Rick Childs of Mendocino wondered if $42 million for a new Ten Mile Bridge could be better spent.
“Our hospital is in danger of bankruptcy. For $42 million we could have the hospital flush with cash for the next 25 years, or we could have this bridge,” said Childs, who spoke at a public hearing held by Caltrans at Fort Bragg”s Town Hall last Tuesday.
Caltrans, criticized in the past for not getting enough public input, made a grand presentation of the new bridge plans, with numerous maps, aerial photos and timetables laid out around the room.
On Tuesday, Caltrans officials, such as project manager Alan Escarda, as well as engineers on the project, answered questions and engaged the audience of about 30 people in discussions. Most of the people who attended live near the bridge.
Officials said the cost of the bridge, which was to be $17 million six years ago, shot up to $25 million by last year. When the California Coastal Commission rejected the proposed Caltrans bridge last fall, demanding more scenic rails and a pedestrian walkway on the ocean side of the structure, the bridge had to be redesigned with the current estimate of more than $40 million. Concrete and steel costs have both shot up in the last two years due to rapid demand in Asia for development. Caltrans hopes to start work this fall and finish within three years.
At a hearing where many in the crowd were confused by the fact that they were only supposed to comment on the “county” or “public works” portions of the bridge plan, Childs asked the officials and the audience to look at the big picture.
Childs, a local Unitarian minister, pointed out that if local people had to pay the $42 million pricetag for the bridge, it would cost each person in Fort Bragg $6,000. Local schools could be funded for 80 years with that amount of money or five new aquatic centers built, he said.
The Ten Mile Bridge is located 10.8 miles west of the San Andreas Fault, which is capable of generating an 8.0 earthquake, the Caltrans report states.
“Is the incremental Richter scale worth the benefit versus the cost? That is my question as a public citizen,” Childs said.
Fae Olson said neighbors of the Ten Mile Bridge had asked the same questions at the beginning of the process and even came up with an answer — earthquake gates that could close the bridge off at the beginning of a temblor.
“The local people at Ten Mile thought that years ago, we recommended earthquake gates, people got up on their hind legs and they called and they spoke to everybody they could and were stonewalled,” said Olsen.
Escarda said, in an interview after the meeting, that earthquake gates are used in other areas as an interim measure. He said the gates might increase safety but wouldn”t prevent the bridge from falling down, and the resulting environmental disaster and transportation nightmare, with Westport cut off from schools and emergency services.
Only five people spoke at the public hearing, although several more submitted written comments. Caltrans ended the hearing early.
Erica Fielder, who lives near the bridge, pointed out that the 54-inch tall railing on the east side of the bridge would obscure scenic views of the river. She questioned why the shorter, more scenic rails used on the Noyo River Bridge could not be used on the 10 Mile Bridge.
Escarda said the east side of the bridge has no pedestrian walkway like the Noyo River Bridge does and bicycles would be too close to the shorter rail for safety standards.
Nancy Barth and others asked Caltrans to take a leading role in the Coastal Trail creation. The Coastal Commission shot Caltrans down last year partly because the bridge didn”t include a connection to the California Coastal Trail.
MacKerricher State Park has a master plan that calls for a Coastal Trail, Barth told Caltrans and the crowd. There is concern that walkers from the bridge will trample the undeveloped trails in the area. Estrada said Caltrans is dedicated to helping State Parks with the effort. State Parks has not had funding for the effort and residents of the area are concerned and searching for alternatives.
Another criticism of the plans at the meeting was that the new parking lot, which is 300 feet from the span, is too far away to promote safe pedestrian use of the bridge.
Estrada said Caltrans will provide answers and information on each of the public and written comments received so far. The public comment is being rushed a bit in an effort to get the most important public hearing held in Northern California, before the California Coastal Commission. The group has the last word on the bridge plan.
The commission will meet June 13-16 at the Fountain Grove Inn at 101 Fountain Grove Parkway in Santa Rosa. That is the only meeting in Northern California this summer and the hope is that the Ten Mile Bridge hearing can occur there. Estrada said the two state agencies are trying to accelerate a comment and staff report period that generally takes months to allow for the local hearing.
The public hearing last week was technically only for the county portion of the bridge, which is that part not actually in the river. The Coastal Commission has authority over the state portion of the bridge, which is the part actually in the river. The Coastal Commission will consider comments related to both portions. After the rejection by the Coastal Commission last fall, Caltrans had to go through an extensive “consistency determination” process to bring the bridge back to the table.
Ten Mile Bridge has views of one of the least used beaches and rivers on the coast. The people who live in the area have been successful activists in keeping out development of the spectacular collision of mountain, river and ocean.
