Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Christian Hill Bridge topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press to preserve Christian Hill Road bridge as Selectmen weigh funding and project implications
Summary
Two petition articles — one to delay replacement and one to preserve the Christian Hill Road bridge — prompted lengthy public testimony; supporters argued for preservation and historic funding opportunities while staff warned a delay could jeopardize state and federal grant funding tied to the current project schedule.
Two petition warrant articles concerning the historic Christian Hill Road bridge over the Ashkelott Rail Trail drew extended public comment at the Jan. 13 Select Board meeting.
Speaker 5 read Petition Article 15, which would delay removal and replacement of the town-owned bridge for one year and authorize the Selectmen to appoint a study committee to report by Oct. 2026. Petition Article 16, also read for the public record, would direct voters to preserve the historic bridge in its current location.
John Trainor, who introduced himself as a long-time Swansea resident and artist, delivered an extended testimony in favor of preservation. Trainor recounted the bridge’s 2014 closure, a 2018 federal historic designation and a prior committee process that he said recommended replacement with a concrete culvert. He said residents do not favor a culvert and advocated exploring funding and technical programs that have supported historic-bridge projects elsewhere. "Once you destroy something, it doesn't come back," Trainor said, urging the board to support preservation.
Board members and speakers asked practical questions about the implications of passing either or both petition articles, including whether a preservation vote would require funding for restoration and whether delaying the project could cause the town to lose time-limited state or federal funds. Speakers noted that substantial engineering work and grant obligations are already in place and that some funding streams tied to the current schedule run through 2026; public works staff warned postponing the project could imperil grant-funded engineering and other payments.
Several residents and petitioners said they have pursued potential alternate funding sources, including historic-bridge programs, and one speaker referenced federal timber-for-transit funding opportunities. The board explained that petition warrant wording can be amended at the deliberative session but that the subject of a petition article cannot be removed; deliberative amendments cannot change the fundamental intent.
The discussion left open several factual questions — including potential costs to preserve the bridge in place, exact grant deadlines and the technical feasibility of repair versus replacement — and staff noted the ripple effect for the rail-trail washout repair plan if the Christian Hill bridge is not relocated for reuse. The board closed the public-comment portion and scheduled further hearings and deliberative sessions where voters will consider the petition articles.
