Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
118565086
label
[Public Works] - The Southern Crossing - A Brief Report, February 1971
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118565086
contentType
document
title
[Public Works] - The Southern Crossing - A Brief Report, February 1971
identifierLocal
840
collections
Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit
Reports
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118565086
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-12-31
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1967-01-01
year
1967
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
f13f1ef982b371e5
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers, 1966-74: Press Unit Folder Title: [Public Works] - The Southern Crossing - A Brief Report, February 1971 Box: P38 To see more digitized collections visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ THE FEBRUARY 1971 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS A BRIEF REPORT SAN RAFAEL RICHMOND 680 80 101 WALNUT CREEK 24 OAKLAND 680 SAN ALAMEDA FRANCISCO 280 1 17 580 280 SOUTHERN CROSSING 580 112 HAYWARD N Legislative 4 Route 101 61 1 17 280 238 SAN MATEO THE SOUTHERN CROSSING IS A 1. Toll bridge project across San Francisco Bay which is currently underway. 2. Vital addition to the Bay Area regional highway system. THE ISSUE: SHOULD THE SOUTHERN CROSSING BE DELAYED TO 1. Reevaluate the need after the initiation of BART transbay service. 2. Determine its effect on the patronage of the BART system. 3. Study its effect on the Bay Area environment. - THESE QUESTIONS WILL BE ANSWERED IN A GENERAL DISCUSSION WHICH INCLUDES A. Need. B. History of development and current status. C. Project cost, financing and schedule. D. Effect on the environment. E. Cost of delay. F. Conclusions. A. NEED THE SOUTHERN CROSSING IS NEEDED BECAUSE 1. Present traffic congestion on the Bay Bridge is intolerable. 2. Increase in traffic demand is inevitable due to Bay Area growth. 3. The addition of BART alone will not satisfy future transbay demand. 4. Redistribution of Bay Bridge traffic is essential to the regional highway system. TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ON BAY BRIDGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ARE 1. Current daily traffic - 165,000 + vehicles. 2. Comfortable capacity -- 125,000 vehicles. 3. High volume days exceed 200,000 vehicles. DURING PEAK TRAFFIC PERIODS 1. Extreme morning and evening congestion extends for 2-3 hours. 2. Any mishap results in complete stoppage and long delays. 3. Freeway approaches and city streets are blocked. 4. Congestion costs bridge users 1.4 million hours per year. THIS OCCURS EVEN THOUGH BUSES NOW CARRY 53% OF COMMUTERS. THE BRIDGE HAS 1. Substandard lanes - width less than 12 ft., No shoulders. 2. Increasing accident rate. 3. Inadequate capacity to permit lane closures for maintenance. 4 INEVITABLE BAY AREA GROWTH IS INDICATED BY PROJECTIONS OF 1. Population 2. Employment THE RESULT IS INCREASED TRAVEL DEMAND. BAR CHART BELOW SHOWING PROJECTED GROWTH FROM 1970 TO 1990 IN POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT FOR EACH COUNTY INDICATES - Employment will substantially increase in all Bay Area counties with large population increases in all counties except San Francisco - Result will be increased "home to work" demand for transbay travel NEW CROSSING IS NEEDED TO PROVIDE FOR THESE INCREASES POPULATION - EMPLOYMENT POPULATION-EMPLOYMENT 1990 - 1970 1970 POPULATION - EMPLOYMENT # Census figure 1 CONTRA COSTA ALAMEDA SAN MATEO SAN FRANCISCO CAN THE BAY BRIDGE AND BART SATISFY FUTURE TRANSBAY TRAVEL DEMAND? EFFECT OF BART ON BAY BRIDGE CAN BE DETERMINED FROM TRAFFIC ESTIMATES SAME EXPERTS WHO DEVELOPED BART FEASIBILITY PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION BART