Bridge advocates go to court to save span

Sea Bright, Highlands, citizens group file appeals

BY CHRISTINE VARNO Staff Writer

BY CHRISTINE VARNO
Staff Writer

The Highlands bridge The Highlands bridge A citizens group, joined by the boroughs of Sea Bright and Highlands, has gone to court to block the state’s plan to replace the historic bridge that links the two Shore communities.

Two separate appeals were filed July 6 in the Appellate Division of state Superior Court in Freehold seeking to have plans to demolish and replace the Highlands drawbridge overturned.

One appeal was filed by attorney Janine G. Bauer of South Orange on behalf of the boroughs of Sea Bright and Highlands. The other appeal was filed by Stuart J. Lieberman of Princeton on behalf of Citizens for Rational Coastal Development.

“There are historic attributes associated with not only the bridge, but with the entire area that are being ignored,” said Lieberman in an interview Tuesday.

“What they want is way too high, way too ugly, way too fast and it blocks [the view] way too much,” he said. “It doesn’t fit. It is the worst thing.”

The state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) approved the plan to demolish and replace the 75-year-old drawbridge on May 25.

The approval gave the go-ahead to the state Department of Transportation (DOT) to demolish the existing bridge and construct a new bridge, provided the DOT agreed to conditions set by the DEP.

In the appeal filed on behalf of the citizens’ group, Lieberman said he plans to argue “whether the NJDOT provided enough information to evidence that it will mitigate an adverse impact to the environment and historical landmarks.”

Further, Lieberman said he will question whether rehabilitation of the existing historical bridge should be considered as well as whether the DEP’s approval was supported by the record.

According to the appeal brought on behalf of the municipalities prepared by Bauer, the DEP’s decision violated the state Register of Historic Places Act.

“[The] decision was arbitrary and capricious and not supported by evidence in the record,” Bauer argues in the appeal.

Bauer could not be reached for comment.

Although the appeals were filed separately, Lieberman said the court could decide to hear them together.

“Based on the law,” Lieberman said, “the record is really strong and the state did not consider the things it should have.

“The DOT does this all the time,” he continued, adding, “There are a lot of these bridges that have to be replaced. They have no respect for local cultural aspects.”

Lieberman further said that there are alternative options for the fate of the bridge.

“One,” he said, “is to repair it. Or, two, replace it with an in-kind bridge.

“That is what the community wants,” he added.

The borough councils of Sea Bright and Highlands have passed resolutions opposing the demolition of the existing span and its replacement with a fixed, higher bridge.

In the spring Citizens for Rational Coastal Development formed and retained Lieberman to help block the DOT plan.

The DOT application to the DEP for permission to demolish the bridge was held up because an advisory board of the DEP, the N.J. Historic Sites Council, recommended that the DOT’s request be denied. The council stated that the new bridge, which would be 30 feet higher than the existing span, would have an adverse effect on the views from and to the Twin Lights National Historic Landmark.

The Historic Sites Council also said the permit application failed to show that rehabilitation of the existing bridge would not be “prudent and feasible, thereby avoiding the adverse effects to Twin Lights.”

Lieberman said that in January, the DEP temporarily denied the DOT application and asked for additional information concerning the project.

“They shouldn’t have granted the permit,” Lieberman said. “Their preliminary [decision] to not grant the permit was the right decision.”

Shirley Olman, Highlands resident and co-chairwoman of Citizens for Rational Coastal Development, said Tuesday that the group that represents some 100 Monmouth County residents is opposed to the idea that the bridge cannot be repaired.

“We feel that the DOT decided 10 years ago to replace the bridge and then never did a thing to repair it,” she said.

“We believe the bridge can be repaired,” Olman added.

She also said that her group has requested the DOT’s engineers report that includes the projected costs for repair of the bridge, but has yet to receive it.

She said the group is seeking to protect the bridge and the interests of the community at large.

“This is the first step in changing the character of the northern Jersey Shore,” Olman said. “Many people live here because we like the quaintness of the Jersey Shore.”