Citizens Against Bridge Over U.S. 6
![Pat Moore, with INDOT Real Estate, goes over the plans with Cindy Brown and others. (Photo by Deb Patterson)](https://www.inkfreenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/DSC_6279-e1377865228864-300x201.jpg)
Pat Moore, with INDOT Real Estate, goes over the plans with Cindy Brown and others. (Photo by Deb Patterson)
Lack of police presence to control speeding motorists, relocating a problem intersection from a state road to county roads and inconvenience for residents near that intersection were top comments heard Wednesday night during a U.S. 6/CR 29 bridge proposal public hearing.
The hearing, held at Wawasee High School, was hosted by Indiana Department of Transportation and was about a proposed bridge on CR 29 that would pass over U.S. 6, just north of Syracuse.
The alternatives considered by INDOT were addressed, as were the reasons why those ideas were dismissed reasoning in favor of the preferred bridge. With no access between U.S. 6 and CR 29, Kathryn Smutzer, head designer for INDOT, noted the intersections east and west of CR 29 – SR 13/CR 33 and CR 127 – will operate within INDOT standards.
However, it’s the intersections north and south of the U.S. 6 at CR 29 which were areas of concern. Those intersections are CR 52 to CR 127 on the north side of U.S. 6, and CR 56 to CR 127 to the south.
While there were approximately 30 individuals in attendance, only about half provided comments. Among the 17 who spoke were Max and Marlene Evans, whose property would be affected by the actual construction, and several of those who live at or near the intersections of CR 52 and at CR 56. This is the proposed route people would take to access U.S. 6 if the bridge is constructed. Both intersections are on hills and have slight curves.
Concern from bus drivers in the Fairfield School Corporation, voiced by superintendent Steve Thalheimer, was expressed noting they would be forced to travel in less safe ways and retrace routes which are the last to be cleared from snow and ice in the winter.
Others speaking included a postal carrier, a Syracuse Town Council member and residents who live along or use CR 29 frequently.
All but two of those speaking were opposed to the project, suggesting less expensive alternatives should be reconsidered.
Increased law enforcement, reconsideration of the alternatives which would be less expensive than the bridge were encouraged. There were also suggestions that a flashing light, stop light, four-way stop or rumble strips be added, or that the road should be reconstructed to be straightened out. Many of the people thought those ideas should be tried first before spending the money on a bridge.
“When I heard they were looking at CR 29 and U.S. 6 I thought, ‘Good, they are putting a stop light in to stop injuries’,” said Max Evans who resides just north of the intersection. “But I ended up hearing about the overpass.” Evans noted an overpass would landlock him and those on the other side from accessing U.S. 6.” He added, “Look at a different way. Our country is already broke. Save money. What about turn lanes and a stop light. It’s a lot cheaper than putting in a big bridge.”
Andy Rumfelt, a resident on CR 56, spoke for a number of neighbors on the quiet county road about increased traffic if the project goes through. “CR 56 tees at CR 29. It’s a very dangerous intersection and people have no reason to go down that road. It may become a problem (if access to U.S. 6 at CR 29 is closed).
Dale Grady, a resident of the area, voiced the lack of law enforcement enforcing the speed limit on CR 29. “How many accidents are during the day? How many at night? They all happen during the day, they don’t pay attention. There’s no law enforcement in that area, we’re too far south. You never see a county officer pulling a car over.”
While Grady agreed something needs to be done, he urged putting up traffic lights and encouraging more police presence. “The only time they show up is to serve a warrant … try something simple instead of spending money on something ridiculous,” he said.
Blake Doriot, Elkhart County Surveyor, also spoke reading an email he received from State Rep. David Ober, District 82, which serves part of Elkhart County. The legislator encouraged INDOT to find an equally safer alternative and less expensive solution. He said the problems “… don’t warrant a multi-million dollar bridge.”
Doriot, himself, who has driven that road for over 38 years, said “the major problem is enforcement issues.” He noted while at that intersection with another individual they counted 30 vehicles roll through the intersection, 12 at a fast roll. He’s also heard of approaching motorists shutting off their headlights lights early in the morning to see if any vehicles are coming down U.S. 6 to determine whether they should stop or not.
Realignment of the road and/or traffic signal would be a better option, according to Doriot, as well as asking enforcement to be stepped up by local law enforcement and Indiana State Police.
Tom Gibson a truck driver, was one of the two in favor of the project stating, “The bridge is a lot of money, but how much is one life worth?”
No representatives present from the Elkhart County Sheriff’s Department, Indiana State Police or the three fire departments who respond to calls at that intersection.
It was stressed throughout the meeting that the bridge is only a proposed project and all comments will be considered before a final decision is made.
Rickie Clark, INDOT Office of Pubic Involvement, stated written comments will be taken until Sept. 20 and should be mailed to Indiana Department of Transportation’s Office of Public Involvement 100 N. Senate Ave., Room N642 Indianapolis, IN 46204-2216. Emailed comments can be sent to [email protected].