Cape Cod Rail, Bridges and Highways

Monday morning quarterback, and I'm sure there's a reason we can't do this, because of some benign rule, but if this phasing sequence for Sagamore was truly the only option, they should have rebuilt Bourne first, which looks like it could be built without substantial real estate taking and building 2-spans simultaneous, then moved over to Sagamore, completely closing it using the increased capacity of the new Bourne for 2 summers, max.

A 2-bridge 800-ft replacement project shouldn't take generations.
 
Monday morning quarterback, and I'm sure there's a reason we can't do this, because of some benign rule, but if this phasing sequence for Sagamore was truly the only option, they should have rebuilt Bourne first, which looks like it could be built without substantial real estate taking and building 2-spans simultaneous, then moved over to Sagamore, completely closing it using the increased capacity of the new Bourne for 2 summers, max.

A 2-bridge 800-ft replacement project shouldn't take generations.

The Sagamore Bridge sees considerably higher traffic counts than the Bourne -- hence the focus of getting Sagamore done first.

canalbridgetrafficcounts.jpg


Source: https://www.capecodcommission.org/our-work/traffic-counts/
 
The main span is being built offsite, yes? I presume given the impact to canal traffic, it will be hoisted in a matter of days. This fact makes it all the more perplexing that this will take so long.
 
Earlier this year, MassDOT had refused to disclose payment amounts for the first five homes taken by eminent domain and indicated they may not have to release the costs for years.
MassDOT argued the payments were exempt from disclosure under the state’s public records law. The agency also said publicizing the payouts could hinder negotiations with other property owners and complicate efforts to respect residents’ privacy.
The Globe appealed MassDOT’s decision to the state Supervisor of Records, which said it was “uncertain” whether the agency’s reason for withholding the information complied with public records law. On Thursday, the agency disclosed payments of more than $2.8 million to three property owners on Cecilia Terrace and one on Johns Lane. In an email, a MassDOT lawyer said the agency was disclosing costs because property owners had been paid. Separately, MassDOT paid $1.2 million in January to a fourth homeowner on Cecilia Terrace and $745,000 in February to a property owner on Eleanor Avenue, according to Registry of Deeds and state comptroller records.
A MassDOT spokesperson confirmed those payments to the Globe on Friday. The state paid more than the assessed value for the six homes, which have a combined assessed value of more than $3.5 million, according to Bourne’s online property database.
The Globe did not locate payment records for the five other properties taken by eminent domain. There are three on Johns Lane and one each on Canal Street and Eleanor Avenue.
The eminent domain law is rooted in the Massachusetts Constitution and requires the state to offer owners “reasonable compensation” for their property. In addition to the buyouts, payments could also include relocation and closing costs, and mortgage expenses. In all, officials said they intend to take 13 homes, plus seven vacant properties.
 
(Not accusing you of anything, just the Globe). I do not understand why this is much of a news story, and the framing/headline further makes it sound mildly suspicious when it doesn't appear to be.

The state paying 30% over assessed value seems perfectly reasonable both in terms of not harming the (former) property owners and in terms of "obviously worth it if it avoids a drawn out legal battle". The eminent domain cost appears to be an extremely tiny portion of the overall project cost.
 
(Not accusing you of anything, just the Globe). I do not understand why this is much of a news story, and the framing/headline further makes it sound mildly suspicious when it doesn't appear to be.

The state paying 30% over assessed value seems perfectly reasonable both in terms of not harming the (former) property owners and in terms of "obviously worth it if it avoids a drawn out legal battle". The eminent domain cost appears to be an extremely tiny portion of the overall project cost.

What the Globe has continuously failed to mention in any of its coverage of this long running story is that MassDOT has a clearly defined process for land acquisitions and everything they've done to this point can be traced to their Right of Way Manual.
 
The building in front of MB where Bass Pro Shops was could be costly.

It's such a good deal that I could see some near Ceclia being pissed they aren't getting it. Esp with the bridge being a lot closer to them now.
 

Back
Top