CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Workshop Meeting: Tuesday, October 24, 2017

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Workshop Meeting: Tuesday, October 24, 2017"

Transcription

1 1

2 2 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Workshop Meeting: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 AGENDA ITEM: 2 Hear and deliberate on handrail, lighting, and walkway replacement options for Key Allegro Bridge on Bayshore Drive. SUBMITTED BY: Public Works Director Michael Donoho APPROVED FOR AGENDA: PKC BACKGROUND: In January 2015, the City of Rockport began discussions with the Key Allegro Homeowners Association (HOA) about repairs to the Bayshore Drive Bridge. On March 11, 2015, the City of Rockport requested LJA Engineering to provide a report evaluating the Key Allegro (Bayshore Drive) Bridge and to identify any regulatory or structural deficiencies and limitations. The accompanying bridge evaluation report and a scope of work and cost estimates for the replacement of the pedestrian walkways on both sides of the bridge were evaluated and Council selected concept 1. Hurricane Harvey further damaged the hand rails and walk ways on the bridge and, as shown in the accompanying photographs, the damage has created a safety hazard that needs to be corrected as soon as possible. The HOA has agreed to pay for replacement of the lighting because they prefer a more decorative style than the standard city issue. A representative from the HOA will attend the meeting to answer any questions. FISCAL ANALYSIS: Costs for concept 1 engineering services and replacement of the walkways and handrails on both sides of the Bayshore Drive Bridge is $336, $55,230 has been charged to account to which $100,000 has been budgeted. As Harvey related storm damage, some or all of the expense should be reimbursable by FEMA. RECOMMENDATION: Not an action item. Bayshore Drive Bridge October 24, 2017 Workshop Mtg. Page 1 of 1

3 3

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

8 8

9 9

10 10

11 11 Carl C. Krueger, Jr. Memorial Bridge on Bay Shore Drive Proposed Pathway Draft of Concept 1 Scope of Work July 2017 CITY OF ROCKPORT, ARANSAS COUNTY, TEXAS Prepared for: The City of Rockport This document is issued for interim review and is not to be used for construction, bidding or permitting purposes Prepared by: Firm Registration No. F Briarpark, Suite 600 Houston, Texas Phone Fax LJA Job Number C JULY 10, 2017

12 12 Project Objective The main objective for the improvements from CONCEPT 1 is to improve pedestrian safety and increase the flow of pedestrian and bicycle traffic along the pathway crossing the Bayshore Bridge. The improvements will enhance the accessibility and safety for pedestrians and cyclists by adding vehicle barriers along the pathway, replacing handrails, increasing the pathway width, decreasing the pathway slopes, adding vehicle lane delineators to separate the sight restricted zone of the roadway, and replacing the existing light poles with new lighting for the pathway and vehicle lanes on the bridge. The scope of the project does not include improvements to the existing bridge or the water-main line adjacent to the existing bridge. PROJECT SCOPE Concept 1 Description Final Design The scope of the project for CONCEPT 1 is replacement of the existing timber pathway, see Concept 1 - DEMOLITION PLAN sheet. Along with replacing the timber pathway, the timber railing will also be replaced. The timber handrail will be continuous over and beyond the span of the bridge and it will extend 30 ft. onto the ramp, at all four corners. Due to the widening of the timber pathway, additional angle hanger supports will be added beneath the proposed 5+ foot overhang timber pathway. The pathway expansion will comply with ADA path requirements. Along with the additional angle hanger supports, additional timber beams, 3-6x12, will help distribute the dead and live loads from pedestrian live loads. The timber pathway will be designed per AWC NDS The existing bridge will be analyzed structurally for additional loads and LJA will use the construction documents to determine if the bridge can accommodate these loads. The analysis will follow the loading requirements from the latest AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Moreover, the existing timber pile retaining wall at the corners of the abutments will be removed and replaced with a cast-in-place concrete retaining wall. The design will be done in conformance with ACI 318. A geotechnical engineer will need to collect soil samples and provide recommendations for the cantilever retaining wall. Additional fill material will be required behind the retaining wall. Above the cast-in-place retaining wall, a 5 ft. wide concrete sidewalk will be constructed, see the PLAN & ELEVATION sheet for end of sidewalk. In order to increase safety for pedestrian and cycling use, safety barriers will be installed to separate pedestrians and cyclists from vehicular traffic, on the bridge and for 43-9 past the end of the bridge. See Plan & Elevation for CONCEPT 1 sheet. With the addition of the barriers between the pedestrian walkway and the roadway, saw-tooth curbs are suggested after the safety guardrail terminals to the end of the sidewalk, at all corners of the bridge. Bi-Directional delineators and remarking pavement markings will increase safety and provide easier traffic flow along the center line of the existing roadway and bridge deck. The existing light poles will be replaced with coastal weather bearing steel poles.

