Advertisement

Replacing Half of S.F. Bay Bridge Endorsed

Share
<i> From Associated Press</i>

The image of cars plunging off a broken section of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge after the 1989 earthquake continues to haunt state officials who, on Thursday, endorsed tearing down half the span.

“To best ensure the safety of motorists and the economic integrity of the Bay Area and the state, we should proceed with the construction of a new high-tech bridge to replace the aging Bay Bridge,” Gov. Pete Wilson said in Sacramento.

The new single-level eastern span would stretch two miles from Oakland to the Yerba Buena Island tunnel, replacing the double-deck stretch, which carries an average of 280,000 cars a day.

Advertisement

Along with seismic strengthening of the more secure western span, the cost would hit at least $1.5 billion.

Who will pay for it remains a sticky point.

Wilson has agreed to use $500 million in state highway funds for the project, and a doubling of all Bay Area tolls to $2, except for on the Golden Gate Bridge, seems inevitable.

More money may be needed, and any sources ultimately may be determined in Sacramento.

The push to retrofit came after a 50-foot section of the bridge collapsed after the Loma Prieta quake on the San Andreas fault. But the real threat to the eastern span is from shaking along the Hayward fault in the East Bay.

The structure must be able to withstand a magnitude 7.25 temblor on that fault, the California Department of Transportation says.

Caltrans Director James van Loben Sels made the case for a new bridge at a news conference Thursday in Oakland.

The favored option, called the skyway, would consist of two five-lane bridges set side-by-side, with wider lanes and more emergency space than the current bridge. Depending on public response, the bridge could open in seven years.

Advertisement

Retrofitting the east span would cost $909 million, while building the skyway would come in at $1 billion, Caltrans estimates. Retrofitting the old section during construction, tearing it down afterward and study costs raise the difference to $200 million.

Advertisement