HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 - Park Avenue Bridge C-5128 - CorrespondenceOctober 8, 2013
To: Newport Beach City Council
Subject:Park Avenue Little Island Bridge
"RECEIVE®AR gGENDA�
PRINoED!' S
/0.9 f3
My name is John Kensey. My wife, Linda, and I live on the Little Island at 305 East Bay Front.
In the almost 10 years since the subject of the replacement /retrofit of the Little Island Bridge has been
under consideration, we have been concerned that it be done properly with full consideration of the
tradeoffs between costs, safety (i.e. fire and police access to the Little Island) and only lastly,
inconvenience to the residents.
Ever since the subject of a bridge replacement was first brought up to the Little Island Residents in a
meeting held on July 17, 2004, the plan for replacement called for the employment of a temporary two
lane bridge on Balboa Avenue and the closure of the Park Avenue Bridge during construction. At that
time, one of the residents who lived at the corner of Abalone Avenue and Balboa went "ballistic" and
tried to shoot down the temporary bridge concept, but he was apparently unsuccessful and has since
sold his home and moved away.
As recently as December 2011 the plan had been to employ a temporary bridge over the canal at Balboa
Avenue (see attached material including a Little Island newsletter referencing a meeting the Ed Selich
and Jeff Herdman had with Dave Webb and Tom Sandefur which stated that "Obviously, a temporary
bridge is include in the overall plans that would be a pre- fabricated metal bridge at Balboa Avenue. The
cost of this temporary bridge is included in the Federal funds ".
Accordingly, Linda and I were very surprised to learn at a meeting held for the Little Island residents on
Saturday, March 16th that the temporary bridge alternative appeared to have been discarded and
instead replaced by a plan to use an approach whereby the bridge would be replaced one lane at a time
with controlled access to and from the Island. At the meeting we asked Pat Thomas two questions:
o Who made the decision not to install a temporary bridge and the end of Balboa Avenue? And
o Was the decision made on the basis of economics?
We did not receive an answer to the first question but the inference was that the decision was made
after consultation with an unnamed body and was made so as not to inconvenience the residents who
live on or close to Balboa Avenue (I am one of those residents and I was certainly not consulted).
I was appalled to learned that there had not been an economic study of the temporary bridge
alternative as it frankly seems intuitively obviously that it would be far more expeditious to build the
new bridge in one step and therefore more cost effective.
We subsequently met with Pat Thomas and Fong Tse (March 25th) and pointed out that:
o A one lane, controlled access bridge can present a serious potential life and death hazard if the
bridge becomes backed up thereby limiting the access of emergency vehicles. The population of
the Little Island is rather elderly and minutes, even seconds, count in the treatment of strokes
and heart attacks.
o Construction of the temporary bridge has clearly been judged to be feasible as evidenced by
that fact that it was always contemplated as late as December 2011 and there have been
Page 2 — Memo to Newport Beach City Council re
Park Avenue Little Island Bridge
preliminary engineering studies in this regard. Attached to this memo are the several
references to this as the planned approach of a temporary bridge.
• We noted that the principal objector to the temporary bridge approach when it was presented a
few years ago was a property owner who lived on the corner of Balboa and Abalone. This
person no longer owns the home there.
• Finally and most importantly, we stressed our position that the decision as to which approach to
take should be made the professionals involved —the City engineers, who need to do an
economic and engineering study of the alternatives and the safety experts (i.e. the fire and
police departments) who need to evaluate the safety risks of having limited access to the Little
Island. While the residents' opinions should of course be considered, the final decision should
rest with these professionals who have the ultimate responsibility. In this regard, as we
assumed that the unnamed body was the Little Island Board of Directors and we observed that
it is an unelected, volunteer group and as such, its leadership has no formal standing as a
representative of the residents and may only be expressing their own opinions.
Pat and Fong indicated to us that at the time of our meeting, no decision has been made as to whether
or not to use a temporary bridge (the presentation on March 16`" notwithstanding) and assured us that
both:
• The alterative of whether or not to use such a bridge will be evaluated from both an economic
and safety standpoint and
• There would be ample opportunity for us and any other interested party to examine at least a
summary of this evaluation well before a final decision is made —the City Council being the
ultimate decision maker.
In subsequent discussions with Pat both by phone and email since our March meeting he has indicated
that the cost and safety study of the alterative of whether or not to employ a temporary bridge would
be a part of the work to be performed by the City's outside engineering consultant— Item C 5. on
tonight's agenda.
Accordingly, imagine my surprise on reading the proposed Amendment to the Professional Service
Agreement to learn that such a safety and cost study is not a part of the proposed services to be
performed by the consultant. In the entire 40 page document there is only one reference to the
temporary bridge alternative with the balance of the document appearing to assume that the one lane,
controlled access has already been decided as the approach to employ:
• Page 13, 2.1g Traffic Study — there is mention that the "traffic study will analyze three potential
deconstruction /construction traffic condition scenarios under consideration" —one of which is
the temporary bridge alternative.
