Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Workshop_Tab 01_11/13/2007BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS BRIAN C. RHEAULT', P.E. Presiders t October 22, 2007 Village of Tequesta 250 Tequesta Drive, Suite 300 Tequesta, Florida 334fi8 ATTENTION: Mike Couzzo REGARDING: Tequesta Drive Bridge over the north fork of the l._oxahatchee River PROJECT NO.: Ofi-597 Dear Mike: Pursuant to your request, Bridge Design Associates, inc. can provide the design and detailing and construction phase services for the rehabilitation of the existing Tequesta Drive Bridge. Our design will include the complete replacement of both sidewalks and traffic barriers and roadway superstructure except for span #3 which was recently replaced. In addition to the superstructure repairs we will identify and design repairs to the existing piles, pile caps, and end bents as required. Bridge Design is prepared to have the plans and specifications complete for a May 2008 start date. We believe the permitting can be accomplished to meet this schedule. However, we have no control over the process and can only process the applications in a timely manor. Based on current bridge construction prices, we estimate the construction cost for the bridge work #o be approximately $1.5 million. This does not include utility relocation or major modfications in the drainage system at the approaches to the bridge. Our services doe not include roadway or drainage design, utility relocation design, survey or construction phase services or pemtitting costs. As discussed, Bridge Design will honor the terms and conditions and rates as outlined in our Annual agnaemerrt for structural engineering with Palm Beach County (Copy attached). Tequesta Drive Bridge Page 2 Our base fees for the services are as follows: Bridge Design $42,000.00 Permitting $ 8,000.00 If you have any questions, please give me a call. Respectfully, BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. Brian C. Rheault, P.E. President BCR:kedS:12006-Jobs106-5'[7 Tequesta Drive BridgelCorrespondencelpra 10-22-07.wpd January 10, 2007 Department of F.eegineerin~ and Public Works P.O. Box 21229 West Palm Beach. FL 33416-1229 (561} 684-4000 Fax: (561) 000-0000 www.pbcgov.com ^ Palen Beach County soars. of county Commissioners Addie L. Greene, Chairperson Jeri Koons, vice Chair Karen T. Marcus Warren Fl. Newell Mary McGarry Burt Aaronson Tess R. Sanramaria County Administrator Robert Weisman An FquolOPl~'~~n' Affirnwt/ve Actin ~»rptoya~' pttrltetl on recycled paper Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 2035 Vista Parkway, Suite 200 West Palm Beach, FL 334'11 ATTN: Mr. Brian C. Rheault, President RE: STRUCTURAL SERVICES -ANNUAL AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO.: 82004-2557 AGREEMENT DATED: DECEMBER 21, 2004 Mr. Rheau!#: This fetter serves as your `'Notice to Proceed" with the above referenced renews! of Annual Service, which was approved by the Board of County Commissioners (Board) on December 5, 2006 (82006-2579). The County User Departments wilt be in touch with you when your services are required. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me, at 56'1-684-4449..- Sincerely, ~~ David Young .E. Special Projects Manager DY:jd Attachment pc: Administrative Services, Fiscal (LOT 8~ attachment) Contrail Development & Control Finance Departmenrt CCNA File (w/original) Charles Rich, Directar Engineering Services John Chestier, Director of Capital Improvements Bevis Beaudet, Dtreilor of Water Utilities Richard Watesky, Director of E.R.M Bruce Pelly, Director of Airports Reading File ec: Omelio A. Fernandez, P.E., Director, Engineering/Pubfic Works Ops. Rose Ann Clements, EA (!, Roadway Production Div. Jorge Hernandez, EA ttt, Roadway Production Division 1=:1ROADWAYICCNAWnnualslStruoturallBridge Design120071ANNUAL NTP BCC.doe i BRI~~aE ®IESBGIV AS'S®CiAT'E~,1NC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS BRIAN C. RHEAULT, P.E. President October 9, 2006 Pa{m Beach County Board of County Commissioners c/o Engineering & Public Worics Department 2300 N. Jog Road West Palm Beach, Florida 33411-2745 ATTENTION: David Young, P.E., Special Project Manager RE: Annual Agreement -Structural Engineering Services December 21, 2004 {R2004-2557) Dear Mr. Young: ROb°~} 2579 oEC o s zoos This letter services as our official notification of interest in continuing our Agreement with Palm Beach .County for professional services as specified in the above reference, for the period of December 21, 2006 through December 20, 2007. We are in agreement that a[1 provisions in the original Agreement remain in full force and effect Per your request, we are enclosing an updated fee schedule, State Registration, General, Automobile, and Professional Liability Insurance Certificates and all appropriate affidavits. Please indicate your acceptance of this proposal by proper signature below and returning same as fully executed to this office. Sincerely, Bridge Design Associates, inc. Attest ~~ - : ~` ~~ Brian C. Rheault, President .. _ ''' ' ' r CORPORATE ~ flvl'~,~ Y •~~ i~=~• ... -• .; ~'~ SEAL ~' C~. '••• •.~ ti ~ _~.~' ,,~~ ;egg ' ~~'~"':::~,~"„;Aac~pted by: Attest: ~ p{ Q~ O~ • ~ Palm B ch County Board of Commissioners Sharon R. Bo Jerk a~d~Com 7 y i., ~ 0 !IIA gy: By. ' Addle L. Greene, Chairperson D Jerk 'h,~~~~t~i, •.~.•••.5+2 Approved As To Focm & al Sufficien ~ `''~ Leg cy: proved as to Terms and Conditions: ~ - c ~ ~ ~, Gc~. S:IPERSONNEL1lGm1 BER 061PBC Renewal.wpd s PALM BEACH COUNTY ANNUAL STRUCTURAL CONTRACT Task Order Basis -Fee Schedule eta Parkway, Suite 200 Im Beach, Florida 33411 Brian C. Rheault BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. email: bridgebbd~a7,aol.com Phone: {561) 686-3660 Fax: (561) 686-3664 Fee Schedule -12/21/06 through 12/20/07 :me: BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. Raw Rate Burdened Rate ;I 45.00 130.50 Manager (Sr. P.E.) 45.00 130.50 Engineer (P.E.) 38.00 110.20 presentative {E.I.) 21.50 62.35 craftsman 31.00 89.90 ~suitants NIA Multiplier Salary 1.00 Overhead & Fringe 1.59 Subtotal 2.59 12% Profit 0.31 TOTAL 2.90 sign Associates, Inc. will provide "Additional Services, as Authorized and Approved by the Owner, Palm Beach County" ~NNEt,11Gm10CTOB~R Oti1PBC Rate Schedule.wpd ~~ Memo To: Mayor/Council From: Michael R. Couzzo, Jr __.b..~.. ~ ~ ~ _r._._.._.,~,.:.~ , ®ate: 5/21 /2007 Re: Engineering Status Report and Recommendations for the Tequesta Drive Bridge Attached please find a copy of Bridge Design Associates, Inc. assessment report and recommendations for the Tequesta Drive Bridge. This report is submitted for your review and consideration. I believe this subject may be appropriate for discussion by Council at a future workshop. With regard to engineering recommendations related to existing delamination, our Public Works Department has been directed to coordinate removal (in boat traffic areas). Please feel free to contact me should you wish to discuss this matter. ~alr~~ beach ~®~nty, F'1®rfld~ Qver the North Prong of the Loxahatchee River Prepared by: BRIDGE DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. April, 2007 ~-~~~~~ Brian C. Rheault P.E. 38797 Project Overview Bridge Design Associates, Inc. was retained to investigate and report on the condition of the Tequesta Drive Bridge. Recent construction on the bridge includes the replacement of the center roadway deck in 2006. Inspection of the bridge focused on determining the areas of the bridge that exhibited signs of corrosion and concrete delamination. Concrete roadway panels were investigated using visual inspection and soundings from striking the panel with a metal hammer. Several areas of severe concrete delamination were observed in the roadway and sidewalk panels. Major areas of concern include the roadway panels in spans 2 and 4, sidewalk panel in span 3, and the cast-in-place concrete curb in some locations. The majority of rail posts were found to be in bad or poor condition. Posts were observed to have large sections of missing concrete with exposed reinforcement. Reinforcing was found to be routinely corroded. Concrete rail posts that did not have sections of missing concrete or exposed reinforcement exhibited moderate to severe cracking. Cracking and delamination was observed on the corner of the revetment walls on the southeast, southwest, and northwest revetment. Large cracking and spalling were observed in these locations. Some of these sections were over the area of existing patching. Piping attached to the bridge showed areas of severe corrosion. Some sections had been completed corroded through the exterior of the pipe. Brackets attached to pipe also showed areas of corrosion. Traffic barriers on the approach slab had loose connections between the barrier and post, with some posts not connected to the barrier and some missing nuts to secure the railing. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. I ~we~meng ~~8~ ~®ndeta®uu Severe cracking and delamination was found along the revetment walls in the northwest, southwest, and southeast corners. In the northwest corner of End Bent IVunlber 1 and fourteen foot long zone of cracking and delamination was observed. Cricking was present on the top ,and along rhe~ side of the revetment wall. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 2 -- -- - ~4reas of cracking were observed in the same regions as areas that were observed to have been patched. ~:: >df ~ •. . ~ ~ s ~, ~ ~, ~~ '' "~~ .tip ~ ~h" ~~x.., x ~ t'~ ~A y'~`' ~.F,~ :~ 2: ~.. Bridge Design Associates, II1C. 3 ~;. Concrete Rail Post Conelition The condition of the concrete rail posts was found in most cases to be poor or bad. Posts routinely were observed to have large sections of missing concrete and exposed rebar. Reinforcing bars were heavily corroded and in some cases completely exposed to the corrosive environment. '~' t .,' ,z:." .;r+'.~ ,F. e., ~ „~,.W~ } ~ int..' { .`. ,` h Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 4 x~_; ~::`:; ;~: '~; Bridge Design Associates, Inc. $ Posts were also observed to have moderate to severe cracking. 'This cracking was severe enough to expect that the rail posts would very shortly have sections of concrete fall off. _a ',: -, ~k ,,^ `-,'~3` s _. r ut ' ~' ..`h, *' F Z. (?r& i`, t -~. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. ]Pile Cap Condition Pile caps at the joint between the roadway and sidewalk panels in some areas showed signs of delamination and cracking. On bent No. 2 there was a section of missing concrete with exposed reinforcing steel. Bent No.l had a previously patched section that was delaminated and cracked. 'N~ ~~ ~~i i ~~'~ -~~,, - ~_~ s -~ .4~~ ~- :~ ~~ ~. ~ ~' ~~ a' '~ r'_ l:# ~~~ s~ Bridge Design Associates, Inc. ~ ~.< -_ f .~' ~ - ` % ~ .. . '~~ r 1 6 ;'.~ i - ~ `~Cy~ . ~ ~Y~A~ 1a".: ~'~~~, 1~1 } '~' A` ~' J ~~ 3 The bottom of the pile cap on the End Bent No. 1 had an area of delamination with quarter to three quarter inch wide cracks. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. g An area of cracking and delamination on the bottom side of Bent No. 4. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 9 ~ _1 } h -~~ ~ .. _ :. .: ~ _.._ .__... .. ..: .:...:~M t c - - ~_ - ..-p~..... .._. . ~ .c ~w ~_ ~--. C®nca~ete ]Pile C®nclifi®n Concrete piles were only inspected above the level of low tide. The majority of piles are considered to be in good condition. Cracking was observed in piles eleven and twelve of End Bent Number 1 and in pile four of bent number 2. Sections of rust bleeding were discovered on some piles. The piles' pickup locations were occasionally found to have exposed reinforcing bars. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 10 ~:;, ~N1- f}'r 4$ x ~, , ~~.,_. _, L `~ T - ~~. s, .a~ _ mil! .