Jump to content

San Mateo–Hayward Bridge: Difference between revisions

Coordinates: 37°36′07″N 122°12′17″W / 37.6019°N 122.2047°W / 37.6019; -122.2047
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
dead link
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 12: Line 12:
| official_name =
| official_name =
| other_name = San Mateo Bridge
| other_name = San Mateo Bridge
| carries = Cars and trucks on 6 lanes of {{jct|state=CA|SR|92}}
| carries = 6 lanes of {{jct|state=CA|SR|92}}
| crosses = [[San Francisco Bay]]
| crosses = [[San Francisco Bay]]
| locale = [[Foster City, California|Foster City]] and [[Hayward, California]], United States
| locale = [[Foster City, California|Foster City]] and [[Hayward, California]], United States
Line 87: Line 87:
The new span won two prizes in 1968: an [[American Society of Civil Engineers|ASCE]] Award for Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.asce.org/templates/award-detail.aspx?id=6329&all_recipients=1 |title = Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement (OCEA) Award Past Award Winners |author = American Society of Civil Engineers |date = 2015 |publisher = American Society of Civil Engineers |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref> and an [[American Institute of Steel Construction]] long-span prize bridge award.<ref name=AISC68 />
The new span won two prizes in 1968: an [[American Society of Civil Engineers|ASCE]] Award for Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.asce.org/templates/award-detail.aspx?id=6329&all_recipients=1 |title = Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement (OCEA) Award Past Award Winners |author = American Society of Civil Engineers |date = 2015 |publisher = American Society of Civil Engineers |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref> and an [[American Institute of Steel Construction]] long-span prize bridge award.<ref name=AISC68 />


William Stephen Allen was retained as an architectural consultant,<ref name=CHPW620102 /> although the bridge was designed by the Bay Toll Crossings Division (under Chief Engineer Norman C. Raab) of the [[California Department of Transportation|California Department of Public Works]]. Chuck Seim, one of the design engineers working for Bay Toll Crossings, would later credit [[Allan Temko]]'s criticism of Raab's economical truss design for the Richmond–San Rafael crossing for generating sufficient public pressure to drive the single-deck design.<ref name=CSeim /> Temko's article quoted [[Tung-Yen Lin]] as being against a repeat of the Richmond–San Rafael design, but Lin ultimately gave Temko the credit for the design.<ref>{{cite book |type = Report |url = http://content.cdlib.org/view?docId=kt4w1003s9;NAAN=13030&doc.view=frames&chunk.id=d0e11492&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e10239&brand=calisphere |title = 'The Father of Prestressed Concrete': Teaching Engineers, Bridging Rivers and Borders, 1931 to 1999 |author1 = Swent, Eleanor |author2 = Lin, T.Y. |date = 2001 |publisher = Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California |location = Berkeley |access-date = February 6, 2015 |quote = <!--I had an argument with this old engineer, my senior. Norman Raab was in charge of all the bay bridges. Later it came time to build the San Mateo Bridge. He proposed the San Mateo Bridge to be double deck, one on top, one on bottom, like the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. He proposed steel trusses. Double deck. The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, one deck on top, one deck below. Save money according to him. Probably did save some money. Now come to the San Mateo Bridge, he wants to design it just like the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge which he is used to. And then, I think, lots of people objected to the look of this type of bridge. Double deck and steel truss. Allan Temko wrote an article against this. And that caught public attention. And in his article, he quoted T.Y. Lin. He had consulted me and whatever I said and—then we hit the headlines, so that Governor Brown called a meeting, a public hearing on the bridge design. And came in steel executives, board chairman or president of American Steel Company, et cetera; we all met in a big hall—I cannot remember where in San Francisco. At that meeting the steel people were so powerful, you know! [laughs] They declared it must be a steel bridge. It must be a girder bridge as hinted in Allan Temko's article and then was adopted with the approval of the steel board chairman. I was too young to say anything. I was there but I didn't say anything. However, I was, a few weeks before that meeting, quoted by Allan Temko as being against this repetition of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. And that made me a nonconformist. And also, there was an engineering uproar against me that I shouldn't be speaking something against another engineer. This kind of thing. But Allan Temko was for the critique and he changed it to a girder design. Hence the San Mateo Bridge was designed of the girder type. Among the longest girders in the world. Steel girder, with a main span of 750 feet. It's beautiful, single deck. Much better than Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. [...] You know who designed the bridge? Allan Temko did! He initiated the whole thing. Without him, this would have been another one like the Richmond-San Rafael, steel truss, double deck. He insisted on a single deck and a girder bridge.--> }}</ref> Raab retired and his successor, E.R. "Mike" Foley, was willing to incorporate aesthetic considerations, resulting in the final design.<ref name=CSeim /> The western highrise span features an all-steel superstructure, with an [[orthotropic deck]] over two parallel box girders, following the construction of several smaller test bridges using the same orthotropic deck technology.<ref name=Mangus05>{{cite journal |url = http://www.structuremag.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/F-Orthotropics-Oct-051.pdf |title = California's Orthotropic Steel Bridges |last = Mangus |first = Alfred R. |date = October 2005 |journal = Structure |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> It was the first large-scale use of an orthotropic deck, which reduces weight, and thus seismic loading, although the bridge is expected to receive moderate to major damage following an earthquake.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://bata.mtc.ca.gov/projects/seismic.htm |title = Toll Bridge Seismic Retrofit Program |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line--> |date = September 6, 2013 |publisher = Bay Area Toll Authority |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref>
William Stephen Allen was retained as an architectural consultant,<ref name=CHPW620102 /> although the bridge was designed by the Bay Toll Crossings Division (under Chief Engineer Norman C. Raab) of the [[California Department of Transportation|California Department of Public Works]]. Chuck Seim, one of the design engineers working for Bay Toll Crossings, would later credit [[Allan Temko]]'s criticism of Raab's economical truss design for the Richmond–San Rafael crossing for generating sufficient public pressure to drive the single-deck design.<ref name=CSeim /> Temko's article quoted [[Tung-Yen Lin]] as being against a repeat of the Richmond–San Rafael design, but Lin ultimately gave Temko the credit for the design.<ref>{{cite book |type = Report |url = http://content.cdlib.org/view?docId=kt4w1003s9;NAAN=13030&doc.view=frames&chunk.id=d0e11492&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e10239&brand=calisphere |title = 'The Father of Prestressed Concrete': Teaching Engineers, Bridging Rivers and Borders, 1931 to 1999 |author1 = Swent, Eleanor |author2 = Lin, T.Y. |date = 2001 |publisher = Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California |location = Berkeley |access-date = February 6, 2015 |quote = <!--I had an argument with this old engineer, my senior. Norman Raab was in charge of all the bay bridges. Later it came time to build the San Mateo Bridge. He proposed the San Mateo Bridge to be double deck, one on top, one on bottom, like the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. He proposed steel trusses. Double deck. The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, one deck on top, one deck below. Save money according to him. Probably did save some money. Now come to the San Mateo Bridge, he wants to design it just like the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge which he is used to. And then, I think, lots of people objected to the look of this type of bridge. Double deck and steel truss. Allan Temko wrote an article against this. And that caught public attention. And in his article, he quoted T.Y. Lin. He had consulted me and whatever I said and—then we hit the headlines, so that Governor Brown called a meeting, a public hearing on the bridge design. And came in steel executives, board chairman or president of American Steel Company, et cetera; we all met in a big hall—I cannot remember where in San Francisco. At that meeting the steel people were so powerful, you know! [laughs] They declared it must be a steel bridge. It must be a girder bridge as hinted in Allan Temko's article and then was adopted with the approval of the steel board chairman. I was too young to say anything. I was there but I didn't say anything. However, I was, a few weeks before that meeting, quoted by Allan Temko as being against this repetition of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. And that made me a nonconformist. And also, there was an engineering uproar against me that I shouldn't be speaking something against another engineer. This kind of thing. But Allan Temko was for the critique and he changed it to a girder design. Hence the San Mateo Bridge was designed of the girder type. Among the longest girders in the world. Steel girder, with a main span of 750 feet. It's beautiful, single deck. Much better than Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. [...] You know who designed the bridge? Allan Temko did! He initiated the whole thing. Without him, this would have been another one like the Richmond-San Rafael, steel truss, double deck. He insisted on a single deck and a girder bridge.--> }}</ref> Raab retired and his successor, E.R. "Mike" Foley, was willing to incorporate aesthetic considerations, resulting in the final design.<ref name=CSeim /> The western highrise span features an all-steel superstructure, with an [[orthotropic deck]] over two parallel box girders, following the construction of several smaller test bridges using the same orthotropic deck technology.<ref name=Mangus05>{{cite journal |url = http://www.structuremag.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/F-Orthotropics-Oct-051.pdf |title = California's Orthotropic Steel Bridges |last = Mangus |first = Alfred R. |date = October 2005 |journal = Structure |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> It was the first large-scale use of an orthotropic deck, which reduces weight, and thus seismic loading, although the bridge is expected to receive moderate to major damage following an earthquake.<ref>{{cite web |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line--> |date=September 6, 2013 |title=Toll Bridge Seismic Retrofit Program |url=http://bata.mtc.ca.gov/projects/seismic.htm |url-status=dead |access-date=January 15, 2015 |publisher=Bay Area Toll Authority}}</ref>


