Bridge over troubled waters?

Bridge over troubled waters? Gerald Desmond Bridge replacement underscores slow pace of infrastructure renewal.

   The Gerald Desmond Bridge replacement in Long Beach, Calif., is the type of major infrastructure project that can make a big difference in improving freight and commuter flows, but never makes it off the drawing board because of bureaucratic inertia, political opposition and financial challenges.
   After years of trying to put together a financing package, the California Transportation Commission on Nov. 3 approved the Port of Long Beach's plan to fund and build a $950 million replacement bridge. The project is motivated by the need for a higher clearance to allow the new generation of mega-ships to pass underneath. The new bridge will also feature a wider roadway for cars and trucks to improve safety and reduce congestion.
   The favorable vote, which authorizes the port and the California Department of Transportation to seek firms to design and construct the span, is the final government clearance needed for the project. The Long Beach City Council in October approved the port's plans and its environmental impact report.
   The Port of Long Beach is expected to issue a request for bids to both design and build the bridge, a contracting method designed to speed up the start of construction. Final design and preliminary construction would begin early next year and construction of the main bridge supports could start in 2012, according to the port.
   'The Transportation Commission's approval is a major milestone for this project,' said Nick Sramek, president of the Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners, in a statement. 'It allows us to embark upon one of the biggest construction projects in the state and to replace an obsolete bridge with a new one built to handle the traffic and cargo needs of the region.'
   State highway and transportation bond funds will cover $500 million of the span's cost. Federal sources are expected to contribute about $300 million. The Port of Long Beach has committed $114 million to the project and Los Angeles Country Metro is providing $28 million.
   California added $200 million to its contribution this summer after extensive negotiations with the port. The extra money was available because many other state projects are on hold, port spokesman Lee Peterson said.
   The Gerald Desmond Bridge is a major thoroughfare for trucks hauling containers in and out of the port, which along with Los Angeles is the nation's largest gateway for containerized goods. About 15 percent of all ocean cargo travels over the bridge from Terminal Island to local, regional or national destinations. It also is a heavily used east/west route for commuters in the San Pedro Bay area.
   California officials 20 years ago identified the bridge as a top priority, but were unable to come up with the money for a new bridge.
   The project is expected to create an average of 4,000 jobs per year during the five-year construction period. When the new bridge is completed, the old one will be dismantled.
   Port Director Richard Steinke said at a logistics conference in San Diego on Sept. 29 that the Gerald Desmond Bridge has national significance, but only received $100 million from Congress in the multiyear surface transportation spending plan passed in 2005.
   And earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Transportation did not grant any money from its $1.5 billion discretionary TIGER program that was part of the 2009 economic stimulus bill. That oversight drew a rebuke from local officials at a mid-March forum organized by the Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce in Long Beach.
   'I was shocked that L.A. and Long Beach got zero from TIGER,' said Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Geraldine Knatz. 'It turned out to be a lot more political than we thought. The money is supposed to be reserved for merit, for big projects of national significance.'
   Steinke was blunter. 'It's ridiculous,' he said. 'I liken it to the port security grants. There were some terrific mistakes made in that program early on. I'm very disappointed.'
   'I find it hard to understand how you can fund port communities in general, but not fund the largest port complex in America,' Rep. Laura Richardson, D-Calif., said in February.
   The recession and extreme drop in cargo volumes through Southern California ports forced them to indefinitely defer charging an additional infrastructure fee for the bridge and other projects.
   Even some ocean carriers and shippers that supported a new bridge changed their position during the recession, saying they needed reductions in terminal usage fees and were willing to postpone infrastructure improvements, said Dale Bonner, California's secretary of business, transportation and housing.