Donegal Twp. family frustrated with bridge project
DONEGAL TWP — The Rabbitt family has called the rolling hills of Rattigan Road near Buffalo Creek in Donegal Township home since the 1800s.
An intersecting road was even named for the family. Rabbitt Road runs parallel with the creek on its northeast bank before veering to the east and terminating at East Slippery Rock Road.
Tom Rabbitt owns two acres at the intersection of Rattigan and Rabbitt roads, once the site of the 60-acre family farm.
Various family members own other chunks of the old farm on both sides of the creek.
Now, the family says it is in a frustrating stalemate with the township and state Department of Transportation over the impact to two Rabbitt properties after the bridge spanning the Buffalo Creek was replaced.
While the new $1.54 million bridge was a township project, the Federal Highway Administration funded 80 percent of the project. PennDOT provided 15 percent and served as a consultant on the bridge's construction, according to Joshua Kaufer, PennDOT District 10 press officer.
The county provided $51,594 from the new $5 addition to registration fees, and the township funded $25,649 of the project, according to the county.
One complaint voiced by Rabbitt is that neither PennDOT nor the three township supervisors have sufficiently communicated with the family regarding plans for the bridge or how it would affect their property.
Floyd Zang, vice chairman of the board of supervisors and township roadmaster, said he understands Rabbitt's frustration with issues caused by the bridge project.
He said the supervisors met with PennDOT officials Friday regarding the drainage issues on the Rabbitt property.
“As of right now, the engineers and PennDOT are putting together some changes to try to make things right,” Zang said.
Both Rattigan and Rabbitt roads were raised at the intersection as a result of the bridge project, which engineers told Rabbitt was necessary to comply with PennDOT grade standards.
The work elevated the road surface above the driveway and yard, which eliminated Rabbitt's multicar driveway on Rattigan Road and created a bowl along his and his brother's property on Rabbitt Road that has flooded his one-car garage so badly that items have floated away in heavy rain.Two storm drains were installed at the intersection, and a pipe was added under the small gravel driveway placed on Rabbitt's property by the bridge crew.A video Rabbitt recorded during a heavy rainstorm on the day the bridge was opened last fall shows the flooding near the one-stall garage, bone-dry storm drains and no water flowing through the pipe installed under his driveway.He said crews blocked the ditch and filled in the culvert that efficiently channeled stormwater into the creek for decades.Zang said the bridge was raised 12 inches from its former height, which caused the road surface to be raised near the Rabbitt property.“We're well aware of that,” Zang said.But he said state requirements have changed over the years, and construction must conform to those requirements.“There are issues the township isn't satisfied with there, but that's the way the specs are and the way (the bridge project) was designed,” Zang said. “I feel we are trying to do the best we can with his hardships.”Rabbitt said the roads' rights of way around his property were changed from 33 to 52 feet, which required the taking of some of his property through eminent domain.“They basically stole my property,” Rabbitt said.Mike Gallagher, Donegal Township solicitor, said Rabbitt was paid for the “two slivers” of land that were taken for the project.Regarding communication, Gallagher said the supervisors understand the Rabbitts have had problems with transparency on the impact to their property.“The township said they would make it a point to communicate with Mr. Rabbitt (regarding the bridge) as construction went on,” Gallagher said.He recalled a contractor testifying at a condemnation hearing was able to list several appointments he had with the Rabbitts during the bridge's construction.“He just pulled out his calendar,” Gallagher said.
Rabbitt said traffic problems have arisen at the bridge since its opening in October.While motorists carefully entered the old, more narrow bridge, he said vehicles now speed down the hill and across the new, wider bridge. A speeding truck crashed and rolled over at the bridge in November, marking the first accident the Rabbitts have seen there.Rabbitt, who put up two official-looking “Corruption Bridge” street signs on either side of Rattigan Road near the span, said the whole fight could have been avoided if the bridge had been placed downstream on the creek to the south, which would also have eliminated a bend on Rattigan Road.He said PennDOT points the finger at the Federal Highway Administration's requirements, while the township points the finger at PennDOT, and no state representatives he has written to have replied about the impact of the bridge project.Rabbitt is also irked that engineers never approached him to discuss the project's design with the family, who saw the plans for the first time only two years ago at a public meeting to present the plans for the bridge.“I'm not the general public,” Rabbitt said. “I was the one impacted by this.”Rabbitt said he wants his property repaired so it drains properly.“The big thing is how poorly the family has been treated throughout the process and continues to be treated,” Rabbitt said. “They frankly didn't care how we were impacted.”Rabbitt said he wishes the old bridge had been repaired or the new bridge had been placed on vacant property he owns downstream.“I would have given them the land,” he said.Gallagher agreed with Zang that the township supervisors have been working with PennDOT to address the problems and communicating with the family on issues that arose from the bridge project.“The Rabbitts have been fighting the bridge for years despite the supervisors trying to help out and work with them,” Gallagher said.
