After Thursday night’s gathering with Caltrans about the Green Bridge replacement, I spoke at length with my daughter, an independent transportation consultant in the Bay Area. She has worked on numerous projects that have dealt with Caltrans or their regulations, so she understands how the agency thinks and operates—good things for us to know in light of the coming bridge replacement. This article is not meant to be an all-inclusive discussion of the replacement, but simply a list of issues to help you write effective comments to Caltrans, and to hopefully allow our community to end up with a bridge we can all be proud of. The deadline for submitting comments is April 20.
The first thing we need to understand is that this bridge will be replaced. As it now stands, it is seismically unsafe, and were it to be damaged in an earthquake, our communities would be cut off from each other for an extended period of time.
A little over a year ago, Caltrans was soundly criticized for its efforts, or lack thereof, to create a viable, vibrant transportation system throughout California. Since then, it reorganized so that staff can focus on building a sustainable, multi-modal transportation system. It also recently developed a new mission, vision and goals. It is important for us to know them—and use their language—in our comments. They can be found at dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/about/mission.htm.
On Thursday we received a handout, called the Lagunitas Creek Bridge Project Scoping Meeting. Toward the bottom of the page, the “Project Purpose and Need,” or P.P.N., section contains a very important fact. Caltrans is already in stage two of the bridge-building process, and the P.P.N. drives the decision of which bridge design to build. The purpose is simply to build a “seismically safe crossing on SR-1 over Lagunitas Creek,” and nothing more. The bridge does not have to be pretty or efficient, for example, just seismically safe.
Therefore the first goal of our comments should be to get Caltrans to expand the P.P.N., using language from its mission statement, such as “…to provide a safe way for tourists and local residents to access the communities on either side of the bridge while reducing pollution and enhancing the local economies.” A second sentence that references tourists accessing the Point Reyes National Seashore and locals accessing schools and medical facilities wouldn’t hurt, nor would a sentence about protecting the environment. But keep it short and concise. Then, as we make comments about each design, or about our preferred design, we can refer back to our above wording, or other wording in Caltrans’ mission statement, to emphasize these points and hopefully sway them toward our preferred design.
The Caltrans site for the project may be found at dot.ca.gov/dist4/lagunitascreekbridge. On the right side of the page are three links to further documents, including the 14 posters we saw at last week’s meeting. It is important to become familiar with the contents of the second and third links.
The design options offered to us might be taken from Engineering 101, in which a teacher gives students an assignment to design a bridge. We basically have four options: steel truss, overhead lateral bracing, precast concrete and suspension bridge. The road, shoulder and sidewalk widths are what Caltrans determined has worked successfully in the past. (“Why change it if it worked before?”) My daughter said it might be difficult to change the proposed dimensions of the bridge features, but if someone really cares about the size of the bridge, the best approach would be to research and report on other bridges throughout California that Caltrans built in ways that deviated from the norm, and which did not increase the risk to passengers and pedestrians.
It will also help to tell Caltrans things it may not understand about our bridge, our communities and the needs inherent in our rural, agricultural life. For instance, Option 2, which has overhead lateral bracing and a height limitation, may be incompatible with tall hay trucks and livestock trucks; it could also impinge on the movement of large construction vehicles that may be needed in the event of another large mudslide or wildfire. Caltrans may not have thought of these implications.
Each of the designs also has three sidewalk options: cantilevered, adjacent to the street bed and adjacent to the street bed with a guardrail. Using wording from the mission statement and our edited P.P.N., we can explain why we prefer one form of sidewalk over another, so that no matter which bridge design is chosen, at least we had a say in our sidewalk.
In regards to Option 3, the pre-cast concrete girder, it may be possible to use a concrete that blends into the environment. In parts of Caltrans District 7, such as in Monterey County, maintenance workers alter the color of the concrete and the paint on their bridges so they look as if they had been there for quite a while. That could be recommended here, too.
Another matter we can influence is the list of agencies and stakeholders Caltrans plan to work with. The current list makes no mention of the Inverness or Point Reyes Station Village Associations, the West Marin Chamber of Commerce or the Point Reyes Seashore Ranchers Association—not to mention local residents and tourists. Again, Caltrans is unfamiliar with our community, so these omissions need to be pointed out so the agency will confer with these entities for input.
And what about traffic counts? Is Caltrans aware that during Labor Day weekend we see a large increase in summer traffic due to the sand castle-building contest, or that Western Weekend, in June, increases traffic diversions because of the parade? We are also a destination for dozens of bikers and bicycle riders every weekend, and these people need to be considered in any design choice.
Another point we might influence is the temporary bridge. It is likely not possible to build a two-lane temporary bridge, as it would prevent traffic into the veterinarian clinic. However, we could ask for the option of changing the timing of the traffic lights on the bridge if existing timing is impeding traffic and increasing pollution in our community (remember the rewritten P.P.N. and Caltrans’ mission statement). Timing could be changed seasonally.
We can also comment on how Caltrans will leave the site upon the project’s completion. For instance, environmentalists may want the creek banks replanted with specific plants that will support and promote salmon or frogs. Those who live directly south of the bridge may want hedges built on their property lines to help block the noise from the new, wider roadbed.
The overall goal of comments is to improve the bridge and our community. Focus on what is most important to you, and then add additional comments if you wish. You should be persuasive. And pay attention to your language. Avoid negative words and phrases such as “lack of traffic” and “congestion,” and instead use “mobility” and “access.” Word choices should be aimed at cultivating what we want, rather than focusing on what we want to avoid.
Because Caltrans is only obligated to notify residences and business within a very small area surrounding the bridge, many locals, and all our tourists, will be unaware of the project. It behooves us to do what we can to let these people know about it and to come together as a community to figure out if there are ways we can alleviate the traffic and other disturbances the project will cause, so as to minimize its effects on our lives and local economy as much as possible. (Fortunately, we don’t have to achieve this part by April 20.)
The actual construction of the bridge is not anticipated until 2019; however, it will last two to three years. The first stage will be the construction of the temporary bridge, and at least that stage will not disrupt us too much.
In the end, because we can only influence Caltrans, each of us must find a way to be personally okay with all four designs. Something could arise in the Environmental Impact Report phase or the permitting phase that would exclude all but one of the designs, and we will have to accept that. I find it helpful to focus my thoughts around this bridge replacement on maintaining a valuable community connection.
Comments can be emailed by April 20 to [email protected]. Letters can be sent by the same date to California Department of Transportation, District 4 Office of Environmental Analysis, Attn: Oliver Iberien, P.O. Box 23660, Oakland, CA 94623.
Cathleen Dorinson, the mother of two grown daughters, has lived in Point Reyes Station for 12 years, and is an active member of Mainstreet Moms.