~ ~ ~.. ~;..",,,r,~... ^'„+eV ,~, a+r `' Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 11 concrete ]Panel ECondation Roadway panels in span 2 had large areas of delamination and cracking. In some cases delamination and cracking was observed in areas that were previously patched. Areas as large as Oft by 12ft were observed to be delaminated. ~;; ~1+~.. _~~ ~~ 1. ~ ~, '~~; ,,, ~:. ~~ ~ _ µ Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 12 One of the sidewalk panels in span 3 showed signs of severe delamination with the presence of large cracking. Roadway panels in span 3 also showed signs of severe delamination and cracking. Some panels show several separate areas of delamination. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 13 ~~ _ _ -- ,: . ~: _ `_~ - M 'r ~ X ~+ :- 4 ~ , o+m ~ f._ ' ~~ The joint between the cast-in-place concrete curb and roadway panels were found to be routinely cracked. This cracking and delamination was found in some regions that were previously patched. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 14 A patched section that shows signs of delamination and severe cracking on the cast-in- place curb in span 5. Fes; ~ . ~ _ .: >~ ti~'~_ . Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 15 Sidewalk ~®nd~ti®n The ground beneath the sidewalk on the northeast corner of the bridge show signs that the ground beneath the sidewalk has been eroded away. The concrete sidewalks show signs of cracking along the joint of the cast-in-place concrete curb and the sidewalk panel. :~ ,~ ~.. ,r - .,~a~ Y2r* - a " , ~ `. x _ ;~,/ . ~~ ~ ?' h k L a . ~:F w . i:; - :9 ~ ~ - ~ ;~`' .._. x _ b ,r Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 16 Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 1~ ®thea~ Aa-eas ®f C®ncern Traffic railing post connections were routinely found to be loose. These connections were also found to be unattached between rail and post, with several bolts that did not have any nuts to secure the bolt. Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 18 Pipes that were connected to the bridge also exhibited signs of deterioration. 'T'his deterioration included signs of severe corrosion, in some cases entire sections of pipe cover is no longer present. Connection brackets were also found to be heavily corroded. ~, ~~ ..> • f, .. ti - „.:. '~ a. 1 °y ' ~ ..: ~_-. _ ~ ~ I ;. 6~F.C^:• Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 19 Conclusion Based on the observed condition of bridge, there are several areas of concern. Concrete roadway panels in spans 2 and 4 showed signs of severe delamination. The southern sidewalk panel .in span 3 had areas of severed cracking and delamination. There is concern over the danger of sections of concrete falling from the deck onto boats below the bridge. Concrete rail posts were found to be mostly in poor to bad condition. Several posts had large sections of missing concrete with exposed reinforcing strands. Other posts had areas of cracking that will give way if hit. The concrete piles of the bridge were in good condition, with the exception of a few' piles that had areas of cracking. Piles were only investigated above the waterline, so Bridge Design Associates, Inc. is unable to affirm the below water condition of any pile. Pile caps were found to be in mostly good condition. There were some areas of delamination and cracking observed in the pile. These areas of concern were generally found at the corner between the roadway and sidewalk panels. Tw_o pier caps showed areas of delamination. Recommendations Based on our site observation: Spans number 2 and number 4 need to be replaced within the next 24 months. The sidewalk slabs and railings need to be replaced within the next 24 months. We also recommend removing any loose patches or spalling concrete for boater safety. Based on the inspections it is clear that within four to five years the entire bridge deck will have to be replaced. We recommend the village decide to continue the piece by piece replacement basically closing the bridge down every two years to continue the repairs or take steps to replace the bridge in the next 24 months. It is our opinion that concrete repairs on span number 2 and 4 and the sidewalk slabs of span number 3 will not extend the life of the deck slabs significantly enough to justify the expense. 