13 13 Construction Phase Services Construction phase services will include a site visit during construction, review of shop drawings for the retaining walls, hangers and concrete railings and any Requests for Information (RFI) from the contractor.

14 14 CONCEPT PLANS FOR CARL C. KRUEGER, JR MEMORIAL BRIDGE ON BAYSHORE DRIVE TO SERVE CITY OF ROCKPORT, ARANSAS COUNTY,TEXAS JOB NO. C DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2016 ENGINEER: LJA Engineering, Inc Briarpark Drive Phone Suite 600 Fax Houston, Texas FRN-F

15 15 PLAN VIEW CENTERLINE PROFILE HORIZONTAL SCALE 1:40 VERTICAL SCALE 1:10 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 11

16 16 DEMOLITION PLAN LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 DEMOLITION PLAN 12

17 17 PLAN ELEVATION LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 PLAN & ELEVATION 13

18 18 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 PHASE CONSTRUCTION 14

19 19 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 DETAILS 15

20 20

21 21 INDEX Page Executive Summary... 3 Brief Description For All Three Concepts... 3 Project Objective... 3 Project Scope... 3 Concept 1 Description... 3 Concept 1 Pros and Cons... 4 Concept 1 Costs... 4 Concept 2 Description... 4 Concept 2 Pros and Cons... 4 Concept 2 Costs... 5 Concept 3 Description... 5 Concept 3 Pros and Cons... 5 Cost 3 Costs... 5 Constructability Costs... 5 Pedestrian Handrail... 6 Estimate Quantities for Concept Demolition, Construction, General Conditions, Soft Costs, Total Costs... 7 Estimate Quantities for Concept Demolition, Construction, General Conditions, Soft Costs, Total Costs... 8 Estimate Quantities for Concept Demolition, Construction, General Conditions, Soft Costs, Total Costs... 9 Conceptual Plans Cover Page Bayshore Bridge Topographic Survey Existing Plan and Profile Concept 1 Demolition Plan Concept 1 Plan and Elevation Concept 1 Phase Construction Concept 1 Details Concept 2 Demolition Plan Concept 2 Plan and Elevation Concept 2 Phase Construction Concept 2 - Details Concept 3 Demolition Plan Concept 3 Plan and Elevation Concept 3 Phase Construction Concept 3 Details... 23

22 22 Executive Summary The Carl C. Krueger, Jr. Memorial Bridge (Bayshore Bridge), consist of two lanes, one span and two overhang pathways, connecting the island of Key Allegro and the mainland. Bay Shore Drive is the road crossing over the bridge onto the island. The existing timber pathways are on the Little Bay side face of the bridge and on the Aransas Bay side of the bridge. Both existing pathways are approximately 4 ft. wide and are hooked and bolted to the vertically curved exterior girder. The pathways do not provide pedestrian protection by separating pedestrian and vehicular traffic. For each of the proposed concepts, the existing timber pathways will be demolished. Concept 1 will continue to provide a timber pathway along both sides of the bridge, but with a wider path and longer timber approaches. The timber railing will be replaced and new hook supports will be required. Due to the longer overhang, the spaces between the hanger supports will be reduced by adding additional hangers. Concepts 2 and 3 will provide a pathway on the Little Bay side of the bridge with slab beams and abutment supports. Both of those concepts will included a 5 concrete slab on the span. Concept 3 proposes a timber pathway 30 feet long starting from the abutments. The distinction between Concept 2 and 3 is that Concept 2 will continue the 5 inch thick concrete pathway onto the approach slab with a supporting retaining wall. Concept 3 will include timber joist supports for the 2x6 treated decking on the ramps stretching 30 feet long from the abutments down a 5% slope to the ground. Project Objective Preliminary design of improvements to the pedestrian and bicycle pathway crossing the Bayshore Bridge. The improvements will enhance the accessibility and safety for pedestrians and cyclists, to include vehicle barriers to the pathway, pathway handrails, increased pathway width, decreased pathway slopes, vehicle lane delineation and separation in the sight restriction zone of the roadway, and new lighting for the pathway and vehicle lanes on the bridge. The project will not include improvements to the bridge, but may include improvements to the water main adjacent to the bridge. Project Scope The preliminary design will include three conceptual designs complete with elevation drawings, section drawings, and opinions of probable project costs. After City of Rockport review and selection of one concept (or a hybrid of the three submitted), a follow-on proposal for final design, assistance with bidding, and assistance with construction administration will be submitted. Concept 1 Description Concept 1 is mainly a repair, similar to the existing timber pathway, see Concept 1 - DEMOLITION PLAN plan sheet. Along with replacing the timber pathway, the timber rail will also be replaced. Moreover, additional supports will be allocated beneath the proposed +5 feet overhang timber pathway, by using 3-6x12 timber beams and reducing the spacing of the angle hook supports, therefore, increasing the number of hangers required. Concept 1 includes re-marking of pavement markings and placing bi-directional delineators along the center line of the existing roadway and bridge deck. O:\LAND\C325\C \C Bayshore Bridge - Pedestrian Pathway Reconstruction docx Page 3

23 23 Concept 1 Pros and Cons One benefit of this design is the extra foot of width which allows for a wider ADA-compliant path, see Concept 1 PHASE CONSTRUCTION sheet. Also, the addition of the vehicular traffic barrier will increase the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. New illuminating light poles will be installed and can be placed on top of the vehicle barrier, if not attached to the overhang timber pathway. Although Concept 1 s timber pathway renewal extends over 1 foot from the existing measurement, one of the major cons of the Bayshore Drive Bridge is the placement of the gas and water lines, which lie adjacent to the bridge and pose as constructability issues. If the water and gas lines will not be redirected, a special steel angle support must be considered for the bay side pathway to avoid contact with the water line. Proper city officials should be contacted about the consideration of moving the water line. Concept 1 Cost The cost of Concept 1, in terms of items needed for constructability, will be less than Concepts 2 & 3, with the major cost of the items to be for the concrete vehicle rail. See the items listed and their unit pricing in Figure 1. Concept 2 Description Concept 2 for the Bayshore Bridge involves removing the existing timber walkway on both sides of the existing bridge and constructing an adjacent slab beam span walkway, see Concept 2 - DEMOLITION PLAN and PLAN & ELEVATION sheets. The span will include two slab beam girders supported by a concrete abutment at both ends. The walkway will be offset 1 in. away from the existing 4 foot deep concrete girder, and will be placed on the bay side of the bridge. The concrete pathway will be elevated above the water line with an approved clearance from the City of Rockport. Currently, Concepts 2 and 3 show a 6 inch vertical clearance. Moreover, a hook support will be considered at mid span to increase support for the water line. Due to the elevated pathway, pedestrian rails will be required on both sides of the pathway. A concrete vehicle rail will be placed on both sides of the bridge on the vehicle lanes. New pavement marking and bi-directional delineators will be placed on the existing road. The lighting element will be fixed above the concrete vehicle barrier to allow illumination on both the pathway and the traffic lanes. At the approach ends of the pathway, a retaining wall support will increase the aesthetically pleasing view and provide an ADA-compliant slope for the pathway. Concept 2 Pros and Cons Concept 2 proposes a 10 width to accommodate pedestrian and cycling traffic, see Concept 2 PHASE CONSTRUCTION sheet. Due to the steep slope from the existing bridge, the pathway will provide a 5% slope incline and decline for the ramps. The 5% slope follows ADA compliance for walkways. One of the cons for Concept 2 is the placement of the water line. The concrete pathway is elevated, clearing it from the water line, and therefore having to support an approach slab by using a retaining wall at both ends of the pathway. A max slope grade of 5% will be maintained per ADA compliance. O:\LAND\C325\C \C Bayshore Bridge - Pedestrian Pathway Reconstruction docx Page 4