Murphy Pacific Marine built the ''Marine Boss'' floating barge-crane in 1966 with a {{convert |500|ST|MT|0|adj=on}} capacity to perform the heavy box girder and deck-section lifts.<ref>{{cite conference |url = http://www.orthotropic-bridge.org/pdffiles/CaliforniaOrthotropicBridgeBusTourOBC2008.pdf |last = Mangus |first = Alfred R. |date = August 30, 2008 |title = California Orthotropic Bridge Bus Tour |conference = Orthotropic Bridge Conference |location = Sacramento, California |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> The heavy lift capacity of ''Marine Boss'' enabled Murphy Pacific to raise much longer prefabricated girders than existing barge cranes would have allowed. Box girder and deck sections were fabricated in Murphy Pacific's [[Richmond, California|Richmond]] yard and were carried by ''Marine Boss'' to the bridge construction site.<ref name=Murphy07 /> ''Marine Boss'' was sold for scrap in 1988 to Weeks Marine in New Jersey,<ref>{{cite journal |url = http://www.cranestodaymagazine.com/features/new-life-for-the-marine-boss/ |title = New Life for the Marine Boss |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line--> |date = January 2, 2001 |journal = Cranes Today |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> who renamed it the ''[[Weeks 533]]'' and refurbished it. ''Weeks 533'' has since been used for several notable [[heavy lift]]s, including moving the [[Concorde]] and [[Space Shuttle Enterprise|''Enterprise'']] onto the [[Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum]] and lifting the downed hull of [[US Airways Flight 1549]] from the [[Hudson River]].<ref>{{cite journal |url = http://www.professionalmariner.com/September-2012/Worlds-most-famous-crane-Shuttle-move-shines-spotlight-on-Weeks/ |title = World's Most Famous Crane? Shuttle Move Shines Spotlight on Weeks |last = Gauvin |first = Brian |date = August 22, 2012 |journal = Professional Mariner |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url = http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/space_shuttle_enterprise_is_th.html |title = Space Shuttle ''Enterprise'' Is the Latest Historic Vessel Picked Up by Legendary Jersey City Crane |last = Rose |first = Lisa |date = June 6, 2012 |newspaper = New Jersey Star-Ledger |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref>
Murphy Pacific Marine built the ''Marine Boss'' floating barge-crane in 1966 with a {{convert |500|ST|MT|0|adj=on}} capacity to perform the heavy box girder and deck-section lifts.<ref>{{cite conference |url = http://www.orthotropic-bridge.org/pdffiles/CaliforniaOrthotropicBridgeBusTourOBC2008.pdf |last = Mangus |first = Alfred R. |date = August 30, 2008 |title = California Orthotropic Bridge Bus Tour |conference = Orthotropic Bridge Conference |location = Sacramento, California |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> The heavy lift capacity of ''Marine Boss'' enabled Murphy Pacific to raise much longer prefabricated girders than existing barge cranes would have allowed. Box girder and deck sections were fabricated in Murphy Pacific's [[Richmond, California|Richmond]] yard and were carried by ''Marine Boss'' to the bridge construction site.<ref name=Murphy07 /> ''Marine Boss'' was sold for scrap in 1988 to Weeks Marine in New Jersey,<ref>{{cite journal |url = http://www.cranestodaymagazine.com/features/new-life-for-the-marine-boss/ |title = New Life for the Marine Boss |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line--> |date = January 2, 2001 |journal = Cranes Today |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> who renamed it the ''[[Weeks 533]]'' and refurbished it. ''Weeks 533'' has since been used for several notable [[heavy lift]]s, including moving the [[Concorde]] and [[Space Shuttle Enterprise|''Enterprise'']] onto the [[Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum]] and lifting the downed hull of [[US Airways Flight 1549]] from the [[Hudson River]].<ref>{{cite journal |url = http://www.professionalmariner.com/September-2012/Worlds-most-famous-crane-Shuttle-move-shines-spotlight-on-Weeks/ |title = World's Most Famous Crane? Shuttle Move Shines Spotlight on Weeks |last = Gauvin |first = Brian |date = August 22, 2012 |journal = Professional Mariner |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url = http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/space_shuttle_enterprise_is_th.html |title = Space Shuttle ''Enterprise'' Is the Latest Historic Vessel Picked Up by Legendary Jersey City Crane |last = Rose |first = Lisa |date = June 6, 2012 |newspaper = New Jersey Star-Ledger |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref>
Line 96: Line 96:
Work on the western highrise span was bid in October 1964<ref name=CHPW640910>{{cite journal |url = http://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/Californiahighways/chpw_1964_sepoct.pdf |title = San Mateo–Hayward Bridge |page = 65 |author = <!--staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date = September–October 1964 |journal = California Highways and Public Works |publisher = California Department of Public Works |access-date = January 21, 2015 }}</ref> and commenced in 1965. It crosses a shipping channel, with an orthotropic main span that is {{Convert|750|ft|m|0}} long (at the time, the longest girder span in the United States)<ref name=CSeim /><ref name=SMT65 /><ref name=CHPW640910 /> and has a vertical clearance of {{Convert|135|ft|m|0}}.<ref name=CTSMHB /> The main span is flanked by two orthotropic back spans which are each {{convert |375|ft|m|0}} long, and there are seven orthotropic side spans on the approach to each back span. Each of these side spans are {{convert |292|ft|m|0}} long.<ref name=Mangus05 /> Although these spans appear to be formed from continuous box girders, they consist of alternating anchor spans and suspended spans. Anchor spans rest on top of two adjacent piers and cantilever over each side slightly, and suspended spans are hung between the ends of two adjacent anchor spans.<ref name=Murphy07>{{cite journal |url = http://steeltips.org/steeltips/tip_details.php?id=98 |title = Early California Accelerated Steel Bridge Construction |last = Murphy |first = Jay |date = June 2007 |publisher = Structural Steel Educational Council |journal = Steel TIPS: Technical Information & Product Service |access-date = August 2, 2015 }}</ref> There are an additional nine {{convert |208|ft|m|0|adj=on}} steel spans carrying a concrete deck on the San Mateo side of the highrise, and ten steel spans carrying a concrete deck on the Hayward side, ranging from {{convert |186|to|208|ft|m|0}}.<ref name=SMT65 /> The bridge carries about 93,000 cars and other vehicles on a typical day, almost double its original projected design capacity of 50,000 vehicles per day.<ref name=CHPW640910 />
Work on the western highrise span was bid in October 1964<ref name=CHPW640910>{{cite journal |url = http://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/Californiahighways/chpw_1964_sepoct.pdf |title = San Mateo–Hayward Bridge |page = 65 |author = <!--staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date = September–October 1964 |journal = California Highways and Public Works |publisher = California Department of Public Works |access-date = January 21, 2015 }}</ref> and commenced in 1965. It crosses a shipping channel, with an orthotropic main span that is {{Convert|750|ft|m|0}} long (at the time, the longest girder span in the United States)<ref name=CSeim /><ref name=SMT65 /><ref name=CHPW640910 /> and has a vertical clearance of {{Convert|135|ft|m|0}}.<ref name=CTSMHB /> The main span is flanked by two orthotropic back spans which are each {{convert |375|ft|m|0}} long, and there are seven orthotropic side spans on the approach to each back span. Each of these side spans are {{convert |292|ft|m|0}} long.<ref name=Mangus05 /> Although these spans appear to be formed from continuous box girders, they consist of alternating anchor spans and suspended spans. Anchor spans rest on top of two adjacent piers and cantilever over each side slightly, and suspended spans are hung between the ends of two adjacent anchor spans.<ref name=Murphy07>{{cite journal |url = http://steeltips.org/steeltips/tip_details.php?id=98 |title = Early California Accelerated Steel Bridge Construction |last = Murphy |first = Jay |date = June 2007 |publisher = Structural Steel Educational Council |journal = Steel TIPS: Technical Information & Product Service |access-date = August 2, 2015 }}</ref> There are an additional nine {{convert |208|ft|m|0|adj=on}} steel spans carrying a concrete deck on the San Mateo side of the highrise, and ten steel spans carrying a concrete deck on the Hayward side, ranging from {{convert |186|to|208|ft|m|0}}.<ref name=SMT65 /> The bridge carries about 93,000 cars and other vehicles on a typical day, almost double its original projected design capacity of 50,000 vehicles per day.<ref name=CHPW640910 />


