The Seaside City Council heard a status update Sept. 4 on the closed San Pablo pedestrian bridge and directed staff to keep designing a replacement-level solution while pursuing outside funding.

Public Works Director Thomas Corman told the council the 95-foot timber glulam bridge, originally built in the 1960s, was inspected in December 2022 and closed in early 2023 after inspectors found splitting and moisture damage to the glulam beams. “The recommendation was basically made to close that bridge in the light of safety,” Corman said.

The presentation summarized three earlier options presented to council in April 2023: a short-term repair (previously estimated at about $350,000), a superstructure replacement (about $500,000 at the time of estimate), and a full replacement including approach/pathway and environmental review (about $2 million at the time). Corman said the repair would likely extend service “about 5 to 10 years” and require yearly inspections; a superstructure replacement would provide a much longer service life—“probably 25 to 30 years and beyond.”

Corman reviewed grant and budget work to date. The city spent roughly $222,000 on the bridge assessment and about $160,000 on design services so far, he said. An earlier Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) award of $700,000 was reallocated to a different project when staff determined it could not be used for the bridge; a later state Active Transportation Program application for $2.7 million was not funded. Corman said the city has rolled over approximately $668,000 in general-fund design and construction-allowance money toward the project; he identified a pending congressional community project funding request through Rep. Jimmy Panetta for $850,000 (down from an initial $3 million request).

Council members pressed staff on tradeoffs between speed and durability. Mayor Pro Tem Pacheco described the short-term repair as “a band aid,” questioning whether spending to open the bridge temporarily made sense when repeated inspections and subsequent closures would be likely. Corman agreed the repair would be fastest to reopen the bridge but warned it would require ongoing annual inspection and likely additional repairs within five to 10 years.

Several council members said their prior direction was to pursue full replacement-level work where possible. After discussion, staff said it would continue design on the superstructure-replacement approach and return to council for decisions contingent on funding outcomes. “Staff's proceeding with design, as Thomas referenced, the superstructure still requires design, so staff is moving forward with that,” the city manager said.

Council and staff also discussed ADA access. Corman said a repair-only approach would leave approach slopes and landings in their current (non-ADA-compliant) state, while a superstructure or full replacement would allow the city to engineer compliant approaches, potentially in coordination with Lincoln Cunningham Park work already underway.

The council did not take a binding vote on construction at the Sept. 4 meeting; members reiterated prior direction to pursue replacement-level funding and authorized staff to continue design and external funding outreach.

The city will return to the council with funding decisions and any recommended bid timing once grant notifications and the continued design work clarify costs and scope.