Maryland officials have narrowed the options for a proposed future replacement to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge.

The current two bridge structures aren’t enough to handle existing and future traffic demands to cross the Bay, according to documents from The Maryland Transportation Authority, which owns and operates the state’s tolled facilities like the Bay Bridge. So they initiated a lengthy process back in 2017 with the Federal Highway Administration to determine what to do.

While other potential crossing locations were considered initially, officials narrowed their focus to the vicinity of the current bridge for reasons of cost, ease of construction and supporting road infrastructure. Other crossing locations closer to Baltimore or farther south would need to cross more water and require much more road construction on land.

Here’s what you need to know:

Does this mean they are going to start building tomorrow?

No, and any new construction would still be years away.

The MDTA is in the second stage of an environmental review process — essentially a cost-benefit analysis — to determine if the needs for a new bridge outweigh any potential adverse impacts to the surrounding area. The state initiated the process back in 2017 and likely won’t finish for another two years.

If the call is to build something new and tear down the existing bridges, it would still be years after that 2026 decision until construction would begin. That likely means sometime in the 2030s.

Do the current bridges need to be replaced?

The state still could choose a “no-build” option — retaining the existing spans alongside any option for building a new bridge (or bridges) is required as part of the environmental review process.

But it’s highly unlikely that officials would go that direction.

The current bridge is listed in “fair” condition, according to the National Bridge Inventory, and is safe to drive on, but will reach the end of its “useful lifespan” in the coming decades.

Keeping it in safe condition would require investing an estimated $3.8 billion over the next 40 years to maintain the two current spans — that’s roughly half the cost of building something new and would result in worse congestion in the future, according to MDTA documents, presumably due to lane closures during maintenance and growing traffic.

The shoulders on the two spans are substandard, and the 185 feet of clearance for ships navigating the Chesapeake Bay is a “key constraint,” according to MDTA documents. The Francis Scott Key Bridge, which cargo ships also had to sail under before it collapsed, was a similar height — the MDTA is pursuing a rebuilt Key Bridge roughly 45 feet higher than before.

What are the build options?

The MDTA has narrowed the options for any future bridge down to six. Agency officials will present those six alternatives and the “no-build” option at public meetings in December.

1. Alternative A (6-5-6), or the no-build option, maintains the current structures. The eastern and western shore approach roads (U.S. 50/301) would remain at six total lanes of traffic, and the bridges with their five total lanes.
2. Alternatives B and C (6-8-6) would keep the U.S. 50/301 approaches as-is, but build two new bridge spans with a total of eight lanes. The difference between the two would be the exact location (slightly north or slightly south) of the future spans within the designated corridor.
3. Alternatives D and E (8-8-8) would widen the U.S. 50/301 approaches from six total lanes to eight and build two new bridge spans with a total of eight lanes. The difference between the two would be the exact location (slightly north or slightly south) of the future spans within the designated corridor.
4. Alternatives F and G (8-10-8) would widen the U.S. 50/301 approaches from six total lanes to eight and build two new bridge spans totaling ten lanes. The difference between the two would be the exact location (slightly north or slightly south) of the future spans within the designated corridor.

In moving these alternatives forward, the MDTA will close the book on the possibility of a tunnel or bridge-tunnel combo similar to a different Chesapeake Bay crossing near Norfolk, Virginia. A tunnel would cost more than twice than building a bridge, and both a tunnel and a bridge-tunnel would have greater adverse environmental impacts to the bay and restrict the transit of hazardous materials in trucks.

In an interview Wednesday afternoon, MDTA Executive Director Bruce Gartner said the decision-making process is still ongoing and not a “done deal.” Though the no-build option or constructing one big bridge carrying traffic in both directions are still theoretically on the table, his agency’s professional recommendation, he added, is to build two separate structures like the current alignment.

What else might a new bridge include?

Each of the proposed alternatives (excluding the no-build option) includes a 12-foot shoulder on the left and right side of each span, meaning four total shoulders. The right shoulder would provide enough space for stalled or emergency vehicles. The left shoulder could be turned into a travel lane during peak hours.

Planners also are evaluating the feasibility of including an area for pedestrians and cyclists to use along one of the spans. There’s a possibility of using one of the lanes as a 24-hour dedicated bus lane, too, as part of a revamp to the area’s transit service. That would complement potential new park-and-ride facilities to facilitate carpooling or bus service to popular locations on either side of the bay.

What about the tolls?

There could be a significant change to tolls. The MDTA is studying the possibility of using congestion pricing to help keep traffic at bay.

Drivers currently pay variable rates based on how they pay and use the bridge. The regular rates for 2-axle cars for Marylanders with E-ZPass is $2.50. Commuters with E-ZPass pay $1.40. Without the transponder, Marylanders pay $4 with a “pay-by-plate” account and the video toll rate for everyone else is $6. Vehicles with more axles or commercial vehicles pay more.

Congestion pricing idea would make the cost to cross the bridge higher at peak travel times, and encouraging drivers to avoid crowding the bridge at once — for example, crossing on Friday afternoon and evening in the summer. Some drivers would choose to pay the higher toll, but others might wait out rush hour, theoretically making traffic better for everyone.

Officials in New York have on-again, off-again congestion pricing plans for part of downtown New York City. The tolling infrastructure is in place, but New York Gov. Kathy Hochul suddenly paused the plan earlier this year over concerns of “unintended consequences,” like unfairly taxing working-class drivers. The plan is reportedly back on but with lower toll rates.

How will the state pay for it?

If and when the state builds the new spans, it will be a massive project, currently estimated to cost as much as $8.4 billion.

The state transportation department is currently staring down a budget crunch due to rising costs and waning revenues, and it has a long list of priority projects, including the proposed Baltimore Red Line light rail.

The MDTA is partially immune to that crunch, though, because it pays for a lot of its own stuff — well, drivers pay for it with the money they spend on tolls. Toll revenue goes right back into MDTA projects, giving the agency a solid, dedicated funding stream. The agency brought in more than $750 million in fiscal year 2023, according to its financial documents.

A project of this scale would undoubtedly require federal help, though, hence the environmental review process. The MDTA could pursue grant or formula funding from the Federal Highway Administration, but that request would still be many years away.

Where do things go from here?

The MDTA will present the narrowed-down options for a future Bay Bridge at three upcoming public meetings.

• Virtual: Wednesday, Dec. 4, 6-8 p.m. at baycrossingstudy.com
• In person: Anne Arundel County: Monday, Dec. 9, 6-8 p.m. at Broadneck High School, 1265 Green Holly Drive, Annapolis
• In person: Queen Anne’s County: Wednesday, Dec. 11, 6-8 p.m. at Kent Island High School, 900 Love Point Road, Stevensville

The agency then will spend the next year working on a draft environmental impact statement that dissects all of the available options. They should be able to select a “preferred” alternative by next summer, and then will work with federal officials to reach a “record of decision” by November 2026 if all goes to plan.

Even with an ROD in hand, it still would be years before ground is broken on any new bridge, pushing likely completion into the 2030s.

Rick Hutzell contributed to this report