The Buffalo News

CITIZENS PANEL PUTS SENSE INTO BRIDGE PROCESS

Published on April 3, 2000
Author:    DONN ESMONDE
© The Buffalo News Inc.

THEIR MOANS could be heard clear across the non-signature span.

The Public Bridge Authority groused loud and long Friday about the citizens panel that a day earlier slapped down the idea of twinning the Peace Bridge. Instead, the panel recommended a single six-lane bridge, preferably concrete and a lot better looking than the steel twins. The citizens panel wasn't supposed to tell us what kind of bridge it wanted, griped the authority's Victor Martucci. Now this thing may drag out for another year or more -- depending on an upcoming court decision -- groused the authority's Earl Rowe.

What they didn't say is, if they had truly acted like a Public Bridge Authority -- emphasis on Public -- over the years, we wouldn't be in this mess.

The citizens group -- the Public Consensus Review Panel -- did in the past eight months what the Public Bridge Authority, a k a the Peace Bridge Authority, should have done in the past eight years: took a long, hard look at various bridge and plaza options; kicked open the door to public comment (it held eight public hearings over seven months) and looked at the latest bridge technology -- which is about concrete and cable, not rust-prone steel.

In other words, the review panel gave this the imagination, foresight and public consideration the Public Bridge Authority should have given us.

The citizens panel said we can do better than what the authority wants: the same kind of steel bridge as the geriatric, uninspiring, needs-repair relic we've got, running into a too-small plaza in an Olmsted park.

Only recently did the authority even consider jettisoning the wart-ugly Peace Bridge truss for a matching arch to its proposed twin. It was a small step, not a giant leap.

"A (signature) six-lane bridge is the best decision for the next 100 years," said Judy Fisher, the county legislator on the citizens panel. "We came to this with an open mind, and a lot of us changed our minds."

The authority didn't like it.

"It's not like we closed the doors one day," said Martucci, in defense of the evil twin, "and said let's come up with the ugliest bridge we can."

No. But that's the way it turned out.

It was plain to anybody who checked out the 3-D virtual-reality bridges the past few weeks at UB's computer center. The twin bridge, compared with a six-lane signature bridge, looks like an old slipper next to a Gucci high heel.

Frankly, the 3-D display was the clincher for me. I was on the other side early on. But as each authority half-truth came to light, as more people saw the proposed twin as a symbol of mediocrity, I shifted the other way.

It's no surprise the 10-member authority came up with what it did. For generations, the authority -- at least the American half -- was run like a laid-back Sunday school. Repair the bridge, collect the tolls, don't worry be happy. Americans on the authority were a collection of career bureaucrats and political animals -- including, at one point, not just the county's Democratic Party boss, but also the wife of the ex-boss. When truck traffic amped up after free trade hit in the late '80s, they grabbed the obvious, uninspired solution to a too-narrow bridge: a duplicate.

Had they gone deeper back then, they might have seen what the citizens panel saw: You can build a grander, better, lower-maintenance bridge than the exact twins for less money in about the same time.

"The community decided that the (authority) process was broken; that's what led to the (review panel)," said Kevin Gaughan, the citizen activist who's on the city's bridge task force. "That's why (the panel review decision) was huge. The community took back the power."

The laughable irony is that the authority complained about the process the citizens panel followed. That's like "Stone Cold" Steve Austin saying the other guy fights dirty.

Process? It was only with the review panel that we got a real process.

The authority's Steve Mayer admitted Friday what everybody already knew: The authority decided to twin the Peace Bridge six years ago. Suggestions otherwise since then were circular-filed. Alternative-design bridge charettes have been charades.

"The decision was made (in 1994) that the Peace Bridge was in good condition," said Mayer. "We excluded (considering) a six-lane bridge because it didn't make any sense to us to take the Peace Bridge down."

That's the same bridge, by the way, that needs $25 million in repairs.

The twin span might have gone down with no fuss. But some spoke out years ago, and Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan signed on. Then the New Millennium Group, mainly young white-collar types, saw in the twin bridge a symbol of a half-century of boneheaded moves. The snowball was rolling.

This week, it rolled up to the Public Bridge Authority's door.
<
Search again: