Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Workshop_11/13/2007MINUTES VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2007 Call to Order and Roll Call The meeting was called to order by Mayor Jim Humpage at 6:05 p.m. A roll call was taken by Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. Present were: Mayor Jim Humpage, Vice Mayor Pat Watkins, Council Member Dan Amero, Council Member Calvin Turnquest, and Council Member Tom Paterno. Also in attendance were: Manager Michael R. Couzzo, Jr., and Village Clerk Lori McWilliams. New Business Discussion on the Teguesta Bridge Mayor Humpage reported the purpose of the workshop primarily was to discuss the amount of money that would be required for the engineering fees. The backup indicated a cost estimate of approximately $1.5 million; however, construction costs could change, and the Council needed to discuss this matter and give Manager Couzzo direction on how to proceed. Mayor Humpage opened the floor for discussion. Council Member Amero indicated he wanted to look at all options: repair, and/or replacement. After reading the reports back to 2/15/07 and the 3/26/07 County memo and Manager Couzzo's memo of 5/21/07, he had concerns about putting a band aid on the bridge. In the memo from DOT on 2/15/07 regarding significant bridge deficiencies, they mentioned there was real concern regarding boater safety due to possible falling debris. Commissioner Karen Marcus mentioned replacing the bridge entirely and the County taking over maintenance and ownership after it was completely replaced. In Village Manager Couzzo's memo, and in the report from Bridge Design Associates, they used the word "severe" five times -meaning the worst it could be. Cracking of posts; sidewalk panels in span three showed delamination and presence of large cracks, and roadway panels in span three also showed signs of severe delamination and cracking. An area in span five which had already been patched also showed signs of delamination and cracking. Deterioration included signs of heavy corrosion. Recommendations by Bridge Design Associates indicated it was clear that within 4-5 years the entire bridge deck would need to be replaced, and suggested the Village continue the piece-by-piece replacement and shut down every two years for repairs, or take steps to replace the bridge within the next 24 months. Council Member Amero commented it sounded like if the Village continued to do repairs over the next two years, they still thought the bridge needed to be replaced. Council Member Amero stated he was not a proponent for driving all the way around; closing the bridge would be a major inconvenience for residents, and reiterated to look at all options: replacement, time Minutes -Village Council Workshop Meeting 11/13/07 Page 2 frames, an estimate submitted from another bridge expert, going to Palm Beach County residents to see if they would like to chip in since there were a lot of them living on that side of the bridge who were not in favor of voluntary annexation; and going to Commissioner Marcus for money towards the project. Vice Mayor Watkins commented that span three had been done first because it was in the worst condition, and there had been a workshop at that time from which her recollection was that Bridge Design Associates thought if Council continued the process which was done on span three, that when done it would be a sound bridge for another 50 years. The Vice Mayor expressed concern that the pilings were an issue and she wanted to be assured those were not an issue. She commented she understood the Village could piggyback on a county bid; Village Manager Couzzo agreed. Vice Mayor Watkins commented at the time, they talked about approaching Martin and Palm Beach County but that had not been a popular idea, and the letter from Commissioner Marcus had been a response to Vice Mayor Watkins' letter to her. The Vice Mayor advised she was all for doing the bridge the sooner the better and as reasonably as possible expense wise and as well done as possible design wise. She understood they could expand the procedure that was done on span three and it would work. Replacing the bridge would be more expensive. Council Member Amero asked what it had cost to do the work to date? Village Manager Couzzo responded that the work done last year to replace segments cost $235,000 and preventative maintenance was in the high $50,000 range. Council Member Amero commented that didn't include items like engineering. The Village Manager responded that engineering had included a lot of sub-engineering for a cost of approximately $147,000, which was brought down after he spoke with them. Many other things would be needed--utility engineers, storm drainage work, surveying, etc., so the engineering component would come up. Council Member Amero estimated with design and permitting, drainage design, utility relocation design, and survey work, the Village might be looking at $2 million, which did not include roadway design. Village Manager Couzzo commented the estimate was contingent upon today's prices. In response to Council Member Amero's question regarding total cost of replacement and time constraints, the Village Manager estimated the cost could be 3 - 4 times what was being projected and maybe take 9 - 12 months for removal and reinstallation. There had been discussion about making the bridge higher to accommodate taller boats. Council Member Amero noted residents would be concerned about their views. Council Member Amero commented then the cost could be $2.5 million including everything. Council Member Paterno commented it would be more than that. Also to be considerea were police and fire overtime-the last time it was at least $40,000 on a short term basis; also, he had understood the two spans replaced previously would extend the life of the bridge 5-7 years, which would buy time to come up with a plan. Council Member 2 Minutes -Village Council Workshop Meeting 11/13/07 Page 3 Paterno asked Village Manager Couzzo if he had come up with any other options. The Village Manager advised it could always be replaced with a new bridge; however, there were a number of consequences such as the elevated costs and extension of time; 9-12 months for public safety. Council Member Amero expressed his opinion of the need to seriously look at the number-now they were looking at borrowing $1.5 million but it would be more. Village Manager Couzzo commented there might confusion as to repair and replacement. The engineers had indicated if the work was done as specified repairing the existing structure and not replacing what was done last year, no additional work would be needed for another 50 years; the other spans would be lifted out and replaced, in effect bringing the bridge up to standards for a minimum of 50 years. Council Member Paterno was under the understanding the seawalls were part of the problem due to leakage and the top would have to be removed to replace them; he clarified he was speaking about the panels that had to shoot down for the seawall. The Village Manager reported the substructure that supported the span was in good shape. Discussion ensued. Clarification was needed from the engineers whether "replacement" referred to replacing spans or the