For 30 years, from 1981 to 2011, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge governed my life as I commuted from Easton, first to Baltimore and then Annapolis. I developed a love-hate relationship with this two-span colossus, concerned not only about frequent traffic delays but also its structural integrity and its effectiveness as a vital link between the Eastern and Western shores.
Now, I am even more driven by doubt.
A recent life-cycle cost analysis by the Maryland Transport Authority (MdTA) stated that by 2040, without additional lanes, the aggravating back-ups that occur mostly on summer weekends will happen daily. Eastbound back-ups during the reach the beach months could extend 13 miles to Route 97 by 2040. For westbound travelers, daily back-ups could be three miles long, while Sunday jam-ups could be 14 miles, to Wye Mills, by 2040, according to the study.
As for the structural capability—keeping in mind that the two-lane east span was built in 1952, and the three-lane west span was completed in 1973—the analysis is rather stark …” that with programmed and anticipated rehabilitation and maintenance the existing structures can be maintained in fair or better condition through 2065…”
The solution to this grim news is obvious but so very difficult and disruptive. Options offered are 1) build a new three-lane bridge, or 2) demolish the eastbound span and build a new five-lane structure, or 3) demolish the two existing spans and build a new eight-lane Bay Bridge, or 4) maintain existing the three-lane westbound span and widen and refurbish the existing two-lane eastbound span to three lanes.
These options cost between nearly $4 billion and $6.9 billion in 2014 dollars, according to MdTA. These costs seem unrealistically low to me. They include widening the lanes leading to and from the Bay Bridge.
So, where do we go from here?
My 30 years of commuting taught me one thing, beyond anything else. The Bay Bridge is already obsolete in handling today’s traffic. Even during the middle of winter, I saw increasing traffic on Thursday evenings. Those with second homes have grown in number and frequency of visits. Commuters not only from Kent Island but also Easton, Denton, Cambridge and Salisbury have increased. My observations are anecdotal, gained from anguishing trips home to Easton in every type of weather.
I am not entirely surprised that MdTA seems to be avoiding a siren of urgency. Construction of a new bridge or expansion of the existing is a politically explosive subject. Were I living on Kent Island, I would be dumbstruck by the possibility that an even larger, more obtrusive highway would slice through my community. I would think we already have sacrificed quality of life derided by many as another incarnation of the congested, charmless Glen Burnie in Anne Arundel County.
Some would argue that another Bay Bridge or an expanded one would impose even greater pressure on the Eastern Shore than already exists for residential and commercial development. That might be a valid objection—ignoring that Queen Anne’s, Talbot, Caroline and Dorchester counties can control runaway development through zoning and thoughtfully designed comprehensive plans.
I’ve often wondered why the powers-to-be in Ocean City, the mecca of Maryland tourism, haven’t screamed for another Bay Bridge. Perhaps its thousands of visitors have calmed down from the wretched back-ups by the time they reach sand and sunshine. I’ve also wondered why the commercial trucking industry has not complained loudly and often about time lost on Route 50/301.
From a practical standpoint, the huge amount of dollars for a major public works project such as a new or expanded Bay Bridge, is not readily available, if at all today in Maryland. Maybe federal dollars are available. I suspect that transportation leaders in our state have considered a public-private partnership to build and finance the Bay crossing. That option too comes with controversy; the public has to decide if it wants to share the proceeds from a profitable Bay Bridge.
I’m pleased that the state has issued yet another Bay Bridge study. If it is not to gather dust (is that still a relevant concern in the IT age?), Annapolis politicians will have to gather the stamina and will have to persuade citizens on the Eastern and Western Shores, possibly through a referendum, to approve a badly needed renovation and expansion of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. The public voice must be heard.
I suggest we all think about the future and the increasing traffic misery created by an inadequate Bay Bridge. I suspect that pondering this future may be unpleasant and distasteful for many. And I understand that.
Columnist Howard Freedlander retired in 2011 as Deputy State Treasurer of the State of Maryland. Previously, he was the executive officer of the Maryland National Guard. He also served as community editor for Chesapeake Publishing, lastly at the Queen Anne’s Record-Observer. In retirement, Howard serves on the boards of several non-profits on the Eastern Shore, Annapolis and Philadelphia.
Jim Franke says
I wonder if the Four Seasons development was considered in how soon backups will be a daily problem. So much for zoning control.
David Lloyd says
Interesting article but: not one word about the fact that the current governor cut the tolls — thus reducing even further any chance of updating the bridge(s) in the near/distant future. Also I am concerned that with the tolls being reduced, what will be the impact on continued maintenance?
Jeff Staley says
While forecasts of population, congestion, sprawl, pollution, crime, petroleum consumption, hunger, etc. can be useful thought exercises, many resort to assuming that past growth will continue unabated into the future until some obviously untenable situation exists. While human beings often seem resistant to change, they are, when their backs are against the wall, remarkably adaptable. Thus, if backups on the bridge become very long, sensible people will move to the other side, stop trying to commute to work over the bridge, or find a weekend house that is easier to reach.
What can hardly be doubted is that bridge maintenance or new construction can be readily funded by demanding that those (large numbers of drivers) who use the bridge pay for its existence. The start-up costs and risks of the Bay Bridge venture were taken on long ago. Surely this popular institution can be made self-sufficient by now. Not only must current operating and maintenance costs be paid, but tolls should be large enough to allow funds to be accrued for eventual bridge replacement. In fact, the biggest challenge to self-sufficiency may be keeping politicians from re-allocating toll revenues to other projects in the short term.
kirk french says
Well…yeah. This is what economists call “location subsidies.” Once the state builds roads and bridges and whatnot, by not taking a pseudo-market approach in charging drivers for that construction, after five or so years, traffic jams return.
Dirk Dekker says
I wrote this letter to the Star Democrat almost ten years ago. I was wrong at least for now on the huge reduction of fuel prices, whether this will hold for the next 30 or so years it would take for a new bridge is a moot point. I have cleared up a few minor grammar mistakes.
I have read with interest the recent discussion and calls for a new multilane Bay Bridge. Whilst agreeing that the current set up is inadequate and has a potential for danger if someone is not concentrating, tired, driving without due care, there are other I believe more viable options.
Current fuel prices are unlikely to decline for long as world demand increases over the years and I wonder what the prices will be relatively in 20 years time when a new bridge would open.
A far broader approach is needed. Link Ocean City with Salisbury then 404/50 and Stevensville, and then across the Bay to link with Annapolis, and split from there on to DC or Baltimore. This would need to be a monorail type system. Would take far less land, obviate the need for expanding lanes on Route 50/301/ or wherever it hooked up. Ocean City certainly does not need more traffic and has a public transport system in place. Countries in Europe and elsewhere have faced this problem and found some workable alternatives including banning non resident cars from areas, nor do most of the roads on the Eastern Shore have the needed capacity. The phrase Build it and they will come would certainly apply to another Bridge. Another Bridge would be a expensive band aid and not solve the underlying problem of too much traffic.