The steel deck of the bridge, approximately {{convert |418000|sqft|m2|-2}}, was paved with an epoxy asphalt concrete wearing surface in two layers.<ref>{{cite book |chapter-url = https://books.google.com/books?id=QvX5118La_UC&pg=PA42 |title = Skid Resistance of Highway Pavements |last = Seim |first = Charles |chapter = Skid Resistance of Epoxy Asphalt Pavements on California Toll Bridges |pages = 41–59 |date = 1973 |publisher = American Society for Testing and Materials |access-date = January 20, 2015 }}</ref> The San Mateo Bridge was the first deployment of an epoxy asphalt concrete wearing surface.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.chemcosystems.com/epoxy.html |title = Epoxy Asphalt Polymer Concrete |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |publisher = ChemCo Systems |date = 2014 |access-date = January 20, 2015 }}</ref> {{as of|2005}}, the original wearing surface was still in use,<ref>{{cite journal |url = https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/05mar/06.cfm |title = A Fresh Look at Orthotropic Technology |last = Mangus |first = Alfred R. |date = March–April 2005 |access-date = January 20, 2015 |journal = Public Roads |volume = 68 |number = 5 <!-- unsupported parameter |docket = FHWA-HRT-05-004 --> }}</ref> but was subsequently replaced in 2015.<ref name=Sterling>{{cite press release |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title = Sterling Construction Company, Inc. Is the Selected Contractor for a San Mateo Bridge Project Valued at Approximately $25 Million |url = http://51f3c1fffec509d4b452-ed2b04ade11a8b9296c77d8bcca9bb76.r14.cf2.rackcdn.com/uploaded/p/0e3877944_1417633804_press-release-san-mateo-bridge.pdf |location = The Woodlands, Texas |publisher = Sterling Construction Company |date = December 2, 2014 |access-date = January 20, 2015 }}</ref>
The steel deck of the bridge, approximately {{convert |418000|sqft|m2|-2}}, was paved with an epoxy asphalt concrete wearing surface in two layers.<ref>{{cite book |chapter-url = https://books.google.com/books?id=QvX5118La_UC&pg=PA42 |title = Skid Resistance of Highway Pavements |last = Seim |first = Charles |chapter = Skid Resistance of Epoxy Asphalt Pavements on California Toll Bridges |pages = 41–59 |date = 1973 |publisher = American Society for Testing and Materials |access-date = January 20, 2015 }}</ref> The San Mateo Bridge was the first deployment of an epoxy asphalt concrete wearing surface.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.chemcosystems.com/epoxy.html |title = Epoxy Asphalt Polymer Concrete |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |publisher = ChemCo Systems |date = 2014 |access-date = January 20, 2015 }}</ref> {{as of|2005}}, the original wearing surface was still in use,<ref>{{cite journal |url = https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/marchapril-2005/fresh-look-orthotropic-technology |title = A Fresh Look at Orthotropic Technology |last = Mangus |first = Alfred R. |date = March–April 2005 |access-date = January 20, 2015 |journal = Public Roads |volume = 68 |number = 5 <!-- unsupported parameter |docket = FHWA-HRT-05-004 --> }}</ref> but was subsequently replaced in 2015.<ref name=Sterling>{{cite press release |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title = Sterling Construction Company, Inc. Is the Selected Contractor for a San Mateo Bridge Project Valued at Approximately $25 Million |url = http://51f3c1fffec509d4b452-ed2b04ade11a8b9296c77d8bcca9bb76.r14.cf2.rackcdn.com/uploaded/p/0e3877944_1417633804_press-release-san-mateo-bridge.pdf |location = The Woodlands, Texas |publisher = Sterling Construction Company |date = December 2, 2014 |access-date = January 20, 2015 }}</ref>