24 24 Concept 2 Cost The cost of Concept 2 will increase from Concept 1, mainly because of the use of the slab beam girders, retaining walls, abutments and other concrete components, including the pedestrian railing on both sides of the walkway. See Figure 2 for items listed and costs. Concept 3 Description Similar to Concepts 1 and 2, the existing timber pathway is going to be removed to allow for the proposed Concept 3 pathway to be built adjacent to the existing bridge. Concept 3 is very similar to Concept 2, except for the 2x6 treated decking. The abutment approach slopes will have the 2x6 treated decking. The decking will start from the abutment approach section and slope down at a 5% grade to the ground and tie into a 5 inch concrete sidewalk. Concept 3 will not have a retaining wall, but will form a timber support for the treated decking down the 5% grade. The timber support will be supported on concrete drilled shafts. The lighting will be placed above the concrete vehicle railing to both faces of the bridge. Concept 3 Pros and Cons Concept 3 eliminates the need for a retaining wall. It reduces the cost of the items needed and establishes a timber support system supported on concrete drilled shafts. Although a concrete abutment will still be required to support the slab beams for the pathway, it will be sticking out of the ground with minimum view. Some of the cons for Concept 3 are the water and gas lines. The water line causes the pathway to be elevated, which results in a maximum slope for the ramp. A max slope grade of 5% will be maintained per ADA compliance. Costs and Constructability Days In terms of costs, additional items were listed for Concept 1 but the cost remains below Concepts 2 and 3 along with the estimate construction time. Concepts 2 and 3, although very similar, have an estimated cost of $308,900 for Concept 2 and of $443,722 for Concept 3, see Figures 2 and 3. The estimated time of construction for Concepts 2 and 3 range between 47 and 50 days, see Figures 1, 2 and 3. The estimated time includes removal of existing timber pathway and traffic control to provide a safe area for travelers and construction workers, prior to beginning construction. Due to the constructability issue of the water and gas lines, an additional $200 per linear foot will be added to account for the possibility of moving the water and the gas lines. Pedestrian Handrail The handrail required for the proposed pathway on Concepts 2 and 3 are proposed to consist of Type 316 stainless steel, see Concept 2 & 3 - DETAILS. The Type 316 stainless steel require less maintenance, contain 2% molybdenum and is one of the most cost effective choices in demanding environments. The life expectancy of using Type 316 stainless steel surpasses the regular maintenance required for a traditional carbon steel, iron or aluminum handrail. The traditional carbon steel handrail has a life expectancy of about 5 to 10 years before any maintenance or replacement is required. O:\LAND\C325\C \C Bayshore Bridge - Pedestrian Pathway Reconstruction docx Page 5

25 25 Pedestrian Handrail The handrail required for the proposed pathway on Concepts 2 and 3 are proposed to consist of Type 316 stainless steel, see Concept 2 & 3 - DETAILS. The Type 316 stainless steel require less maintenance, contain 2% molybdenum and is one of the most cost effective choices in demanding environments. The life expectancy of using Type 316 stainless steel surpasses the regular maintenance required for a traditional carbon steel, iron or aluminum handrail. The traditional carbon steel handrail has a life expectancy of about 5 to 10 years before any maintenance or replacement is required. 6

26 26 Estimate Quantities for Concept 1 - Fig. 1 Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price Demolition Sidewalk SY 222 $ $ 8, Bridge Walkway EA 2 $ 4, $ 8, Posts and Wire EA 1 $ 4, $ 4, Light Poles and Gas Lines EA 6 $ $ 1, Retaining Wall LF 80 $ $ 4, Construction 5 ft. Sidewalk SY 383 $ $ 20, CIP Retaining Wall SF 360 $ $ 25, ft. Timber Pathway MBF $ 5, $ 5, Timber Handrails MBF $ $ 1, Vehicle Barrier Rail LF 383 $ $ 44, Light Poles EA 6 $ 4, $ 28, Electrical Wiring, Controls EA 1 $ 2, $ 2, Adjust Water Line LF 60 $ $ 12, Directional Delineators LF 375 $ 9.84 $ 3, Pavement Striping/Marking LF 750 $ 0.30 $ Work Zone Traffic Control MO 3 $ 5, $ 16, Steel Angle Supports w/hngr. EA 26 $ $ Total Demolition and Construction $ 187, General Conditions Mobilization, Insurance, etc. 1 LS $ 9, $ 9, Estimate 5% of Demo. and Const. Soft Costs 1 LS $ 46, $ 46, Engineering, Permits, Inspection, Geotechnical, Materials Testing, Other. Estimate 25% of Demo. and Const. Total Cost Opinion $ 243, Demolition, Construction, General Conditions, Soft Costs 7

27 27 Estimate Quantities for Concept 2 - Fig. 2 Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price Demolition Sidewalk SY 222 $ $ 8, Bridge Walkway EA 2 $ 4, $ 8, Posts and Wire EA 1 $ 4, $ 4, Light Poles and Gas Lines EA 6 $ $ 1, Retaining Wall LF 80 $ $ 4, Construction 10 ft. Sidewalk SY 417 $ $ 22, CIP Retaining Wall SF 250 $ $ 17, ft. Concrete Pathway SY 56 $ $ 2, Metal Handrails LF 220 $ $ 44, Pathway Support Abutments CY $ $ 16, Vehicle Barrier Rail LF 100 $ $ 11, Wood Post Guardrail EA 4 $ 3, $ 13, Light Poles EA 6 $ 4, $ 28, Electrical Wiring, Controls EA 1 $ 2, $ 2, Adjust Water Line LF 60 $ $ 12, Directional Delineators LF 375 $ 9.84 $ 3, Pavement Striping/Marking LF 750 $ 0.30 $ Work Zone Traffic Control MO 3 $ 5, $ 16, PRESTR Concrete Slab Beams LF 100 $ $ 17, Cement Stabilized Backfill CY 71.1 $ $ 2, Total Demolition and Construction $ 237, General Conditions Mobilization, Insurance, etc. 1 LS $ 11, $ 11, Estimate 5% of Demo. and Const. Soft Costs 1 LS $ 59, $ 59, Engineering, Permits, Inspection, Geotechnical, Materials Testing, Other. Estimate 25% of Demo. and Const. Total Cost Opinion 1 LS $ 308, Demolition, Construction, General Conditions, Soft Costs 8

28 28 Estimate Quantities for Concept 3 - Fig. 3 Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Price Demolition Sidewalk SY 222 $ $ 8, Bridge Walkway EA 2 $ 4, $ 8, Posts and Wire EA 1 $ 4, $ 4, Light Poles and Gas Lines EA 6 $ $ 1, Retaining Wall LF 80 $ $ 4, Construction 10 ft. Sidewalk SY 350 $ $ 18, Concrete Piers for Timber Walkway LF 288 $ $ 126, ft. Timber Walkway MBF $ $ ft. Concrete Pathway SY 56 $ $ 2, Metal Handrails LF 220 $ $ 44, Pathway Support Abutments CY $ $ 16, Vehicle Barrier Rail LF 100 $ $ 11, Wood Post Guardrail EA 4 $ 3, $ 13, Light Poles EA 6 $ 4, $ 28, Electrical Wiring, Controls EA 1 $ 2, $ 2, Adjust Water Line LF 60 $ $ 12, Directional Delineators LF 375 $ 9.84 $ 3, Pavement Striping/Marking LF 750 $ 0.30 $ Work Zone Traffic Control MO 3 $ 5, $ 16, PRESTR Concrete Slab Beams LF 100 $ $ 17, Total Demolition and Construction $ 341, General Conditions Mobilization, Insurance, etc. 1 LS $ 17, $ 17, Estimate 5% of Demo. and Const. Soft Costs 1 LS $ 85, $ 85, Engineering, Permits, Inspection, Geotechnical, Materials Testing, Other. Estimate 25% of Demo. and Const. Total Cost Opinion $ 443, Demolition, Construction, General Conditions, Soft Costs 9

29 29 CONCEPT PLANS FOR CARL C. KRUEGER, JR MEMORIAL BRIDGE ON BAYSHORE DRIVE TO SERVE CITY OF ROCKPORT, ARANSAS COUNTY,TEXAS JOB NO. C DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2016 ENGINEER: LJA Engineering, Inc Briarpark Drive Phone Suite 600 Fax Houston, Texas FRN-F

30 30 PLAN VIEW CENTERLINE PROFILE HORIZONTAL SCALE 1:40 VERTICAL SCALE 1:10 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 11

31 31 DEMOLITION PLAN LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 DEMOLITION PLAN 12

32 32 PLAN ELEVATION LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 PLAN & ELEVATION 13

33 33 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 PHASE CONSTRUCTION 14

34 34 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 1 DETAILS 15

35 35 DEMOLITION PLAN LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 2 DEMOLITION PLAN 16

36 36 PLAN ELEVATION LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 2 PLAN & ELEVATION 17

37 37 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 2 PHASE CONSTRUCTION 18

38 38 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 2 DETAILS 19

39 39 DEMOLITION PLAN LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 3 DEMOLITION PLAN 20

40 40 PLAN ELEVATION LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 3 PLAN & ELEVATION 21

41 41 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 3 PHASE CONSTRUCTION 22

42 42 LJA Engineering, Inc. 820 Buffalo Street Phone Corpus Christi, Texas Fax TBPE Firm Reg. # F-1386 TBPLS Firm Reg. # BAYSHORE BRIDGE - CONCEPT 3 DETAILS 23

43 43

44 44

45 45

46 46 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Workshop Meeting: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 AGENDA ITEM: 3 Hear and deliberate on repair of the Key Allegro Bridge bulkhead on Bayshore Drive. SUBMITTED BY: Public Works Director Michael Donoho APPROVED FOR AGENDA: PKC BACKGROUND: Hurricane Harvey destroyed a portion of the bulkhead retaining wall near the north-west corner of the Key Allegro Bridge. The destroyed portion of the bulk head retaining wall has caused a serious erosion problem that impacts the integrity and structural stability of the bridge and threatens public and private utilities. The replacement of the destroyed bulk head retaining wall is urgent. Staff recommends replacing the full length (approximately 130 linear feet) of the bulkhead retaining wall and back fill behind the new bulkhead. See the accompanying proposals and services agreement from LJA Engineering for more information. FISCAL ANALYSIS: Costs for engineering services and replacement of the destroyed bulk head replacement plus backfill is $418, and will be charged to account This damage is directly attributable to Hurricane Harvey and should be reimbursable by FEMA. RECOMMENDATION: Not an action item. Bayshore Drive bulkhead repairs Oct. 24, 2017 Council Mtg. Page 1 of 1

47 47

48 48

49 49

50 50

51 51

52 52

53 53

54 54

55 55 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Workshop Meeting: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 AGENDA ITEM: 4 Deliberate on Hurricane Harvey temporary manufactured housing units and options for resolving any conflicts with existing city ordinances. SUBMITTED BY: City Manager Kevin Carruth APPROVED FOR AGENDA: PKC BACKGROUND: FEMA has begun placing those displaced by hurricane Harvey into manufactured housing units (MHUs) in order to meet the need for post-harvey housing. Recipients are allowed to live in the units for up to 18 months following the event. There is precedence for FEMA selling the units to occupants at the end of the 18 months, under certain circumstances. Current city ordinances do not allow MHUs without a conditional use permit (CUP). Additionally, there are concerns that once FEMA s terms of occupancy have expired or the terms of the CUP have expired, there will be difficulties and expenses for the City in removing the occupants and structures. City Planner Amanda Torres will present research at the meeting on options for resolving any conflicts with existing city ordinances. FISCAL ANALYSIS: N/A. RECOMMENDATION: Not an action item. MHUs Oct. 24, 2017 Workshop Mtg. Page 1 of 1