As officials ponder whether to spend at least a year and $1.5 billion more on an already ambitious upgrade of the Vincent Thomas Bridge, locals are asking if the mess they will have to endure during construction will be worth it.
Soon after the California Department of Transportation shared plans to fix up the more than 60-year-old bridge that connects downtown Long Beach to San Pedro and Terminal Island, the Port of Los Angeles piled on with even bigger plans.
Gene Seroka, executive director of the Port of L.A., suggested Caltrans also raise the height of the symbol of the locality by 26 feet.
Raising the bridge would allow larger cargo ships to pass under its deck, helping create jobs and keep the port relevant. It would also increase the project’s price, already projected at more than $700 million, by an additional $1.5 billion.
Most painfully for local commuters and businesses, it would mean the bridge will be closed for around 28 months rather than the originally planned 16 months.
About 40% of the port’s cargo container capacity is beyond the bridge, which is 185 feet high. Raising the bridge to 211 feet would accommodate the next generation of cargo ships, which will be larger and more energy efficient, Seroka said.
“You’re going to need more capacity at the nation’s largest port,” he said. “Caltrans was looking to resurface the bridge and we thought maybe there was a way you could accomplish both.”
Seroka said he has already secured private funding from banks and industry participants to raise the bridge by putting sleeve lifts and platforms on the bridge’s legs.
The Bayonne Bridge connecting Staten Island, N.Y., and Bayonne, N.J., was raised in a similar manner in 2019.
While the Port of Los Angeles has garnered support for the idea, many communities surrounding the bridge have raised concerns about travel disruptions and the effect of rerouted traffic.
Closing the bridge for more than two years would require an alternative route for cargo trucks traveling to and from the port, and would likely affect tourism across San Pedro and Long Beach.
“It’s not only for employees going back and forth through the port complex,” said Elise Swanson, president of the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce. “The bridge is really a connection to our communities for art, culture, dining.”
In August, the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce voted to support a study of the effects of raising the bridge.
Swanson said she saw the merits of raising the bridge while acknowledging the disruption the project would have, particularly to Wilmington residents, where truck traffic would be rerouted.
Preliminary detour routes would send commuters, tourists and cargo through Harry Bridges Boulevard in Wilmington and on the 110 and 405 freeways.
“We’re all in agreement on the study and getting all the facts in front of us,” Swanson said. “If we’re going to go through all of this work and spend this money on fixing the current bridge, is that really a good expenditure of funds if the bridge won’t meet future needs for the shipping industry?”
Caltrans is expected to decide on the bridge raising in October, following a late September meeting with the Port of Los Angeles. The $706 million re-decking project is slated to begin next year and will also replace the bridge railings, fences and median barrier.
Los Angeles City Councilmember Tim McOsker, who represents port-adjacent communities including Wilmington, Harbor City and San Pedro, said he supports raising the bridge as long as it is safe and takes locals’ needs into account.
“In the years that it would take to come up with the plans, the financing and the environmental review for raising the bridge, we have to think about the traveling public in the meantime,” he said.
Under its original plans, Caltrans hoped to reopen the bridge to traffic in late 2027 or early 2028, in time for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles.
If the bridge is raised, it would likely not be done before the Olympics, making it harder for the tourists to visit that corner of Los Angeles.
The Pacific Merchant Shipping Assn., which represents marine terminal operators, says raising the bridge is worth the trouble.
“We would like to see the bridge’s useful life increased,” Pacific Merchant Shipping Assn. President Michael Jacob said of the Vincent Thomas Bridge, which opened in 1963.
Increasing the port’s capacity and ability to accommodate larger ships would boost job opportunities by about 20% for longshoremen, truckers, warehouse workers and terminal operators, Seroka said. The newest and largest container ships are also the most environmentally friendly, he said.
Caltrans declined to comment on its decision-making process regarding the bridge raising and directed questions about the bridge to the Port of L.A.
“Caltrans is focused on delivering a needed bridge deck replacement project and is collaborating with our partners on those efforts,” the department said in a statement.
McOsker said his constituents are waiting on a decision.
“Making the bridge higher with a greater clearance is really important to industry and the workforce, but it also has significant time implications and significant cost implications,” McOsker said. “Caltrans will have to speak for themselves.”
The post A bridge too far? Vincent Thomas plans put Port of L.A. at odds with locals appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