The highrise section was initially built with six lanes and the eastern causeway with four lanes (two in each direction). The causeway section was a perennial traffic bottleneck until it was expanded to six lanes in 2002,<ref name=SFC021030 /> along with much needed improvements in its connections with Interstate 880 in Hayward.
The highrise section was initially built with six lanes and the eastern causeway with four lanes (two in each direction). The causeway section was a perennial traffic bottleneck until it was expanded to six lanes in 2002,<ref name=SFC021030 /> along with much needed improvements in its connections with Interstate 880 in Hayward.
Line 111: Line 111:
The bridge was closed in the wake of the [[1989 Loma Prieta earthquake]] as a precaution, but reopened on October 18, 1989.<ref>{{cite news |url = https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=PnkhAAAAIBAJ&pg=3248%2C4750734 |title = Toppled Road Predates Quake Reinforcements |last = Appel |first = Ted |agency = United Press International |date = October 19, 1989 |newspaper = Schenectady Gazette |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> It underwent an extensive [[seismic retrofit]]ting from 1997 through 2000 to protect against earthquake damage.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/SM-Hay/Overview1.html |title = San Mateo–Hayward Seismic Retrofit |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |publisher = California Department of Transportation |date = 1995 |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref>
The bridge was closed in the wake of the [[1989 Loma Prieta earthquake]] as a precaution, but reopened on October 18, 1989.<ref>{{cite news |url = https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=PnkhAAAAIBAJ&pg=3248%2C4750734 |title = Toppled Road Predates Quake Reinforcements |last = Appel |first = Ted |agency = United Press International |date = October 19, 1989 |newspaper = Schenectady Gazette |access-date = January 15, 2015 }}</ref> It underwent an extensive [[seismic retrofit]]ting from 1997 through 2000 to protect against earthquake damage.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/SM-Hay/Overview1.html |title = San Mateo–Hayward Seismic Retrofit |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |publisher = California Department of Transportation |date = 1995 |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref>


====Widening (2002–2003)====
==== Second span (2002–2003)====
The bridge was considered the worst evening commute in the Bay Area,<ref name=SFC980615>{{cite news |url = http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Busting-the-San-Mateo-Bridge-Bottleneck-3003732.php |title = Busting the San Mateo Bridge Bottleneck |last = Wilson |first = Marshall |newspaper = San Francisco Chronicle |date = June 15, 1998 |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref> which ended with the completion of a new eastern trestle carrying westbound bridge traffic in 2002.<ref name=SFC021030 /> Eastbound bridge traffic took over the old trestle completely, although eastbound traffic was not expanded to three lanes until February 2003.<ref>{{cite news |url = http://archives.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=18072 |title = New Lanes on San Mateo Bridge Open Today |date = November 4, 2002 |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |newspaper = San Mateo Daily Journal |access-date = January 19, 2015 }}</ref> Funded as part of BATA's regional Measure (RM) 1 program, which raised bridge tolls,<ref name=SFC980615 /> the new low-rise trestle portion of the bridge added {{convert|10|ft|m|adj=on}} shoulders on both sides in both directions and effectively widened traffic from four to six lanes, matching the configuration of the high-rise portion of the bridge.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://bata.mtc.ca.gov/bridges/sm-hayward.htm |publisher = Bay Area Toll Authority |title = Bridge Facts: San Mateo–Hayward Bridge }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/SM-Hay/Widening/Overview1.html |title = Widening San Mateo–Hayward Bridge |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |publisher = California Department of Transportation |date = 1998 |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref> With the completion of the new westbound trestle, the speed limit on the bridge was raised to {{convert|65|mph|kph}}.<ref>{{cite news |url = http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SAN-MATEO-Speed-limit-on-bridge-jumps-to-65-mph-2548269.php |title = San Mateo: Speed Limit on Bridge Jumps to 65 mph |last = Cabanatuan |first = Michael |date = November 20, 2003 |newspaper = San Francisco Chronicle |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref>
The bridge was considered the worst evening commute in the Bay Area;<ref name=SFC980615>{{cite news |url = http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Busting-the-San-Mateo-Bridge-Bottleneck-3003732.php |title = Busting the San Mateo Bridge Bottleneck |last = Wilson |first = Marshall |newspaper = San Francisco Chronicle |date = June 15, 1998 |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref> this ended with the completion of a new eastern trestle carrying westbound bridge traffic in 2002.<ref name=SFC021030 /> Eastbound bridge traffic took over the old trestle completely, though eastbound traffic was not expanded to three lanes until February 2003.<ref>{{cite news |url = http://archives.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=18072 |title = New Lanes on San Mateo Bridge Open Today |date = November 4, 2002 |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |newspaper = San Mateo Daily Journal |access-date = January 19, 2015 }}</ref> Funded as part of BATA's regional Measure (RM) 1 program, which raised bridge tolls,<ref name=SFC980615 /> the new low-rise trestle portion of the bridge added {{convert|10|ft|m|adj=on}} shoulders on both sides in both directions and effectively widened traffic from four to six lanes, matching the configuration of the high-rise portion of the bridge.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://bata.mtc.ca.gov/bridges/sm-hayward.htm |publisher = Bay Area Toll Authority |title = Bridge Facts: San Mateo–Hayward Bridge }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/SM-Hay/Widening/Overview1.html |title = Widening San Mateo–Hayward Bridge |author = <!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |publisher = California Department of Transportation |date = 1998 |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref> With the completion of the new westbound trestle, the speed limit on the bridge was raised to {{convert|65|mph|kph}}.<ref>{{cite news |url = http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SAN-MATEO-Speed-limit-on-bridge-jumps-to-65-mph-2548269.php |title = San Mateo: Speed Limit on Bridge Jumps to 65 mph |last = Cabanatuan |first = Michael |date = November 20, 2003 |newspaper = San Francisco Chronicle |access-date = January 14, 2015 }}</ref>


====Seismic beam (2010–2015)====
====Seismic beam (2010–2015)====

Latest revision as of 22:10, 5 December 2024

San Mateo–Hayward Bridge
Aerial view of the San Mateo–Hayward Bridge, with Foster City in the foreground
Coordinates37°36′07″N 122°12′17″W / 37.6019°N 122.2047°W / 37.6019; -122.2047
Carries6 lanes of SR 92
CrossesSan Francisco Bay
LocaleFoster City and Hayward, California, United States
Other name(s)San Mateo Bridge
OwnerState of California
Maintained byCaltrans and BATA
ID number35 0054
Websitewww.bayareafastrak.org
Characteristics
Design
Total length
  • 36,960 ft (11,270 m)
  • 7.0 mi (11.3 km)
Width41 m (135 ft) roadway approach
Longest span757.2 ft (230.8 m)
No. of spans
  • 37 (highrise)
  • 871 (causeway)
Clearance below134.5 ft (41.0 m)
History
DesignerCaltrans, Bay Toll Crossings Division[1]
Constructed by
  • superstructure: Murphy Pacific Bridge Builders, Emeryville
  • substructure: Pomeroy-Gerwick-Steers, San Francisco
[1]
Fabrication byMurphy Pacific Corporation, Emeryville[1]
Construction cost$70,000,000 (equivalent to $488 million in 2023[2])
Opened
  • October 31, 1967[3]
  • November 4, 2002 (new westbound causeway)[4]
Statistics
Daily traffic93,000
Toll
  • Westbound only
  • FasTrak or pay-by-plate, cash not accepted
  • Effective January 1, 2022 – December 31, 2024 (2022-01-01 – 2024-12-31):
  • $7.00
  • $3.50 (carpool rush hours, FasTrak only)
Location
Map

The San Mateo–Hayward Bridge (commonly called the San Mateo Bridge) is a bridge crossing the American state of California's San Francisco Bay, linking the San Francisco Peninsula with the East Bay. The bridge's western end is in Foster City, a suburb on the eastern edge of San Mateo. The eastern end of the bridge is in Hayward. It is the longest fixed-link bridge in California and the 25th longest in the world by length. The bridge is owned by the state of California, and is maintained by California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the state highway agency. Further oversight is provided by the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA).

