THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, March 1, 1995 TAG: 9503010501
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY SCOTT HARPER, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: NEWPORT NEWS LENGTH: Medium: 79 lines
Plans for a second bridge across the Chesapeake Bay, spanning 19.5 miles of water and wetlands from Virginia Beach to the Eastern Shore, won a key endorsement Tuesday from environmental regulators.
The Virginia Marine Resources Commission became the first of several government agencies to approve the $250 million project, designed to relieve traffic and increase safety on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel.
By a 5-1 vote, the commission signaled its belief that this companion span, to be built parallel to the existing bridge but without any tunnels, will not significantly harm the Bay.
Concerns that dredging and construction would damage fish and crab stocks, increase beach erosion and hurt water quality have been core arguments against the project since it was first discussed in the late 1980s.
But research by scientists at Old Dominion University and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science indicate the project would have minimal environmental impacts. And the commission voted accordingly.
The dissenting vote came from Tommy Leggett, a commercial fisherman. Peter Rowe, considered a strong environmental advocate on the panel, abstained.
``Common sense tells me it's almost like putting a wall across the Bay,'' Leggett said, referring to worries that the new bridge could reduce crab and migratory fish populations, which already are low. ``I just am very, very uncomfortable with this.''
The approval Tuesday moves the project on to regulators at the Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. All three agencies have indicated their support for the plan and are expected to issue permits.
James K. Brookshire, executive director of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel Commission, said he hopes to begin construction as early as this summer. Under that schedule, the new span could be completed by 1999.
When the second bridge opens, the bridge-tunnel would be closed for a year for long-overdue repairs, Brookshire said. The span, which has been open since 1964, needs structural maintenance that would close both lanes of traffic, he said.
The new bridge would consist of two lanes and shoulders. The existing bridge has no shoulders - one reason, Brookshire said, that traffic accidents and fatalities have increased in recent years. Since 1964, 63 people have been killed crossing the bridge, according to state statistics.
As currently designed, the new bridge would come within 30 feet of a waterfront condominium in Virginia Beach. Residents have protested the alignment, but Brookshire said the state acquired the rights to that path in the 1950s, well before the condominium was built.
Richard Bell, who owns property near the bridge site in Virginia Beach, complained that he was never notified about bridge plans and had to find about them from ``a third party.''
Bell also is worried that dredging and construction work near the shoreline would increase beach erosion and more easily flood Pleasure House Lake.
A study of the problem by the Army Corps of Engineers indicates that erosion is likely to increase, but only slightly above normal rates.
Under one plan, sandy dredge material from the bridge construction would be used to replenish Bay-front beaches. But officials said the dredge material more likely would go to the city of Virginia Beach for use in maintaining its resort beaches. ILLUSTRATION: THE CHESAPEAKE BAY BRIDGE-TUNNEL
[Color Photo]
Approved by: The Virginia Marine Resources Commission.
Yet to approve: The Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.
Cost: $250 million
Design: To Parellel current span, but with shoulders and without
tunnels.
Schedule: Construction could begin this summer and could end by
1999.
KEYWORDS: ROAD CONSTRUCTION CHESAPEAKE BAY BRIDGE TUNNEL by CNB