entire bridge. Council Member Amero suggested fixing the bridge and then giving it to the county, since it would be an ongoing maintenance headache. Mayor Humpage commented that on the last page there was an "as built" drawing on the back, dated 5/21/07 showing they had replaced the center sections. His understanding was the pilings were good but needed repair. Mayor Humpage explained there were five sections and when two sides were placed together, cables were put through the cavity and torque wrenches were used to jack the sections together to strengthen the slabs. They poured hydraulic cement to fill the cavities so the cables were not exposed. The Mayor commented the Council needed to direct the Manager to have someone do the engineering to know exactly what was needed. What they were saying now was to repair the pilings and bulk heads, put all new spans back, and repair the bridge, would cost around $1.5 million, which he thought was probably a good guess but not accurate. Mayor Humpage suggested using the enterprise fund, and use stormwater and their reserves to do stormwater and not take from the general fund. The Mayor stated he thought what the engineers were saying was the bridge was sound as far as substructure and only needed minor repairs; but then the bridge in its entirety needed to be removed and completely replaced as was done with the center spans. That seemed to him the best solution as far as the least amount of downtime and overtime. But what the Council needed was someone to say that would work and this is the cost. Council Member Paterno asked why take from the water department to pay for the bridge? Mayor Humpage indicated he was only referring to the utility cost. Council Member Paterno advised he thought the idea of this workshop was to come up with alternatives and walk away and say move in some direction, not say let's spend 3 Minutes -Village Council Workshop Meeting 11/13/07 Page 4 $42,000 on engineering for something they might never do, and only one option was presented. Village Manager Couzzo commented the workshop was for discussion. Council Member Amero commented they couldn't afford to drag on too long, and should lay out some options. He recommended having an engineer present and maybe a couple of different bids. Look at what it would cost to go new; and look at numbers; talk about how to finance and pay for it; leave with some good information and come back at a new workshop and make a decision before the end of the year. Mayor Humpage asked if Council wanted an estimate on total bridge replacement and an estimate on total bridge repair. Council Member Turnquest commented it was more than repair and replacement, because they needed to consider what lies under the bridge, the seawall, and pilings, when speaking with engineers--the entire substructure of the bridge. The engineers needed to provide a report on what needed to be done and everything involved. Mayor Humpage summarized: they wanted a substructure report; general idea on cost estimate for total bridge replacement; in the event the substructure was sound or repairable, a theory on the replacement of the bridge, in other words, the super structure. Also a cost analysis on total replacement and time frames from the bottom up. Council Member Paterno suggested it might be in the best interest of the community to have someone come here and answer questions first, to reduce cost. Vice Mayor Watkins asked if it would be feasible to have this same gentleman meet with Council for a clear assessment as to what he was saying. Village Manager Couzzo commented he would come and be prepared to address the questions raised tonight, with some cost estimates for engineering analysis. The Vice Mayor indicated she would like to know the difference with the soundness of the bridge as previously done with the other spans versus a total redo. Council Member Amero asked if the Village Manager had sat down with anyone to come up with a plan to pay for this, to which Mr. Couzzo responded it could be paid for by using reserves or designating reserves against the loans, and could be stretched out over 15 or maybe 20 years. Council Member Amero indicated he would like two opinions. The Village Manager advised this was the company used by the county. Public Comment: Mr. Marty Grosswald, 27 Starboard Way, commented with numerous options on the table it would be a good idea to put together a matrix; the costs, downsides, and upsides of options; short and long term effects; and then determine the best to pick and 4 Minutes -Village Council Workshop Meeting 11/13/07 Page 5 choose from. Mr. Grosswald asked who was going to determine the best benefit; and suggested maybe doing half the bridge at a time. Mayor Humpage noted public safety would incur overtime during the construction. Mr. Grosswald indicated that could be included in the matrix, and a cost analysis could be done on whatever options were selected. Council Member Amero noted they were talking about borrowing $1.5 million now - what would it cost in two more years. Abby Roloff, Tradewinds Circle; commented she would feel a lot better if someone other than Bridge Design looked at the bridge and came up with what they thought they would do, and asked if that would be an expense. Mayor Humpage indicated he thought there would be a charge. Village Manager Couzzo suggested the cost might be minimized by using the state consultants, and they were familiar with the bridge. Dr. Jeff Davis, 136 Gulfstream Drive, Martin County Trauma Director, asked if it had been considered that raising the bridge would increase property values west of the bridge. Mayor Humpage noted the approach to the bridge would have to be moved back farther and that could be a DOT issue; and those who would benefit from raising the bridge would not be Tequesta residents, it would benefit unincorporated Martin and Palm Beach County residents who did not pay taxes to Tequesta, and would cost the Village money. Council Member Paterno suggested possibly annexation could help. Vice Mayor Watkins wanted at this point to look at this for Tequesta residents primarily and focus on the fact they will pay the bill. Village Manager Couzzo indicated he had received Council direction. Council Member Paterno commented he had a conflict with the business forum date- Mayor Humpage advised they were trying to move it to the 17tH Council Member Amero asked if it would be appropriate to send a follow up letter to Commissioner Marcus stating if the Village did the bridge repairs if Palm Beach County would take over the bridge. Dottie Campbell, 30 Eastwinds Circle, commented for at least five years Bob Harp, the then Village Manager, said we did not want the bridge and we got it anyway, and she did not believe they would take it back. Ms. Campbell asked what would happen with the Village roads if the bridge was given back, which the Mayor stated was a good point. Adjournment Vice Mayor Watkins moved to adjourn the meeting; seconded by Council Member Amero. The motion to adjourn carried by unanimous 5-0 vote; therefore the meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p. m. 5 Minutes -Village Council Workshop Meeting 11/13/07 Page 6 Respectfully submitted, ~,~ ~~~. Lori McWilliams, CMC Village Clerk