The bridge is part of State Route 92 (SR 92), whose western terminus is at the city of Half Moon Bay on the Pacific coast. It links Interstate 880 (I-880) in the East Bay with U.S. Route 101 (US 101) on the peninsula. It is roughly parallel to, and lies between, the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge and the Dumbarton Bridge.

History and description

[edit]

1929 original bridge

[edit]
Lift span of the original bridge

The San Francisco Bay Toll-Bridge Company issued $4.5 million (equivalent to $63.5 million in 2023[2]) in bonds[5] to raise a portion of the estimated $7.5 million (equivalent to $106 million in 2023[2]) budget required to build the first bridge. First-year operating revenues were anticipated to be $868,469 (equivalent to $12.3 million in 2023[2]), but the original bridge lost money in its first year of operation.[6]

The original bridge, known as the San Francisco Bay Toll Bridge, opened on March 2, 1929[7][8][9] after about a year of construction. It was a privately owned venture and was then the longest bridge in the world.[3] Most of the original bridge was a causeway trestle 27 feet wide, with five 300-foot (91 m) truss spans in the center[10] incorporating a vertical lift over the main shipping channel. Clearance when the lift was down to allow road traffic over the bridge was 35 feet (11 m), and clearance with the lift up to allow marine traffic to pass the bridge was 135 feet (41 m).[11]

The original drawbridge played a minor role in the history of the Stanford Axe. When Stanford students stole the Axe back from Cal in April 1930, the getaway car was presumed to be traveling the shortest route, which would be over the bridge, and pursuing Cal students gave chase. The operator on duty, who was a graduate student at Stanford, learned that Cal students were causing the increased traffic in pursuit of the Axe, so he raised the draw and stopped traffic. In fact, the getaway car was traveling back to Palo Alto via San Jose.[12]

Although the initial press was favorable, daily traffic fell from the opening months[13] and never exceeded 2,000 cars per day until 1947.[6] The State of California purchased the bridge on September 12, 1951, for $6,000,000 (equivalent to $56.5 million in 2023[2]). By 1955, traffic exceeded 9,000 cars per day,[6] and in 1957, traffic was stopped an average of six times per day to allow ship traffic to pass the bridge.[3] The bridge originally had pole lights along the entire stretch, which were later abandoned except over the vertical lift span. Traffic on the bridge increased from 3,000 cars per day in 1929[13] to 56,000 cars per day in 1968.[9] Before the new bridge was complete, California put the original truss spans up for sale in 1965, with the buyer obligated to remove all five truss spans after completion of the 1967 bridge.[10]

1967 orthotropic bridge

[edit]

With increased road and marine traffic, a bill was introduced in 1961 by State Senator Richard J. Dolwig to fund a new fixed high-level bridge to replace the 1929 lift-bridge.[14] The modern span, which began construction on July 17, 1961,[6] opened for traffic in 1967 at a cost of $70,000,000 (equivalent to $488 million in 2023[2]).[3] The originally designed upgrade would retain the existing lift span (along with the attendant delays due to passing ship traffic), adding a second deck to the truss spans and widening the existing trestles to four lanes,[15] but the California Toll Bridge Authority added $30,000,000 (equivalent to $234 million in 2023[2]) to the project budget in September 1961 to replace the existing lift span with a fixed high-level double-deck span,[15] which would have been similar in appearance to the nearby 1956 Richmond–San Rafael Bridge.[16]

By that time, prior phases of the project had already been awarded to relocate the toll plaza from San Mateo to Hayward on new fill[17] and bids were taken for the new eastern trestle,[18] with trestle construction awarded to Peter Kiewit Sons'.[19] The finished single-deck design was not finalized until January 1962, with work initially estimated to complete in 1965.[20]

The new span won two prizes in 1968: an ASCE Award for Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement[21] and an American Institute of Steel Construction long-span prize bridge award.[1]

William Stephen Allen was retained as an architectural consultant,[20] although the bridge was designed by the Bay Toll Crossings Division (under Chief Engineer Norman C. Raab) of the California Department of Public Works. Chuck Seim, one of the design engineers working for Bay Toll Crossings, would later credit Allan Temko's criticism of Raab's economical truss design for the Richmond–San Rafael crossing for generating sufficient public pressure to drive the single-deck design.[16] Temko's article quoted Tung-Yen Lin as being against a repeat of the Richmond–San Rafael design, but Lin ultimately gave Temko the credit for the design.[22] Raab retired and his successor, E.R. "Mike" Foley, was willing to incorporate aesthetic considerations, resulting in the final design.[16] The western highrise span features an all-steel superstructure, with an orthotropic deck over two parallel box girders, following the construction of several smaller test bridges using the same orthotropic deck technology.[23] It was the first large-scale use of an orthotropic deck, which reduces weight, and thus seismic loading, although the bridge is expected to receive moderate to major damage following an earthquake.[24]

Murphy Pacific Marine built the Marine Boss floating barge-crane in 1966 with a 500-short-ton (454 t) capacity to perform the heavy box girder and deck-section lifts.[25] The heavy lift capacity of Marine Boss enabled Murphy Pacific to raise much longer prefabricated girders than existing barge cranes would have allowed. Box girder and deck sections were fabricated in Murphy Pacific's Richmond yard and were carried by Marine Boss to the bridge construction site.[26] Marine Boss was sold for scrap in 1988 to Weeks Marine in New Jersey,[27] who renamed it the Weeks 533 and refurbished it. Weeks 533 has since been used for several notable heavy lifts, including moving the Concorde and Enterprise onto the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum and lifting the downed hull of US Airways Flight 1549 from the Hudson River.[28][29]

San Mateo–Hayward highrise
The highrise section of the San Mateo–Hayward bridge (1967 span).

