Loading...
09 Staff Report - Roberts Road Bridge Replacement COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: 8/2/04 ITEM NO. 9 DATE: JULY 28, 2004 TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL FROM: DEBRA J. FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER SUBJECT: '/V UPDATE ON ROBERTS ROAD BRIDGE REPLACE RECOMMENDATION: Pursue grant funding for replacement of the Roberts Road bridge. BACKGROUND: During the 2004-2009 Capital Budget review, the Town Council asked questions regarding the Roberts Road Bridge Capital Improvement Project. This report provides additional information on the current status of the bridges and anticipated next steps. The State of California annually inspects the bridges in cities and towns that are not within their maintenance sphere and reports its finding to the local jurisdictions. The Town received reports covering the condition of each of its bridges, all of which received good grades for their condition, with one exception: Roberts Road. The report uses a condition scale of 1 (excellent) to 6 (poor) for various bridge components. The Roberts Road bridge received ratings on and 4 which means below average condition. The report found this structure deficient in several categories. The bridge on Roberts Road across Los Gatos Creek was built in 1918. The design ofthis bridge was in accordance with the engineering standards and requirements of the early 1900's and is far from today's modem and complex criteria in terms ofboth structure and seismic design. This bridge was basically a one lane structure used to carry agricultural products across the creek at that time. There has been very little rehabilitation work done on this structure over its 86 years. Additionally, the bridge would not meet current seismic standards. The Caltrans report identifies cracks and spalls in nearly all concrete elements ofthe bridge; piers, roadway slabs, and rails. Reinforcing is exposed in several locations. The weakened concrete sections are a cause to heed the recommendations ofthis report. From it there are a few options available: ! (j (. ftwftA PREPARED BY: 􀁾􀁅􀀮 CURTIS 'JDirector of Parks and Public Works Reviewed Reviewed by: \>.J::S Assistant Town Manager =::El:Attomey __Clerk % Finance Community Djevelopment Revised: 7/29/04 7:49 am Reformatted: 5/30/02 N:\B&E\COUNCIL REPORTS\roberts.rd.bridge.replace.wpd MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT REGARDING UPDATE ON THE ROBERT ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT JULY 28, 2004 Page Two 1. Reduce the use of the bridge to pedestrians and bicyclists with either some or no allowance for vehicular usage. 2. Repair the existing structure and possibly impose a load restriction. 3. Replace the existing structure with a facility that meets code. At present, the bridge appears to be in a stable condition, but action will be needed shortly. DISCUSSION: Staffhas looked into options as to what can be done with this bridge, both short term and long term. In the short term, it is recommended that weight limit restrictions be placed on this bridge. This bridge has a rating of 20 tons which is less than most garbage and delivery trucks. Limiting the vehicle weight/size will increase the service life ofthe structure until more permanent rehabilitation or replacement is done. This would be achieved through signage. Staff has already proceeded in taking this measure. Property owners on Roberts Road and the adjacent streets have been notified regarding the implementation ofvehicle weight limits, and the garbage company has been contacted. In the long term, if the bridge is to remain open, it will need extensive rehabilitation of the deck, rails, and support structure below the deck at an estimated cost of $1 ,000,000. This rehabilitation would repair the structural deficiencies ofthe bridge, but not bring it up to current design criteria. which is a requirement of Caltrans if an agency wants to use grant funding for rehabilitation. Due to its present condition and initial design, it is not cost effective to rehabilitate this bridge to bring it into compliance with current Caltrans standards. It is Caltrans policy not to fund projects where a local agency has not taken appropriate action to address deficiencies identified in a Caltrans Inspection Report. A more attractive option is to keep this road open to all users. Ifthis is to be done, it is recommended to replace this bridge with an adequate structure. A new bridge can be designed with any aesthetic feature that the Town may wish to have. Grant funding could be used for the replacement proj ect and can be used for architectural features on the bridge, as long as such features are similar to the existing bridge. If approved by Caltrans a replacement structure would allow for improved sight distance and traffic safety, pedestrian and bicycle safe railings, lower maintenance and repair costs, and a much higher level of seismic resistance. Closure of the bridge to vehicles, with a detour to Blossom Hill Road, is also an option. MAYOR AND TO\VN COUNCIL SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT REGARDING UPDATE ONTHE ROBERT ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT JULY 28, 2004 Page Three CONCLUSION: Staff recommends the following approach: 1. Reduce the usage ofthe bridge to pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles under 10,000 pounds. 2. Pursue grant funding for sufficient funds for replacement of the existing bridge. 3. Design and build the new Roberts Road Bridge. Another course of action, not recommended by staff, is to repair and renovate the existing bridge. If this action were taken, the bridge would still not be in compliance with current standards and would have questionable life expectancy. However, if grant funds prove to be unavailable for replacing the bridge, then repair is a preferred alternative to permanent closure. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: This project is not defined under CEQA. A Notice of Exemption is not required. FISCAL IMPACT The cost ofputting weight limit signs on the bridge is under $200. Any rehabilitation or replacement costs would would need to be funded separately by the Town. The FY 2004/09 Capital Improvement Plan allocates $100,000 oflocal GFAR funding and $900,000 ofstate grant funding totaling $1,000,000 for this project. Staffcan pursue grant funding from Caltrans for replacement, ifthat is the direction of the Council. ."'-.