City Staff Suggest Two Options for 6th Street
Eric Richardson
The 1933 6th Street Viaduct, viewed from the 4th street bridge in a 2007 photo.
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — Should the replacement design for the 1933 6th Street Viaduct be traditional or modern? City staff have narrowed a list of options down to two recommendations, one from each category. One design featured a traditional steel arch, while the other offers a modern cable-stay design.
The historic bridge is an icon connecting Downtown with East L.A., but suffers from a condition called Alkali Silica Reaction. Described as "cancer," ASR combines with moisure to crumble concrete from the inside.
On October 23rd, Bureau of Engineering staff presented their preferred designs and alignment at a meeting of the project's Community Advisory Committee. The meeting will be the last before the project issues its Draft Environmental Report, set to be released before the end of the year.
City staff recommend that the replacement span use a new alignment that eliminates the current bridge's kink and instead offers a gentle curve. The bend has been the site of the majority of accidents to take place on the bridge. The new alignment would require that the city acquire many of the properties adjacent to the north side of the alignment on the east side of the river.
The replacement project is estimated to cost $340 - $402 million. Construction is aimed to start by 2011.
archie4oz on November 10, 2008, at 02:56PM – #1
Technically, Concept 4 is a cable-stayed bridge, not a suspension bridge
benjamin on November 10, 2008, at 03:12PM – #2
i still dont understand why the existing bridge cant be saved. we are not living in the 20th century.
RLK on November 10, 2008, at 03:55PM – #3
After having a conversation with a friend over the new 200Million dollar High School and the horrible tower to nowhere, I think the simple question is, "Which project is less expensive?"
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on November 10, 2008, at 04:31PM – #4
archie4oz: Thanks. I obviously don't know my bridges that well.
David on November 10, 2008, at 04:40PM – #5
benjamin - Re-read the related post at the bottom of tha rticle for more details on ASR. Basically, the concrete in the bridge was not made correctly and so it starts a chemical process that can't be stopped since the concrete itself is the problem -- not something attached to it like the steel.
Tim Quinn on November 10, 2008, at 05:17PM – #6
Economic conditions are temporary, even when they are this bad. It would be poor planning to base the bridge's design on short budgets in the present when it will last more than 100 years easily. The cost can be amortized over that period, so the funds can be borrowed from the future in the form of bonds. This is why most big projects are done that way.
As big as the Fed debt is, for example, it is only one third what it was at the end of World War Two (in inflation adjusted dollars). More borrowing is on the horizon for governments all over to get through this and stimulate the economy. It is not that big a deal for government to go into debt, get used to it.
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on November 10, 2008, at 05:32PM – #7
This project also won't be done with city funds. There are state and federal funding sources available to cover bridge replacement.
John Crandell on November 10, 2008, at 07:58PM – #8
Go suspension all the way! That way, the rail lines can be elevated and the river channel be reconfigured and greened. All of the above illustrated options preclude the rail tracks from being elevated. With that, absolutely nothing could be done for the river in this sector and if not here, where?
Dear Councilwoman Perry: kick their butts!
rob on November 10, 2008, at 08:15PM – #9
hopefully they make it more pedestrian friendly. than the current bridge or maybe a bike lane.
Eric Richardson (@blogdowntown) on November 10, 2008, at 08:31PM – #10
Rob: Wider shoulders and sidewalks are part of the plans. The last numbers I saw said that the bridge would go from 77 feet wide to 94 feet wide.