The total length of the bridge is 7 miles (11.3 km), which is made up of a western 1.9-mile (3.1 km) highrise section and an eastern 5.1-mile (8.2 km) trestle section. Approximately 425,000 cubic yards (325,000 m3) of fill were used at the Hayward end to reclaim land for placing the toll plaza and administrative buildings.[19] The eastern trestle span was built on 4,840 prestressed hollow concrete piles, each 60–90 feet (18–27 m) long.[19] The contractor built a casting yard in Richmond to produce the concrete piles continuously. The new eastern trestle span was completed in 1963[30] and traffic over the existing 1929 bridge was moved over to it.[31]

Work on the western highrise span was bid in October 1964[32] and commenced in 1965. It crosses a shipping channel, with an orthotropic main span that is 750 feet (229 m) long (at the time, the longest girder span in the United States)[16][31][32] and has a vertical clearance of 135 feet (41 m).[3] The main span is flanked by two orthotropic back spans which are each 375 feet (114 m) long, and there are seven orthotropic side spans on the approach to each back span. Each of these side spans are 292 feet (89 m) long.[23] Although these spans appear to be formed from continuous box girders, they consist of alternating anchor spans and suspended spans. Anchor spans rest on top of two adjacent piers and cantilever over each side slightly, and suspended spans are hung between the ends of two adjacent anchor spans.[26] There are an additional nine 208-foot (63 m) steel spans carrying a concrete deck on the San Mateo side of the highrise, and ten steel spans carrying a concrete deck on the Hayward side, ranging from 186 to 208 feet (57 to 63 m).[31] The bridge carries about 93,000 cars and other vehicles on a typical day, almost double its original projected design capacity of 50,000 vehicles per day.[32]

The steel deck of the bridge, approximately 418,000 square feet (38,800 m2), was paved with an epoxy asphalt concrete wearing surface in two layers.[33] The San Mateo Bridge was the first deployment of an epoxy asphalt concrete wearing surface.[34] As of 2005, the original wearing surface was still in use,[35] but was subsequently replaced in 2015.[36]

The highrise section was initially built with six lanes and the eastern causeway with four lanes (two in each direction). The causeway section was a perennial traffic bottleneck until it was expanded to six lanes in 2002,[4] along with much needed improvements in its connections with Interstate 880 in Hayward.

AC Transit began route M bus service over the bridge in May 2003.[37] Service was suspended in 2020 due to ridership losses following the COVID-19 pandemic in the San Francisco Bay Area.[38][39]

San Mateo–Hayward Bridge
San Mateo–Hayward Bridge (1967), showing some of the electric transmission towers paralleling the bridge route and Werder Pier (at left)
The view of the East Bay as seen by eastbound traffic on the descent from the highrise

High-voltage power lines built by PG&E in the 1950s parallel the bridge all the way across the bay.[40] They provide power to the peninsula and San Francisco.

Upgrades and repairs

[edit]

Seismic upgrades (1997–2000)

[edit]

The bridge was closed in the wake of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake as a precaution, but reopened on October 18, 1989.[41] It underwent an extensive seismic retrofitting from 1997 through 2000 to protect against earthquake damage.[42]

Second span (2002–2003)

[edit]

The bridge was considered the worst evening commute in the Bay Area;[43] this ended with the completion of a new eastern trestle carrying westbound bridge traffic in 2002.[4] Eastbound bridge traffic took over the old trestle completely, though eastbound traffic was not expanded to three lanes until February 2003.[44] Funded as part of BATA's regional Measure (RM) 1 program, which raised bridge tolls,[43] the new low-rise trestle portion of the bridge added 10-foot (3.0 m) shoulders on both sides in both directions and effectively widened traffic from four to six lanes, matching the configuration of the high-rise portion of the bridge.[45][46] With the completion of the new westbound trestle, the speed limit on the bridge was raised to 65 miles per hour (105 km/h).[47]

Seismic beam (2010–2015)

[edit]

A beam, which had been added as part of the seismic retrofit project, was found in a cracked condition during a routine inspection in October 2010.[48] The beam, which was on the westbound approach to (east of) the highrise section, was patched with a steel plate as an emergency repair, and permanent repairs, requiring a weekend shutdown, were completed two years later.[49]

Repaving (2015)

[edit]

After nearly forty years of service from the original orthotropic deck wearing surface, Myers and Sons Construction, a partnership between C. C. Myers and Sterling Construction Company, was the selected bidder to remove and replace the wearing surface on the highrise portion in 2015.[36] The work required two full weekend closures on May 8–11, 2015 and May 22–25, 2015.[50] The new polyester concrete wearing surface, developed by Caltrans and used to great success in other Bay Area bridges,[51] is anticipated to be at least as durable as the original epoxy asphalt concrete, according to laboratory tests conducted at the University of Missouri-Columbia.[52][53]

The bridge was closed to traffic, for the first time since opening, starting at 10 pm on Friday, May 8, 2015, for resurfacing and maintenance. The bridge reopened before 4 am on Monday, May 11, 2015.[54] It closed again for the final phase over Memorial Day weekend, May 22–25, 2015, fully reopening by 4:55 am on May 25.[55]

Werder Pier

[edit]
Werder Pier
Werder Pier, the remnant of the original 1929 western trestle span

After the new bridge was built, the old bridge was demolished but the western approach (the trestle span up to the original truss spans) was purchased by the County of San Mateo in 1968 for the nominal sum of $10 (equivalent to $67 in 2023[2])[9] and retained as the 4,055-foot (1,236 m) Werder Fishing Pier,[3] which was known as one of the best places to catch sharks in San Francisco Bay.[56] San Mateo County operated Werder Pier under a lease agreement with Caltrans, which stated that Caltrans may temporarily revoke the lease in order to use the pier as a staging area for repairs to the 1967 span, and that San Mateo County must maintain the pier and keep it open for public use for 25 years.[9]

Werder Pier was closed to the public in 1996, when Caltrans used it as an equipment staging area for the seismic retrofit of the 1967 span.[57] In addition, there were liability concerns since the pier's structure had degraded due to exposure to marine elements.[9] A report was prepared for the county in 2004; the cost of rehabilitating the pier and providing some improvements was estimated at up to $7,200,000 (equivalent to $11.1 million in 2023[2]),[9] depending on a more detailed evaluation of the pier's condition, since the investigation for the report revealed numerous cracks, spalls and exposed reinforcing steel. However, the report also stated the pier did not require any seismic retrofitting.

As of 2013 ownership of the parking lot and land access to the pier was transferred to Foster City.[57] Initial concepts for the newly acquired space included a possible ice rink[58] and ferry terminal, but the land was deemed too environmentally sensitive to support high-intensity use.[59] The park carried an interim name of Werder Park,[60] and was dedicated as Bridgeview Park for a grand opening on June 27, 2015.[61]

Tolls

[edit]

Tolls are only collected from westbound traffic at the toll plaza on the east side of the bridge. All-electronic tolling has been in effect since 2020, and drivers may either pay using the FasTrak electronic toll collection device, using the license plate tolling program, or via a one time payment online. Effective January 1, 2022 – December 31, 2024 (2022-01-01 – 2024-12-31), the toll rate for passenger cars is $7. During peak traffic hours, carpool vehicles carrying three or more people, clean air vehicles, or motorcycles may pay a discounted toll of $3.50 if they have FasTrak and use the designated carpool lane. Drivers must pay within 48 hours after crossing the bridge or they will be sent a toll violation invoice. No additional fees will be added to the toll violation if it is paid within 21 days.[62]

Historical toll rates

[edit]

Prior to 1969, tolls on the San Mateo–Hayward Bridge were collected in both directions. When it opened, the original 1929 span had a toll of $0.45 (equivalent to $7.98 in 2023[63]) per car plus $0.05 (equivalent to $0.89 in 2023[63]) per passenger. In 1959, tolls were set to $0.35 (equivalent to $3.66 in 2023[63]) per car, and remained that amount when the 1967 span was completed. It was raised to $0.70 (equivalent to $5.82 in 2023[63]) in 1969, then $0.75 (equivalent to $4.02 in 2023[63]) in 1976.[64]