WILL 1. Divert only 10% of Bay Bridge autos - 3 to 5 years normal growth on bridge - ALL experts agree on these estimates 2. Carry 58% to 62% of the peak hour commuters - Existing bus system now carries 53% 3. Not service commercial traffic THEREFORE THE BAY BRIDGE WILL REMAIN CONGESTED EVEN WITH BART IN SERVICE 6 NUMEROUS TRAFFIC ESTIMATES HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE EFFECTS OF BART - Close agreement between studies on percentage diversion - BART will divert 10% or 3 to 5 years growth on Bay Bridge - No other known traffic studies to the contrary THE SOUTHERN CROSSING WILL 1. Divert 36% of Bay Bridge traffic demand Future volumes will be 1980 1990 Bay Bridge 129,000 vehicles/day 154,000 vehicles/day Southern Crossing 90,000 " " 140,000 " " 2. Not compete for BART patronage - diverts only 4% from BART transbay service. - serves areas not convenient to BART. - has insignificant effect on BART system revenues. THE BAY BRIDGE, BART AND THE SOUTHERN CROSSING ARE ALL NEEDED TO MEET FUTURE TRANSBAY TRAVEL REQUIREMENTS 7 AN ADDITIONAL CORRIDOR FOR TRANSBAY TRAFFIC IS ESSENTIAL BECAUSE 1. Bay Bridge congestion causes tie-ups and delays on connecting highways and city streets. 2. Current out-of-direction travel is expensive to private and commercial bridge users. 3. There is no reasonable alternative route in case of a major accident to the Bay Bridge. 8 B. HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT AND CURRENT STATUS THE PROJECT'S DEVELOPMENT HAS INCLUDED 1. Numerous transbay studies over the past 25 years. 2. A $450,000 Report in 1966 recommending the India Basin-Alameda alignment. 3. Adoption of this alignment by the Toll Bridge Authority in 1966. 4. Legislature's appropriation of $10,000,000 for planning, design and right of way. 5. The Legislature's direction of concurrent construction of Southern Crossing and BART. SOUTHERN CROSSING AND RELATED STUDIES SINCE 1946 1. An Additional Crossing of San Francisco Bay 11. Southern Crossing of San Francisco Bay Joint Army-Navy Board, January 1947 Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, October 1956 2. Preliminary Studies for an Additional Bridge Across 12. Southern Crossing of San Francisco Bay San Francisco Bay Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, December 1957 Division of Highways, January 1947 13. Report on Financial Feasibility of the Proposed 3. Additional Toll Crossings of San Francisco Bay Southern Crossing of San Francisco Bay Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, November 1948 Smith, Barney & Co. March 1958 4. Report on San Francisco Bay Vehicular Crossings 14. Transbay Tube Consultants to Assembly Fact Finding Committee, June 1949 Consultants for San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, July 1958 5. Report on Additional Toll Crossings of San Francisco Bay as Proposed by Consultants to Assembly Interim Committee 15. Bay Area Rapid Transit Composite Report Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, October 1949 Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel, May 1962 6. Barriers in the San Francisco Bay System 16. Transbay Traffic Study Division of Water Resources, March 1955 Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, November 1962 7. Southern Crossing of San Francisco Bay 17. Southern Crossing Report Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, December 1954 Division of Bay Toll Crossings, February 1966 8. Southern Crossing of San Francisco Bay 18. Preliminary Regional Plan Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, December 1955 Association of Bay Area Governments, November 1966 9. Southern Crossing of San Francisco Bay, Supplementary Report 19. Northern California Transit Demonstration Project Report Division of San Francisco Bay Toll Crossings, March 1956 Simpson & Curtin, October 1967 10. Report on Financial Feasibility of the Proposed 20. Bay Area Transportation Report Southern Crossing of San Francisco Bay Bay Area Transportation Study Commission, May 1969 Smith, Barney & Co. , September 1956 ROADWAY PROFILE ONE EXC **** -1%1 1200' VALLEJO MMNM MAIN CHANNEL NAVIGATIONAL CLEARANCE NO SCALE SAN RAFAEL GROVE-SHAFTER RICHMOND FREEWAY BRIDGE INI) BAY LAKE MERRITT OAKLAND $ 2 SAN SHORELINE SOUTHERN CROSSING FRANCISCO FREEWAY EXTENSION OAKLAND PACIFIC ND INNE R OCEAN HAYWARD ALAMEDA NAVAL SAN MATED FRANCISCO AIR STATION HARBOR ATLANTIC AVE, NIVA WEBSTER VICINITY MAP OMILER SAN JCSE 1S PACIFIC AVE. ALAMEDA SAN FRANCISCO LEMENAL in NOISW31X3 SAN LEANDRO DAY NIMITZ FREEWAY TOLL PLAZA HUNTERS MAIN BAY FARM ISLAND PLAN CHANNEL MICARTNEY HUNTERS HUNT TERS BIRTH NEE SOUTHERN CROSSING POINT 2000 4000 6000 PEET STATE or CALIFORNIA CARLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DAVIS DIVISION OF DAY TOLL CROSSINGS - Inventions THE PROJECT IS NOW 1. In the 5th year of major design with contract plans well underway. - Nearly $7,000,000 has been spent to date - Right of Way understandings have been reached with the involved agencies and interests. - Permits have been obtained from BCDC and the Corps of Engineers. A Coast Guard permit is pending for the main channel crossing. 2. Included in the plans of all regional and local agencies - BCDC Bay Plan - BATS Committed Regional Highway System - ABAG Preliminary Regional Plan - Master Plans of local agencies DESIGN OF MAIN CHANNEL CROSSING CABLE STAYED GIRDER - DIAMOND TOWER C. PROJECT COST, FINANCING AND SCHEDULE FINANCING FACTS: 1. The Southern Crossing, a vital element of the Regional Highway System, will be financed from toll revenue supplemented by gas tax funds for planned connecting highways. 2. Historically, revenue bonds from user tolls finance expensive Bay crossing construction. MAJOR ELEMENTS OF PROJECT COST TOTALS 1. Main Channel Crossing $186 million Ramps to Hunters Point Freeway Main Channel spans Toll Plaza 2. Alameda-Oakland Section $142 million Alameda Trestle Toll Revenue Funds $328 million Alameda Viaduct Estuary Tube 3. Bay Farm Island-San Leandro Approach $ 69 million Bay Farm Island Trestle San Leandro Approach Route 112 (Davis St. Expressway) Highway Funds $ 6.9 million Project Total $397 million 11 1800'VE ROADWAY PROFILE THE are E.V.C -3%1 1800' WALLEJO OZZ MHAM MAIN CHANNEL NAVIGATIONAL CLEARANCE NO SCALE SAN RAPAIL RICHRIOND FRANCISCO BAY BRIDGE that 000 SECURITY 000 LAKE MERRITT OAKLAND S N SAM FRANCISCO SOUTHERN CANNER SHORELINE FREEWAY EXTENSION OAKLAND PACIFIC SAN all OCEAN names ALAMEDA NAVAL HARBOR # SAB STATED AIR STATION AVE. VICINITY MAP MAIN pmsse - - is PACIFIC AVE. ALAMEDA SAN FRANCISCO by NOISHBIXI ATMENT BAY $186,000,000 CROSSING NUMBER SAN LEANDRO DAY TOLL PLAZA MAIN PLAN CHANNEL SAN $69 BAY FARM At APPROACH ISLAND HUNTERS SEAL 000 000 - SOUTHERN CROSSING THE POINT 2000 PRY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLINE INTERNATIONAL AMPORT DEPARTMENT OF PUCLIC INCEIVE DIVISION OF - TOLL CROSSINGS TOLL CROSSING FACILITY PROJECT COST DEFINITIVE FINANCING PLAN WILL BE DEVELOPED AT TIME OF TOLL REVENUE BOND SALE. IT MUST INCLUDE 1. Final traffic estimate by consultants 2. Required toll schedule on crossing 3. Expected interest rates 4. Current priority of gas tax funds PREVIOUS APPLICATION OF BAY BRIDGE TOLL REVENUE FUNDS 1. Original construction - 1932-1936 $ 73 million 2. Expansion of Bridge -- 1957-1966 $ 42 million 3. Reconstruction of the San Mateo-Hayward Bridge -- 1965-1970 $ 70 million 4. BART Transbay Tube -- 1965-1970 $180 million ALL FUNDS DEDICATED TO PROVIDING FOR THE TRANSBAY TRAFFIC DEMAND NOW, THE SOUTHERN CROSSING AND DUMBARTON BRIDGE THE PROJECT SCHEDULE IS TO 1. Complete design of major sections during the next two years. 