The Torrey Pines Bridge Project
by Councilman Scott Peters
for the La Jolla Village News
July 2002
On July 9th the California Coastal Commission voted 8 to 1 to approve
a coastal development permit for the reconstruction of the Torrey Pines
Bridge on Coast Highway. Since there's been controversy about the project,
I'd like to explain the reasons I feel that we should move forward.
The City began work on the project
in the early 1990s. The City Council approved the proposed design in 1999,
and sent the project forward for state approval. When I took office in late
2000, I wondered why a three-lane configuration was necessary and whether
a two lane alternative could be developed. In the past year and a half,
I've held a number of meetings with all interested parties. The main obstacle
is that traffic can move across a three-land bridge during construction,
but not across a two-lane bridge. We looked at building temporary bridge
structures on either side of the existing bridge to keep traffic flowing
during construction, but found that this would worsen the condition of the
lagoon and cost an additional $4 million to implement. We also looked at
closing one or both lanes of traffic on Coast Highway, intermittently regulating
traffic flow throughout the day using only one lane, or restricting flow
to one direction during AM and PM peak hours. The one-lane scenarios added
an additional $3.4 million cost to the project due to the need for 24-hour
flagmen and temporary traffic signals, and were also deemed unsafe. In fact
the City was unable to find a traffic engineering firm that would sign-off
on such a traffic plan, because the liability for traffic accidents and
risk to construction workers was too high.
After this very thorough process,
it is clear to me that the current design is our best option. It will not
harm the viewshed, will not increase traffic, is fiscally responsible and
offers the best opportunity to save the Los Peñasquitos Lagoon.
I have taken several factors
into consideration. First, the existing bridge is in danger because it is
seismically unsound, scoring 19 out of 100 on the CalTrans structural integrity
scale. There is no disagreement that the bridge needs to be replaced, and
the prospect that even a small earthquake might bring down the bridge means
that we can no longer delay action on the project.
Second, the 72 pilings that
support the existing bridge clog the mouth of the lagoon, and inhibit tidal
flushing, which is essential to a healthy lagoon environment. Replacing
the bridge will reduce the number of pilings from 72 to 4 and allow for
natural flushing. Biologists with the Los Peñasquitos Lagoon Foundation,
the non-profit group dedicated to the preservation of the lagoon, warned
that the lagoon was dying and prolonged delays in replacing the bridge could
cause irreparable harm to the lagoon environment. The Sierra Club, the Audubon
Society and the Lagoon Foundation all support the current project, because
it replaces the bridge in a timely manner, and saves the lagoon from further
decline.
Third, the $3.4 million to change
the configuration of the bridge from the approved three lane to a two lane
bridge is not available. I asked for this money in this year's city budget
process, but it is not there. Clearly, it's not in the state budget. In
fact, any further delay in the project would put at risk the $8 million
federal contribution to the bridge we have already secured.
Fourth, the traffic delays associated
with constricting a two lane bridge are staggering, and would seriously
harm the quality of life in local neighborhoods and for north county commuters
during the 18-month to 2-year construction period. Complete or partial closure
of Highway 101 would divert up to 20,000 cars a day through single-family
neighborhoods, cause 40 minute traffic delays in each direction, hamper
emergency vehicles from entering the area, and add thousands of vehicles
to the already congested I-5 / I-805 merge. It would also mean closing down
a major North / South traffic artery at the same time that CalTrans is implementing
a major expansion of the I-5 / I-805 merge.
Finally, a main concern of the
Torrey Pines community was that because the City of Del Mar is unlikely
to widen its bridge to the North, we would be creating a bottleneck by funneling
three lanes of traffic into two. I recognized this problem and asked that
the bridge be striped for two lanes so there would be no additional traffic
on Coast Highway. This was also the strategy provided for in the adopted
community plan. The Coastal Commission agreed and added this as a condition
of approval.
In the end, the choice is between
a fully funded, lagoon-friendly, seismically safe, view-neutral, traffic-neutral,
three-lane bridge on one hand, and, on the other hand, hope for an unfunded
and undesigned two-lane bridge that would cost at least $3.4 million more.
Because I inherited this project from the previous City Council, I needed
to work with the project in the environment in which I inherited it. The
risks to the lagoon and the added project costs are too great to delay this
project further.
If you would like more information
about this project, and would like to see pictures of the proposed bridge,
please visit my web site in the City
Hall section of www.sandiego.gov.
|
La Jolla Home
Councilman's Corner
Sign up for E-newsletter
|