The basic toll (for automobiles) on the seven state-owned bridges, including the San Mateo–Hayward Bridge, was raised to $1 by Regional Measure 1, approved by Bay Area voters in 1988.[65] A $1 seismic retrofit surcharge was added in 1998 by the state legislature, originally for eight years, but since then extended to December 2037 (AB1171, October 2001).[66] On March 2, 2004, voters approved Regional Measure 2, raising the toll by another dollar to a total of $3. An additional dollar was added to the toll starting January 1, 2007, to cover cost overruns concerning the replacement of the eastern span.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission, a regional transportation agency, in its capacity as the Bay Area Toll Authority, administers RM1 and RM2 funds, a significant portion of which are allocated to public transit capital improvements and operating subsidies in the transportation corridors served by the bridges. Caltrans administers the "second dollar" seismic surcharge, and receives some of the MTC-administered funds to perform other maintenance work on the bridges. The Bay Area Toll Authority is made up of appointed officials put in place by various city and county governments, and is not subject to direct voter oversight.[67]

Due to further funding shortages for seismic retrofit projects, the Bay Area Toll Authority again raised tolls on all seven of the state-owned bridges in July 2010. The toll rate for autos on the San Mateo–Hayward Bridge was thus increased to $5.[68]

In June 2018, Bay Area voters approved Regional Measure 3 to further raise the tolls on all seven of the state-owned bridges to fund $4.5 billion worth of transportation improvements in the area.[69][70] Under the passed measure, the toll rate for autos on the San Mateo–Hayward Bridge will be increased to $6 on January 1, 2019; to $7 on January 1, 2022; and then to $8 on January 1, 2025.[71]

