By Amy Batista, Special Writer
HIGHTSTOWN – Nobody is walking anywhere very quickly. A lot of the update on the walking bridge was more of the same – it’s still in hurry-up-and-wait mode.
“Henry (Underhill) contacted Arun Kumar of the NJDOT who is leading this effort for the borough asking him what was the schedule,” said Borough Engineer Carmela Roberts at the May 2 council meeting. “It’s a lot of paperwork and it takes a lot of time. The DOT doesn’t want to tell us what’s happening.”
The idea for a new pedestrian bridge was first proposed by Taylor Bell when she was 9 years old. The Greenway Walking Bridge Committee – which has ranged in the number of members from 6-12 during the past three years – started meeting in April 2010. It gave careful attention to the aesthetics of the design due to the historic significance of the bridge, which is located at the very spot where John and Mary Hight founded Hightstown in the early 1700s.
The committee set up fundraisers for the bridge project but fell short of its goal. The committee raised approximately $75,000 and spent about $60,000 on the design and the permitting process.
Noting that residents wanted a new pedestrian bridge, the council got involved in the project, but has faced multiple challenges including Hurricane Irene, which caused delays. Then, during an inspection of the dam, the borough found that the bridge was built too low in the 1920s. The borough would have to make changes to the original design as the bridge would have to be re-established outside its original footings in order to get the height needed to meet ADA compliance.
The original walking bridge was a central part of Hightstown landscape history for almost 100 years, but as it aged it presented a safety hazard. The bridge was removed several years ago. The current pedestrian path is in close proximity to traffic on a heavily traveled section of Main Street (Route 33).
Rebuilding the Peddie Lake Dam Pedestrian Bridge is expected to facilitate pedestrian traffic in downtown Hightstown by connecting downtown businesses and shopping areas, the library and Memorial Park with residential areas.
Ms. Roberts said that the borough has been working on the porject since last fall.
“We’ve submitted an application to the State Historic Preservation Office,” she said. “We’ve submitted a permit to the NJDOT. We’ve made submissions to all utilities that could be affected in the area.”
The borough has also made contact with Dam Safety in order to do this work and has submitted the formal package to the NJDOT, which included a cover letter, two pages long, of the documentation that was required.
“We had to update the drawings, we had to modify the specifications, we had to add into it all the federal requirements,” said Ms. Roberts.
She said that all of the required documentation has been with the state since January.
“We submitted more in February,” she said, adding that the borough recently got an email response in early April, which officials responded to a couple weeks later.
Once again, NJDOT is asking for additional information, she said.
“Most recently they wanted to know do we have a set of plans for the bridge that was previously constructed and would we provide a date for when the original bridge was constructed,” she said. “Do we have any photos of the bridge? Can we provide the difference in impervious cover?”
She said as the state keeps asking for information and the borough responds quickly.
“I don’t get as good as an answer as Henry gets when will we hear something,” said Ms. Roberts. “We’ve sent numerous emails and we leave phone messages but Arun has not ever responded to us directly.”
Council member Steven Misiura questioned if NJDOT approval was the last step.
“That’s right,” Ms. Roberts said. “The NJDOT is the agency that required us to go to the State Historic Preservation Office and utilities, so yes. They will ultimately give the borough the authorization to advertise.”
Cranbury resident and Greenway Walking Bridge Committee member Darek Hahn questioned clarification on the spec changes on the bridge so he could report those back to the committee.
“There’s a reference to specs being changed,” said Mr. Hahn. “They’re always really nervous about changing all the work that they did. I’m assuming it’s just minor changes.”
“The only changes that were to comply with the federal requirements and those are contractual things,” said Ms. Roberts. “Nothing’s been changed to the bridge.”
