The purpose of this page is to provide basic facts related to controversial project issues. Please also consult the "News Releases" page for current information.

Bridge Controversy

Residents of St. Bernard Parish have expressed serious concerns with the proposed bridges at St. Claude and Claiborne Ave. We have recommended replacement-in-kind for these crossings. They disagree with the impacts that were identified in our Evaluation Report. Our analysis showed that the bridges would have to be raised fewer times with the project in place than existing conditions, but the duration of the openings would be slightly longer. The St. Bernard residents, based on their analyses, predict more openings and much longer durations. The St. Bernard residents have requested, through the Congressional delegation, that we investigate the use of tunnels and higher bridges at these locations. We had studied higher bridges (high-rise, fixed span) at both these locations previously and had determined that they would have significant impacts to the neighborhoods along the canal. In addition, any higher bridge, even a mid-rise at St. Claude Ave. would have impacts to the nationally recognized historic districts on both sides of the canal at that location. However, we never investigated a mid-rise bridge at Claiborne Ave. This alternative may not cause significant impacts as the other higher bridge alternatives were expected to cause. Therefore, we have awarded a contract to Modjeski & Masters for studies of a mid-rise bridge at this location. This bridge would be a higher mid-rise bridge than the existing one and provide more vertical clearance under the bridge than what was being proposed previously, a replacement-in-kind bridge.

We contracted with URS Corporation, through one of our existing Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contracts, to investigate the feasibility and costs of tunnels at each of these crossings. They determined that tunnel construction in this area was feasible, but identified many impacts to the surrounding areas and determined that the costs of tunnels would be about $150-200 million more than the bridges being proposed. The study was completed in December 2001 at a cost of $170,000. We are performing in-house studies on the real estate, utility relocations, operation and maintenance, and mitigation costs associated with the tunnel alternatives. In addition, we are developing the benefits to the vehicular and navigation traffic associated with the fewer delays resulting from the tunnels. A supplemental Evaluation Report will be prepared documenting all of the studies on this issue and is scheduled for completion in September 2002.

Coordination with the New Orleans Regional Planning Commission, who has traffic models of the area, is ongoing to update our traffic data. We are also working with the La. Department of Transportation and Development and the Port of New Orleans, the owners of the two bridges, and the various navigation interests in the area on this issue. We are working with our Engineering Research and Development Center (formerly the Waterways Experiment Station) on physical and computer simulation models to study this issue.
 

Partnering with the Port of New Orleans
 
A supplement to the March 1997 Evaluation Report was approved in September 2000 that provides for cost sharing of the deep-draft increment of the lock construction. The cost share formula is 65% Corps appropriations and 35% Port of New Orleans funds. With this change, the Port has agreed to accept the Corps valuation of port property required for project construction.

• The Port of New Orleans granted a Right-of-Entry for construction in November 2000.


• A Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) (526 kb, pdf format) with the Port has been completed.

 

Lawsuits Against the Project
 
Four lawsuits were filed in 2000. All four have been dismissed.

• April 2000, Federal Judge dismissed ACORN's first lawsuit - Environmental Justice & Section 4.f. issues.


• May 2000 lawsuits by ACORN, ACLU and ACT - Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) issues related to Community-Based Mitigation Committee.
  • July 2000, Federal Judge denied motion to dismiss, no hearing set.
  • January-April 2001, All three complaints dismissed at the plaintiffs' request.

 

Lock/St. Claude Bridge on Endangered List
 
The Louisiana Preservation Alliance recently named the IHNC Lock and the St. Claude Bridge as one of the "Ten Most Endangered Historic Sites in Louisiana."

The New Orleans District has completed comprehensive cultural resource investigations of the potentially affected area of the project. These studies have identified both direct and indirect effects on historic properties including the St. Claude Bridge, IHNC Lock, Galvez Street Wharf, Holy Cross Historic District, and Bywater Historic District.

The New Orleans District entered into a memorandum of agreement signed by the New Orleans District, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the Louisiana State Historic Preservation Officer. Signature of this memorandum of agreement on October 5, 2000 completed Corps of Engineers compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

The MOA specified that the Corps of Engineers will so far as possible avoid adverse impacts on the Bywater and Holy Cross historic districts. The Corps of Engineers is now preparing historic preservation plans for Bywater and Holy Cross historic districts to meet one of the elements of the MOA.

Construction of the project requires destruction of the IHNC Lock, St. Claude Bridge and Galvez Street Wharf. These historic properties are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The mitigation for these impacts to the St. Claude Bridge, IHNC Lock, and Galvez Street Wharf is documentation to the standards of the Historic American Engineering Record. This is a standard procedure followed throughout the United States and includes a historical study and photographic documentation. This documentation has been completed.

We will continue to implement the requirements of the MOA and to fulfill our historic preservation responsibilities.