A city commission rejected the idea Wednesday of converting an aging bridge spanning the Los Angeles River into a "land bridge," after city engineers warned that the effort could jeopardize federal money needed for a new bridge replacing it.
Neighborhood activists and architects had envisioned turning the old Riverside Drive bridge into a "bridging green space" through which bicyclists and pedestrians could cross the river. Architect Kevin Mulcahy, whose firm RAC Design Build laid out a plan for converting the bridge, described the imagined connector as "the missing link" that would tie together celebrated initiatives to revive the riverfront. The idea comes amid a flurry of plans to revitalize portions of the Los Angeles River, centering on a proposed $1- billion remake of an 11-mile stretch of the waterway just north of downtown.
Demolishing the old concrete and metal truss bridge was part of the replacement plan that the City Council approved eight years ago. Backers of the land bridge point out that when those plans were made, the new bridge was expected to take the same place as the old one. Instead, the new bridge is being built further upstream.
More than 2,000 people have signed an online petition to spare the bridge, including almost 1,400 Los Angeles residents, backers told the Los Angeles Board of Public Works, a five-member panel appointed by Mayor Eric Garcetti. The old bridge, built in 1927, was designated as a historic monument seven years ago after city leaders had already voted to replace it.
"If we tear it down now and decide in two years, 'You know, we could have saved that bridge'...what a tragedy that would be," Eagle Rock resident Bob Inman told the board.
But city officials said the plan faced a host of practical problems.
Interim city engineer Deborah Weintraub said their "back of the envelope estimate" put the cost of converting the old bridge between $15 million and $25 million. Weintraub added that keeping the bridge — scheduled to be demolished within weeks — would end up delaying the new one, because construction plans rely on accessing the site. She added that the new bridge was already designed to allow bicycle and pedestrian access.
City officials also argued that altering construction plans to spare the old bridge could put them at risk of not getting reimbursed with federal funding, which is expected to pay for the bulk of the project. In addition, city structural engineering director Sunny Patel warned that the old bridge had a design with "absolutely no redundancy," leaving it vulnerable if one part of it failed.
Mulcahy countered that the bridge design was an issue, but one that could be addressed with added retrofitting. Tomas O'Grady, executive director of the nonprofit EnrichLA, challenged the rough cost estimates offered by city officials, arguing that "a guess is not good enough" to write off the bridge. Other supporters contended that a completely carless path would be a uniquely valuable amenity.
Their arguments failed to sway the commission, which voted unanimously to stick to city plans for the bridge. Mayor Garcetti and City Councilman Gil Cedillo, whose district includes the area where the project is located, had concluded earlier that the land bridge — though appealing — was not feasible.
Decision-makers "have figured that we can't afford to risk the federal funds that we have," Commissioner Mike Davis said. He added, "It is not because you have not put forth a great proposal."
emily.alpert@latimes.com
Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
