Happy Birthday San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge!

[tayser]

Question: has it always been a double stacked bridge or was that a later addition?

[Gordo]

^Always. It used to have space for streetcars (from the east Bay and from further places like Sacramento) and cars, though now it's just five lanes for cars each direction.

I don't remember the exact alignment before, but now westbound traffic is on the bottom and eastbound is on the top.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Gordo

but now westbound traffic is on the bottom and eastbound is on the top.

that's dumb. westbound traffic should definitely be on top so that people can enjoy sweeping views of the skyline as a grand entrance to "the city".

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by Gordo

^Always. It used to have space for streetcars (from the east Bay and from further places like Sacramento) and cars, though now it's just five lanes for cars each direction.

I don't remember the exact alignment before, but now westbound traffic is on the bottom and eastbound is on the top.

Uh, Gordo, are you in some post-Australia, everything-is-opposite state of mind? Fear not, Steely, westbound is on top, eastbound on the bottom.

[Gordo]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

Uh, Gordo, are you in some post-Australia, everything-is-opposite state of mind? Fear not, Steely, westbound is on top, eastbound on the bottom.

Yeah, not sure why I switched them. I must be still figuring out this northern hemisphere thing again!

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

Fear not, Steely, westbound is on top, eastbound on the bottom.

good. i'm glad to hear that the traffic engineers of california are not retarded.

[peanut gallery]

^ Wait just a minute, don't go putting words in my mouth...

[Steely Dan]

sorry about that, here's the corrected version:

i'm glad to hear that the traffic engineers of california are not completely retarded.

[BigKidD]

Photos of the Bay Bridge from the SF Chronicle,

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object...0499850368.jpg
Construction starts on July 9, 1933. By Jan. 24, 1935, the towers and the beginnings of the eastern span rise from the bay.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object...0499850372.jpg
Sep. 2, 1935: The East span's cantilever bridge, still under construction in this photo, connects to five smaller truss spans.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object...-chronicle.jpg
A ferry passes by the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge on the eve of its opening on Nov. 11, 1936, six decades after Emperor Norton's "mandate." (Chronicle archives)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object...0499854726.jpg
Nov. 12, 1936: California Governor Frank Merriam addresses the crowd at the Oakland toll plaza for the opening day ceremony. He and other officials crossed the bridge and repeated their speeches on the San Francisco side.
-You can notice the Key System behind the crowd.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object...Fba_bridge.jpg
This test-train car, seen in 1938, is part of the Key System that crosses the Bay Bridge on railroad tracks. (File photo, 1938)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object...0499854734.jpg
Oct. 28, 1936: Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, the Papal Secretary of State who became Pope Pius XII, blesses the new Bay Bridge during his visit. Standing with him, from left to right, are: Count Enrico Galezzi of Rome, Bishop Spellman of Boston, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of San Francisco MSGR. Thomas Connolly, Cardinal Pacelli, Archbishop J.J. Mitty of S.F., Police Chief William Quinn, bridge engineer G.B. Woodruff, and Mayor Angelo Rossi.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object...ime4_b_12j.jpg
Nov. 12 1936: The first cars drive across the $77 million, 8.4-mile structure. The upper deck is designated for two-way traffic, the bottom for trucks, trains and streetcars. The toll is 65 cents. (Chronicle file photo)

[Gordo]

^Cool pics. Interesting that the toll has essentially been cut by 60% over the last 60 years. 65 cents in 1936 is roughly equivalent to $10 today, yet the toll today is only $4, in spite of demand that is perhaps an order of magnitude higher.

Kind of laughable that the $77,000,000 cost would only equate to about $1.2 billion today. I would guess that an entirely new structure would be at least $25 billion, probably more.

[Amanita]

I have a copy of the book "High Steel", which chronicles the construction of both the San Francisco-Oakland and Golden Gate Bridges. In it, the authour opines that the bay bridge "Could not be built today at any price. There are not enough dollars in our inflated coffers."

[Chicago3rd]

Originally Posted by Amanita

Note the picture on top, which shows the black netting over parts of the towers.