In September 2019, the MTC approved a $4 million plan to eliminate toll takers and convert all seven of the state-owned bridges to all-electronic tolling, citing that 80 percent of drivers are now using Fastrak and the change would improve traffic flow.[72] On March 20, 2020, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, all-electronic tolling was placed in effect for all seven state-owned toll bridges.[73] The MTC then installed new systems at all seven bridges to make them permanently cashless by the start of 2021.[74] In April 2022, the Bay Area Toll Authority announced plans to remove all remaining unused toll booths and create an open-road tolling system which functions at highway speeds.[75]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b c d American Institute of Steel Construction (1968). "Prize Bridges 1968". American Institute of Steel Construction. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i Johnston, Louis; Williamson, Samuel H. (2023). "What Was the U.S. GDP Then?". MeasuringWorth. Retrieved November 30, 2023. United States Gross Domestic Product deflator figures follow the MeasuringWorth series.
  3. ^ a b c d e f "San Mateo–Hayward Bridge Facts". California Department of Transportation. 1995. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  4. ^ a b c Cabanatuan, Michael (October 30, 2002). "Expanded bridge set to open early". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  5. ^ "Advertisement: San Francisco Bay Toll-Bridge Company—First Mortgage 6 1/2% Sinking Fund Bonds". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. November 22, 1927. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  6. ^ a b c d "The bridges of San Mateo County". San Mateo Daily Journal. March 10, 2008. Retrieved January 19, 2015.
  7. ^ Aerial photo of opening day https://catalog.archives.gov/id/23935737
  8. ^ "San Mateo Bridge Opened by Coolidge; Autos Crowd It Full". San Jose News. March 4, 1929. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  9. ^ a b c d e f Concept Marine Associates (March 2004). County of San Mateo: Werder Pier Restoration Feasibility Study (PDF) (Report). County of San Mateo, Environmental Services Agency, Parks and Recreation Division. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  10. ^ a b "San Mateo–Hayward Spans Are for Sale" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: 30. January–February 1965. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  11. ^ "S. M. Bridges Tie County to Valleys". The Times. San Mateo. October 7, 1936. Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  12. ^ Alkire, David (November 18, 1966). "Operation 'Immortal 21' Highlights Spirited History of Stanford's Axe". The Stanford Daily. Vol. 150, no. 41. Retrieved March 15, 2016.
  13. ^ a b "New San Mateo Bridge Reports Heavy Traffic". San Jose News. April 6, 1929. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  14. ^ "Hearing Due Tuesday on S. M. High Level Bridge". The Times. San Mateo. April 27, 1961. Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  15. ^ a b "Toll Bridge Project is Expanded" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: Inside Front Cover. September–October 1961. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  16. ^ a b c d Redman, Sam; Seim, Chuck (2013). Charles Seim: The Bay Bridge Oral History Project (PDF) (Report). Berkeley: The Bancroft Library, University of California. Retrieved February 6, 2015.
  17. ^ "S.M.-Hayward Bridge Mole Job Is Awarded" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: 71. March–April 1961. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  18. ^ "Bids Will Be Opened July 11, on San Mateo–Hayward Bridge Trestle" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: 21. May–June 1961. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  19. ^ a b c Raab, Norman C. (January–February 1963). "San Mateo–Hayward Bridge" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: 25–31. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  20. ^ a b "San Mateo–Hayward Bridge Design Is Approved" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: 61. January–February 1962. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  21. ^ American Society of Civil Engineers (2015). "Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement (OCEA) Award Past Award Winners". American Society of Civil Engineers. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  22. ^ Swent, Eleanor; Lin, T.Y. (2001). 'The Father of Prestressed Concrete': Teaching Engineers, Bridging Rivers and Borders, 1931 to 1999 (Report). Berkeley: Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California. Retrieved February 6, 2015.
  23. ^ a b Mangus, Alfred R. (October 2005). "California's Orthotropic Steel Bridges" (PDF). Structure. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  24. ^ "Toll Bridge Seismic Retrofit Program". Bay Area Toll Authority. September 6, 2013. Retrieved January 15, 2015.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  25. ^ Mangus, Alfred R. (August 30, 2008). California Orthotropic Bridge Bus Tour (PDF). Orthotropic Bridge Conference. Sacramento, California. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  26. ^ a b Murphy, Jay (June 2007). "Early California Accelerated Steel Bridge Construction". Steel TIPS: Technical Information & Product Service. Structural Steel Educational Council. Retrieved August 2, 2015.
  27. ^ "New Life for the Marine Boss". Cranes Today. January 2, 2001. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  28. ^ Gauvin, Brian (August 22, 2012). "World's Most Famous Crane? Shuttle Move Shines Spotlight on Weeks". Professional Mariner. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  29. ^ Rose, Lisa (June 6, 2012). "Space Shuttle Enterprise Is the Latest Historic Vessel Picked Up by Legendary Jersey City Crane". New Jersey Star-Ledger. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  30. ^ "State-Owned Toll Bridges: San Mateo–Hayward and Dumbarton Bridges" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: 56–57. November–December 1963. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  31. ^ a b c "Tower Work to Start on Bridge". The Times. San Mateo. October 23, 1965. Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  32. ^ a b c "San Mateo–Hayward Bridge" (PDF). California Highways and Public Works. California Department of Public Works: 65. September–October 1964. Retrieved January 21, 2015.
  33. ^ Seim, Charles (1973). "Skid Resistance of Epoxy Asphalt Pavements on California Toll Bridges". Skid Resistance of Highway Pavements. American Society for Testing and Materials. pp. 41–59. Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  34. ^ "Epoxy Asphalt Polymer Concrete". ChemCo Systems. 2014. Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  35. ^ Mangus, Alfred R. (March–April 2005). "A Fresh Look at Orthotropic Technology". Public Roads. 68 (5). Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  36. ^ a b "Sterling Construction Company, Inc. Is the Selected Contractor for a San Mateo Bridge Project Valued at Approximately $25 Million" (PDF) (Press release). The Woodlands, Texas: Sterling Construction Company. December 2, 2014. Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  37. ^ "Line M a Success" (Press release). AC Transit. December 21, 2004. Archived from the original on February 5, 2005.
  38. ^ "Report 20-262". AC Transit. July 8, 2020. Retrieved May 3, 2022.
  39. ^ "AC Transit Temporarily Suspended Bus Line Descriptions". AC Transit. December 5, 2021. Retrieved May 3, 2022.
  40. ^ Weigel, Samantha (October 31, 2013). "PG&E Replacing Transmission Lines over Bay". The Daily Journal. San Mateo. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  41. ^ Appel, Ted (October 19, 1989). "Toppled Road Predates Quake Reinforcements". Schenectady Gazette. United Press International. Retrieved January 15, 2015.
  42. ^ "San Mateo–Hayward Seismic Retrofit". California Department of Transportation. 1995. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  43. ^ a b Wilson, Marshall (June 15, 1998). "Busting the San Mateo Bridge Bottleneck". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  44. ^ "New Lanes on San Mateo Bridge Open Today". San Mateo Daily Journal. November 4, 2002. Retrieved January 19, 2015.
  45. ^ "Bridge Facts: San Mateo–Hayward Bridge". Bay Area Toll Authority.
  46. ^ "Widening San Mateo–Hayward Bridge". California Department of Transportation. 1998. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  47. ^ Cabanatuan, Michael (November 20, 2003). "San Mateo: Speed Limit on Bridge Jumps to 65 mph". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  48. ^ Cabanatuan, Michael (October 15, 2010). "San Mateo Bridge Getting Emergency Beam Repair". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  49. ^ Cabanatuan, Michael (October 21, 2012). "San Mateo Bridge Work Ahead of Schedule". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  50. ^ "Caltrans to Close San Mateo–Hayward Bridge over Two Weekends May 8–11 & May 22–25" (PDF) (Press release). Oakland, California: California Department of Transportation District 4. April 20, 2015. Retrieved May 4, 2015.
  51. ^ Maggenti, Ric (October 2001). "Polyester Concrete in Bridge Deck Overlays Report" (PDF). California Department of Transportation. Retrieved January 20, 2015.
  52. ^ Chamarthi, Ravi Sankar (December 2012). Evaluation of Wearing Surface Systems for the Orthotropic Steel Deck of the San Mateo Hayward Bridge (M.S.). University of Missouri–Columbia. hdl:10355/33133.
  53. ^ Gopalaratnam, V. S.; Chamarthi, R. S. (December 2012). Evaluation of Wearing Surface Systems for the Orthotropic Steel Deck of the San Mateo Hayward Bridge (Report). California Department of Transportation. Project 59A0742
  54. ^ "San Mateo–Hayward Bridge Reopens After Resurfacing, Maintenance". NBC Bay Area. Bay City News Service. May 11, 2015. Retrieved May 25, 2015.
  55. ^ "Both Directions Of San Mateo–Hayward Bridge Now Open". CBS San Francisco. Bay City News Service. May 25, 2015. Retrieved May 25, 2015.
  56. ^ Jones, Ken. "San Mateo Pier". Pier Fishing in California. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  57. ^ a b Okamoto, Steve (February 6, 2013). "Werder Park (Not Pier)". City of Foster City. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  58. ^ Silverfarb, Bill (February 15, 2013). "Ice Rink at Werder Park?". San Mateo Daily Journal. Retrieved July 22, 2015.
  59. ^ Silverfarb, Bill (April 3, 2013). "Ice Rink and Ferry Terminal Unlikely for Foster City's Werder Park". San Mateo Daily Journal. Retrieved July 22, 2015.
  60. ^ "Werder and Destination Parks" (PDF). City of Foster City. May 7, 2014. Retrieved May 5, 2016.
  61. ^ "Bridgeview and Shorebird Parks Ribbon Cutting Grand Opening Celebration" (Press release). City of Foster City. June 8, 2015. Retrieved May 5, 2016.
  62. ^ "San Mateo–Hayward Bridge". www.bayareafastrak.org. CalTrans. Retrieved July 10, 2022.
  63. ^ a b c d e 1634–1699: McCusker, J. J. (1997). How Much Is That in Real Money? A Historical Price Index for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United States: Addenda et Corrigenda (PDF). American Antiquarian Society. 1700–1799: McCusker, J. J. (1992). How Much Is That in Real Money? A Historical Price Index for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United States (PDF). American Antiquarian Society. 1800–present: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. "Consumer Price Index (estimate) 1800–". Retrieved February 29, 2024.
  64. ^ "History of California's Bridge Tolls" (PDF). California Department of Transportation. Retrieved June 3, 2018.
  65. ^ "Regional Measure 1 Toll Bridge Program". Bay Area Toll Authority. Archived from the original on November 4, 2010.
  66. ^ Dutra, John (October 14, 2001). "AB 1171 Assembly Bill – Chaptered". California State Assembly. Archived from the original on March 15, 2012. Retrieved August 7, 2008.
  67. ^ "About MTC". Metropolitan Transportation Commission. October 15, 2009. Archived from the original on November 3, 2010. Retrieved October 15, 2009.
  68. ^ "Frequently Asked Toll Questions". Bay Area Toll Authority. June 1, 2010. Archived from the original on November 22, 2010. Retrieved June 29, 2010.
  69. ^ Cabanatuan, Michael (June 6, 2018). "Regional Measure 3: Work on Transportation Improvements Could Start Next Year". SFGate.com.
  70. ^ Kafton, Christien (November 28, 2018). "Bay Area bridge Tolls to Increase One Dollar in January, Except Golden Gate". KTVU.
  71. ^ "Tolls on Seven Bay Area Bridges Set to Rise Next Month" (Press release). Metropolitan Transportation Commission. December 11, 2018. Retrieved December 16, 2018.
  72. ^ Smith, Darrell (September 7, 2019). "Do you drive to the Bay Area? A big change is coming to toll booths at the bridges". The Sacramento Bee. Retrieved April 12, 2020.
  73. ^ "Cash Toll Collection Suspended at Bay Area Bridges". Metropolitan Transportation Commission. March 20, 2020. Retrieved March 20, 2020.
  74. ^ "New Year Brings New Toll Collection System to Bay Area Bridges". Metropolitan Transportation Commission. December 28, 2020. Retrieved December 28, 2020.
  75. ^ Cabanatuan, Michael (April 10, 2022). "Bay Area toll collectors are gone, so what happens to the tollbooths? Here's the $77 million answer". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved April 12, 2022.
[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to San Mateo – Hayward Bridge.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=San_Mateo–Hayward_Bridge&oldid=1261397943"