Still, I do use it from time to time, and the risk of rubber-necking, I have tried to understand just what this replacement portion of the bridge would be like.
One can look at this a bunch of ways. I will offer one. I hope other readers provide other thoughts.
My thought is about design.
The cantilever bridge that is coming done is ugly, and reflective of the time it was built, namely in the midst of the 1930's depression, and a time of public works employment. Rosie the Riveter mentality. I don't have the civil engineering background to understand why this approach was taken for the span. It was acceptable for years until the 1989 earthquake, and it has taken this long to replace it.
It always has been ugly from a design standpoint.
The new replacement span has been a boondoggle from a spending standpoint, and some of the shenanigans around some of its construction components raise questions about how much safer it is than what it replaces.
But from a design standpoint, my opinion is that it is a thing of beauty, much more in place with the San Francisco persona than its predecessor.
I just hope it is safe to drive.
This story contains 228 words.
If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.
If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.