Also take a look at the first picture in this thread, one of mine showing a close up of the tower. Look at the underside of the uppermost horizontal part at the top of the tower- note that it's latticed. Then look down at the underside of the x-brace immediately below it. That used to be a latticework of steel too, but they've either replaced or reinforced that old latticework with solid steel plate.
Also, have a look at the 4th picture down on the page I linked to- notice the steel beams that make up the bridge's stiffening truss. Those were once made of thousands of small steel pieces riveted together, and are now replaced by one-piece perforated steel crossbeams. That way they don't have thousands of rivets just waiting to fail in the event of an earthquake.

Bay Bridge ended up with something few women want- major weight gain. To the tune of 17 million pounds! Mind you, that 17 million pounds are all solid steel, making her much stronger than she previously was. I definately suggest reading the article linked to here, it s
hould prove helpful.

Thanks! I was reading that the change was visually minimal, but was curious. With your information I found more information showing the change. Thanks for starting this great thread!

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...Retrofit_1.jpg

[peanut gallery]

I'm always amazed that they were able to build both bridges at the same time in the middle of the Great Depression.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

good. i'm glad to hear that the traffic engineers of california are not retarded.

Nor are the financial people. You pay the toll to go into the city. Leaving is free.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Amanita

I would not be surprised if anything requiring closures was done at night, when fewer people would notice or be inconvenienced.

The bridge has a fair amount of traffic 24/7. In fact, since BART shuts down from about 1:30 AM until around 5 or 5:30 AM, in the wee hours the bridge is the only connection between SF and the East Bay. And a fair number of night workers, trucks and such need to use it then.

Like I said, I can't recall any closures at any time except a couple of weekend closures related to the construction of the new eastern span and the recent closure to repair the cantilever span damage.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Gordo

^Cool pics. Interesting that the toll has essentially been cut by 60% over the last 60 years. 65 cents in 1936 is roughly equivalent to $10 today, yet the toll today is only $4, in spite of demand that is perhaps an order of magnitude higher.

Kind of laughable that the $77,000,000 cost would only equate to about $1.2 billion today. I would guess that an entirely new structure would be at least $25 billion, probably more.

The toll was supposed to go away entirely when the bridge was paid for.

Today's toll is as follows: "For the typical automobile, a $4 toll is collected — a $1 base toll, $1 for Regional Measure 2 and a $2 seismic retrofit surcharge."
Source: http://bata.mtc.ca.gov/tolls/index.htm

"Regional measure 2" "raises $125 million annually for transportation improvements designed to get commuters onto transit, thereby decreasing bridge traffic."
Source: http://transformca.org/campaign/rm2

[Amanita]

The toll was supposed to go away on the Golden Gate as well.
To learn more of the "dirty deeds" of the Golden Gate Bridge District, pick up a copy of the book they don't want you to read, it's called "Paying the toll", and can be found on Amazon.
In the case of the Golden Gate, tolls collected partially fund the bus and ferry operations run by the district, as well as paying for vital bridge maintenance.
Although a conversation with a bridge ironworker was illuminating- he said that current GGB administration doesn't seem to care about the bridge that much, only its toll money. Look at the middle two horizontal portal braces on the south tower- covered in rust. That ironworker told me that every day, he and his coworkers walk the cables, and report on things that need fixing. And those reports have a habit of being ignored.
And now they're talking about charging bikers and pedestrians a toll as well. Unreal.

I imagine Bay Bridge also has some of her toll funds allocated to maintenance, "care and feeding", and the like.

About bridge closures- I wonder if they did lane closures at various times when the west span retrofit was happening, instead of full bridge closures. Closing a lane or two at night or during slower traffic times might not be so noticable.

[Gordo]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

The toll was supposed to go away entirely when the bridge was paid for.

Oh, I realize that, just commenting.

[Amanita]

http://bighugelabs.com/onblack.php?i...d=1&size=large

Here's an even better picture I found showing the steel of the towers that was added during the retrofit.

[homebucket]

Bay Bridge, SFO, California by amit srivastav, on Flickr

Bay Bridge Tule Fog Night by Ian Chamberlain, on Flickr

Bay Bridge by Dennis Stanworth, on Flickr

San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge by Sergio Ruiz, on Flickr

Oakland-berthed cruise ship heading under Bay Bridge by Michael Layefsky, on Flickr

Untitled by Nathan McNamara, on Flickr

San Francisco Night Aerial Pano by Lee Sie, on Flickr

San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge by Sergio Ruiz, on Flickr