5:\2006-Jobs\06-517 Tequesta Drive Bridge\report\06-517 Tequesta.doc Bridge Design Associates, Inc. 20 PROJECT: Tequesta Dr. NUMBER: 06-517 Date: 3-22-07 Tequesta Drive Bridge Inspection 06-517 Post Number Condition Notes Post Number Condition Notes N 1 Good S 1 Good XB N 2 Good S 2 Bad N 3 Poor S 3 Bad N 4 Bad XB S 4 Bad N 5 Poor S 5 Poor CR N 6 Bad S 6 Bad MC N 7 Bad XB S 7 Bad MC N 8 Poor S 8 Bad N N 9 Poor 10 Bad PT S S 9 10 Bad Bad MC, XB N N N 11 Bad 12 Poor 13 Bad MC CR MC, XB S S S 11 12 13 Good Bad Bad PT, CR MC, XB CR N 14 Bad MC, XB S 14 Bad PT N 15 Bad S 15 Bad CR N 16 Bad MC, XB S 16 Good N 17 Bad MC S 17 Poor N 18 Poor S 18 Poor N 19 Bad MC, XB S 19 Poor N 20 Bad MC, XB S 20 Poor N N 21 Bad 22 Bad MC S S 21 22 Bad Bad MC, XB XB N 23 Bad MC, XB S 23 Bad N 24 Poor S 24 Poor N 25 Bad XB S 25 Poor N N 26 Good 27 Poor PT S S 26 27 Bad Poor XB, CR N 28 Bad MC, XB S 28 Poor N N I 29 Poor 3G IGood I CR li S S i 29 3G ( Bad Good ~ XB I MC Missing concrete sections XB Exposed Rebar CR Cracked Concrete PT Existing Patch Post numbers begin at the west side of bridge The absence of a note does not necessarily imply that missing concrete, exposed rebar, cracked concrete or existing patches were not present. Christopher LaPorte, E.I. 21 PROJECT: Tequesta Bridge NUMBER: 06-517 Date: 3/29/07 Span Panel Notes w2 R 2 Minor BL 4 in R3 Span 1 R a R5 R6 7 W3 SW 1 BL sw 2 R 1 PT-XB R2 PTw/DL R 3 PT w/ DL Span 2 R a R 5 DL w/ SP, 4 ft by 12 ft R 6 PT w/ SP and DL, aft by 8 ft R 7 DL, 3 ft by 4 ft - DL, 3 ft by 5 ft - CR along ed e btw R 7 and SW 3 SW 3 SW 1 DL, 3 ft by 6 ft section SW 2 CR and SP alon joint btw SW 1 and R 1 R1 R2 3 Span 3 R b Recently replaced panels all appear in ood conditio , g n s R7 SW 3 PT 2 locations SW 4 XB - PT SW 2 DL - 2 locations R 1 DL and CR along edge btw sidewalk and road panel R2 PT wiDL R 3 PT w/ DL Span 4 R 4 DL R 5 DL, 1 ft by 1 ft - DL, 1 ft by 2 ft R 6 Pt w/ DL, 6 ft by 4 ft R 7 PT w/ DL and SP, 1 ft by 1 ft - DL, 3 ft by 6 ft W3 SW 4 DL SW 2 XB, 3 in pan 5 R 1 R2 R3 R 4 R5 R6 DL w/ DL along edge btw SW 2 and R 1 S R 7 W 3 PT w/ DL SP and CR along edge btw R 7 and SW 3, 5 ft - BL D ~ ., L. .... i.. _ _ ~ u"cIJ a' c 'Bleed' DL f ~Delam nat on Prese ortC;RX Crackeds SPR Spalled P M1Ex stingoPatcte; BL -Rust ~ Christopher La orte E.I. 22 PROJECT: Tequesta Bridge NUMBER: 06-517 DATE: 3/29/2007 i equesta Drive Bridge - 06-517 Pile Condition Pile Bent Pile Notes Pile Cap DL btw 1 and 2 - PT btw 7-8-9 - XB north of pile 12 - PT w/ CR north of pile 12, 15 ft horiz 9 in either side of corner- PT w/ DL south of pile 1 2 3 4 BL End Bent 5 No.1 s 7 PT 8 PT 9 PT ~o 11 CR4ftvert-BL 12 CR4ftvert-BL Pile Cap XB over pile 1 west side - PT w/ SP btw piles 4 and 5 west side Bent No ~ . 2 1 3 4 XB at pick up location Pile Cap PT w/ DL over pile 1 - MC XB btw pile 4 and 5 east side - CR along east bottom corner - DL bottom btw 4 and 5 -plant growing over pile 1 Bent 1 No.2 2 3 4 B t Pile Cap ~ CR btw pile 1 and 2 west side - Cr btw pile 4 and 5 bottom - DL btw pile 4 and 5 en 2 No.3 s 4 CR SP 5' vert Pile Cap T '1 nl L. ., 1 A ,J L. over pne 5 - ~~ ~,t~~ pipe ~+ any 5 ~ottviii east corner - CR btw pile i and c" west side - CR above pile cap south side Bent i No.4 2 3 4 Pile Cap CR south of pile 1, 5 ft horiz - PT w/ some DL south of pile 1, 15 ft - CR 1 ft over pile 5 - BL north pile 12 i 2 3 4 End Bent 5 BL No.7 s 8 9 10 BL 11 BL 12 BL Piles are numbered from the south to the north; XB -Exposed Rebar; MC -Missing Concrete; BL - st Bleed; DL - Delamination Present; CR -Cracked; SP - Spalled; PT -Existing Patch '~- Cristopher LaPorte E.I. 23 Page is too large to OCR.