreased according to available records. But the fear instilled in the community is not as easily corrected as a supplement to the draft EIS handed out at the June 7th public forum. A press release from the FDOT to the local media is called for.
The Petition to Save Our Bridge
The widespread confusion surrounding the debate to restore or replace the Bridge of Lions prompted the formation of the Save Our Bridge Committee. On July 4th, 1997, the committee set up a table in the downtown plaza with a petition drawn up in support of the Restoration/Rehabilitation Option 1A as stated in the FDOT’s 1997 Preliminary Engineering Report (the finalized Option 1A as contained in the draft EIS was not available at that time). The committee also prepared and circulated a fact sheet to educate the public on the issue and attempt to dispel some of the fallacies (See Appendix D). The facts were carefully checked for accuracy by the committee through phone conversations with the FDOT and other knowledgeable sources. As information changed or became available the fact sheet was revised to remain as accurate as possible. After the first round of signatures was collected the petition was placed in several businesses around town and on the Save Our Bridge web site (www.bridgeoflions.org). The web site has proven to be a very useful tool for our committee to keep the public informed in a timely manner. It was a welcome addition to link to the FDOT’s draft EIS web site, which we were invited to do by Joe Stephenson, Regional Administrator for the FDOT. The committee finished the collection of signatures this past Independence Day; exactly one year from the date of it’s conception. The final petition contains almost 6,000 signatures with some 2,000 of those being local citizens (See Appendix 1A). This significant portion of the petition are the people most impacted by the fate of the Bridge of Lions. Another large percentage of signatures represents ‘area’ residents; people from Ponte Vedra, Jacksonville, Daytona and other surrounding areas. These are the “day trippers” who come to St. Augustine many times a year to spend the day touring, shopping and attending the Festivals and Events that are key to this City’s economic base of tourist dollars. As was pointed out by Florida Secretary of State, Katherine Harris during her comments at the Public Hearing on June 7th, the Bridge of Lions is an integral part of Florida’s history as a monument of the Florida Land Boom; an important chapter in the Florida’s development. Because of the Bridge of Lions’ position on the National Register of Historic Places, and it’s more exclusive inclusion on the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s ‘11 Most Endangered Historic Places’ the committee decided to include national (and international) signatures. As is stated in the draft EIS, ‘The bridge is considered historically important on a local state and national level and is strongly associated with the City of St. Augustine by both residents and tourists.’ (DEIS, p.1-5). Since the bridge is considered to be a national treasure, then it is a decision with which the nation should be involved. Throughout the collection of these signatures, committee members had many opportunities to talk with people about their feelings on the fate of the Bridge of Lions. Local citizens expressed their concern for the future of the “ancient city” if the bridge is lost. As is stated in the draft, ‘The Bridge of Lions is considered by many residents as an important component of the historic make-up of the City of St. Augustine. The bridge is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and as such, many people are strongly opposed to any efforts to replace it.’ (DEIS, p. S-5.) Tourists who were informed of the possibility of the bridges replacement were generally astonished that the idea of tearing down such a unique structure would even be entertained. Other Measures of Public Opinion
The St. Augustine Record attempted to record public opinion on the Bridge of Lions project with two separate poles taken on their web site (See Appendix C). The first pole taken in November of ‘98 asked the simple question ‘What should done about the Bridge of Lions?’ At that time 72% voted to ‘Restore the old bridge’. Then in February of this year, when the repairs to pier #5 were underway causing weeks of traffic delays the question was posed again, this time reading, ‘We ask again. In light of the latest problems with the Bridge of Lions, should a new bridge be built or should the old bridge be restored?’ Still restoration of the Bridge of Lions was the majority by 66%. The final Public Hearing conducted by the FDOT in cooperation with the U.S. Coast Guard and the Federal Highway Administration on June 7th was another illustration of the percentage of local citizens that support saving the Bridge of Lions. It was obvious to all present or watching the hearing on the television that the overwhelming majority of the people who attended the hearing enthusiastically favored restoration. Of the 44 speakers that night, 33 expressed their support for preserving the bridge. Conclusion Every attempt made and method used to record and measure public opinion on the options presented by the FDOT to restore or replace the Bridge of Lions has resulted in a definite majority of the public favoring restoration Option 1A. While there are some variations on the percentage of restoration and rehabilitation preferred, the overall message to the participating agencies in this project is clear. Save Our Bridge! |