Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1916-06-26
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Proposed New Bridge Over Mantle
River.

Proposed New Bridge Over Mantle
River.
Mr.. Editor: AS a county taxpayer
and as mayor of the city of Norwich
may call your attention and that of
your readers throughout New London
county to the matter of the proposed
new bridge over tie Mantle river be-
tween the towns of Waterford and
East Lyme. The present bridge over
the Mantle river was originally con-
structed and maintained by private
parties as a toll bridge. By a pro-
ceeding brought under chapter 258 of
the public acts of 1907 it was pur-
chased by the state and made a free
bridge, the state then turning it over
to New London county under this
statute which provides that it shall
belong to and be maintained by and
at the expense Of the county :
and the county commissioners :
shall constitute a board for the care,
maintenance and control of said thigh
way, etc.
AS you may know, this bridge is not
part of any trunk line highway, but
merely of the shore road leading from
New London to Mantle. The through
highway travel is taken care of by the
trunk line state road passing through
the Golden Spur at the mead of the
Mantle river, Flanders, ETC., several
miles north of the shore road. The
present bridge Is located short dis
lance north of the railroad bridge a!
the mouth Of the Mantle river, at What
is practically the narrowest part of the
stream. To the north of it the river
widens rapidly into what is known as
the Mantle cove. The present bridge
is said to be considerably out of re-
pair at the present time, and the wal
department of the federal government
has recently passed an order, am in
formed, requiring that the bridge be
so changed that there will be a 46 feet
| span and feet clear at high water
under it. This would require a slightly
/ longer span and higher elevation thar
at present. The changes are ordered
l to be completed by December, 1917.
AS a result of the situation above
outlined the board of county commits
| sioners has made an investigation, IL
consequence of which, I am told, it in.
tends to recommend That a new bridge
| be built forthwith at point nearl!
| 400 feet north of the present structure
across the cove where the width o
open water is from two and one-hal
to three times as great as at the pres
| ent location. It is claimed that thi
will do away with a curve in the high
way and provide for increased trave
/ over this road expected in futur,
years. To adopt this plan will maxi
the bridge cost the county from SIS, 90
to 800, 900, according to the figure
| submitted to the commissioners by al
engineer, and will also, apprehend
necessitate q change of layout of tn
highway and condemnation of a piec
of land on the east shore of the Gov
for the approach from that end.
/ While I don't know that actual esd
mates are available, it seems a fai
assumption that the slightly increase
elevation and longer span called for b
the governments order could be pro
vided in a new bridge located wher
the old one is now, of one-third Of tn
length OF the proposed structure, a
just about one-third Of the propose
j cost. If this is true, it will mean
saving Of from $50, 900 to $60,0O 70
the county to follow this plan instea
of the one suggested. Furthermore,
will avoid the additional expense an
dinculty of laying out new piece {
highway and the expense OF the con