2. Begin construction in 1972. 3. Open for transbay traffic in 1976. 4. Complete freeway approaches by 1978-1980. 12 D. EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT The Crossing will have no adverse effect on the Bay Area environment. Among the factors considered were: 1. AIR QUALITY - Crossing will reduce traffic congestion, shorten transbay trips and reduce air pollution. - Crossing will not increase the number of autos in the Bay Area. Such an increase is primarily a function of growth of the area. " - South Bay Crossing would have little effect on general air pollution in the Bay Area. " Air Resources Board 2. TIDAL FLOW, SILTATION AND WATER QUALITY - Entire Crossing on structure to minimize effects. - Effects on tidal flow too small to measure in Corps of Engineer's Bay Model. - Additional model studies are required by BCDC permit and will insure no adverse effects in these areas. 13 3. NAVIGATION AND RECREATIONAL BOATING - Location and size of navigation openings are adequate to meet the needs of shipping and planned marinas in the area. - Shallow water depth off Alameda restricts large sail boats to established channels where openings are provided. - Main channel crossing includes over two miles of high level structure with adequate clearance for all recreational boating. " - there were no objections to the Crossing as proposed. " Marine Exchange 4. AESTHETICS - Every effort has been made to create a beautiful bridge to enhance the environment. - Main span was developed under the direction of a noted architect, Mr. William Stephen Allen of Anshen and Allen. - The main span will be a cable stayed girder with diamond shaped towers. It was selected by the California Toll Bridge Authority at the conclusion of a study of more than 20 bridge types. - Trestle approaches in the East Bay will rise on gentle grades over the navigation channels. Maximum span lengths will be used to improve the appearance. - the new bridge across San Francisco Bay truly will be another gem added to the Bay Area's many attractions." Oakland Tribune. 14 5. FISH AND WILDLIFE - Entire Crossing will be on structure and therefore will not cause damage to fish and wildlife. - Does not commit the construction of future offshore freeways requiring fills which would affect marshes. - Reasonable public access to the Bay for fishing and recreation will be provided at India Basin and Bay Farm Island. - "The proposed construction of a new bridge will not adversely affect the fish and game " State Department of Fish and Game. 15 E. DELAY IN PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN 1. Increase in construction cost of $60,000,000 for a 4 year delay. 2. Increase in right of way cost of $25,000,000 for a 4 year delay. 3. Adverse effect on many planned developments such as - Marine Terminal for Port of San Francisco - Bay Farm Island land development - Oakland Airport expansion - Estuary Development by Port of Oakland - Drydock expansion by Todd Shipyards - Navy development in Alameda 4. Disruption of the many City and Regional Master Plans 5. The major loss of time and money already spent on this project in route location and design work. 6. Continued cost of delay to Bay Bridge users of $6 million per year. 16 F. CONCLUSIONS THE SOUTHERN CROSSING - Is a key element of the Bay Area regional highway system and is needed now. - Culminates 25 years of promises to the traveling public. - Has been studied sufficiently to show that the effect on BART patronage is minimal. - Will have no significant effects on the Bay Area environment. - Can be financed now through a combination of toll revenue bonds and gas tax funds. - Would cost an additional $85,000,000 if delayed for 4 years, substantially increasing financing problems. - Is an integral part of the planning of most regional and local agencies.