• Page 22, Task 4 —third bullet states that the assumption is that the final design will be based on
a controlled one -way traffic approach.
• Page 29, penultimate paragraph states that the "first stage of construction consists of replacing
existing half or bridge and maintaining one lane traffic during construction ".
Either someone or some group has made a firm decision to employ the one lane controlled access
approach without the benefit of a formal cost and safety analysis. Or, the first phase of this engineering
study should be to perform this analysis.
If a decision has been made, as a Newport Beach resident, I demand to know on what basis the decision
was made and by whom. If a decision has not been made and the temporary bridge alternative is still
Page 3 — Memo to Newport Beach City Council re
Park Avenue Little Island Bridge
under consideration, then the proposed contract with the consultant should be modified to provide for
an initial phase to perform an economic and safety study.
Let me reiterate my position:
• The decision should be based on a professionally conducted engineering and safety study. If the
cost of employing a temporary bridge is higher than the tradeoff between cost and safety
should be made by the Council — not an unelected group.
• As for safety, it is clear that the one -lane approach will slow down traffic (including emergency
vehicles). Seconds count when dealing with health and fire emergencies and no one can be
positive that the single lane will not be impaired by an inoperative piece of construction
equipment. There are many elderly residents (at 77 1 am one of them). No one should have
their 911 call response impeded to save a few thousand dollars — if indeed the temporary bridge
alternative is more costly —which I doubt.
Windows Live Hobnail Print Message Page] of?
...'r, VAndows Live
RE: Little Balboa Island Bridge Status
From: Badum, Steve ( SBadum @city.newport- beach.ca.us)
Sent: Mon 9/10/07 6:01 PM
To: Ronda Mottl (rondamotti @msn.com)
Cc: Bludau, Homer ( HBludau @city.newport- beach.ca.us); Selich, Edward (edselich @adelphia.net)
The Grand Canal Bridge to Little Balboa Island was last inspected an August 23, 2006 and is inspected by the
State every two years. The existing structure was originally constructed in 1928- The City replaced several piles
in 1963 and performed some general rehabilitation work in 1983 The State has determined the bridge to be safe,
but has noted that it does not meet the current seismic codes. Therefore, they have rated it as Functionally
Obsolete. The bridge is eligible for replacement/repair funding under the current State and Federal programs. In
2003, our structural consultant, Dokken Engineering, examined what work would be required for a potential
seismic retrofit and found that the cost to retrofit approaches the cost to replace the bridge. One of the difficulties
with working on this bridge is that the limited space requires the full closure of the bridge during construction for
either retrofit or replacement scenarios. In order to close the bridge for construction, it will be necessary to place
a temporary bridge over the Grand Canal at Balboa Avenue. During the summer of 2004, former Councilman
Bromberg held a Town Hall Meeting to discuss this issue. At that time there was not a consensus as to which
approach to take. retrofit or replacement. Additionally, the idea of a temporary bridge at Balboa Avenue was
quite controversial. Ed Selich has recently asked the Public Works Department to revisit this issue with the
community. We anticipate scheduling a community meeting sometime this fall.
I hope this answers your questions regarding the current status and if you have any additional questions, please
contact me at your convenience.
Steve Badum
Public Works Director
City of Newport Beach
949 -644 -3311
sbadum@city.newport-beach.ca.us
From: Bludau, Homer
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:07 AM
To: 'Ronda Mottl'; Selich, Edward
Cc: Badum, Steve
Subject: RE: Little Balboa Island Bridge Status
Ronda, I will forward your e-mail to Public Works Director Steve Badum. He will provide you the information that
you seek. Thanks. Homer
From: Ronda Mott) [mailto:rondamotti @msn.com]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 7:45 AM
To: Bludau, Homer; Selich, Edward
Subject- Little Balboa Island Bridge Status
Good morning Ed and Homer!
I hope you both had a terrific summer.
hap: //by 117w.bay 117.mail.tive.com /mail /PrintShell.aspx? type= message&cpidg=e7e9aa45... 9/11/2007
Little Balboa Island Property Owner's Association
Board Meeting
.lone 17, 2009
M 1NUTES
Meeting was held at the home of Walt and Sue Richardson and called to order at 7:30 p.m.
Board Members present: John Cunningham, Mickey Dunlap, Bing Girling. Donna I lanunond,
Jeff Herdntan, Ed and Mary Antic Bunt. Linda Kensey, Dan Mariscal, and Walt Richardson.
Guests: Dave 'tVebb. City Engineer and Tom from City of
Newport Beach
Minutes from the May 27. 2009 board meeting were approved as written.
Treasurer's Report; After expenses for June of 5729.36 there was a balance of $9.482,72 in
treasury.
Little Island Bridge:
Dave and Tom from the City attended the board meeting and talked about the Little Island
bridge. They explained that the bridge was built in 19330 and that the state bridge engineers
recommend it be replaced. If not replaced in the future there will probably be weight restrictions
put on it — barring vehicles over a certain weight from using the bridge which could eliminate
fire engines, trash trucks, etc. from coming on Little Island. Dave explained that it would take 3
to 5 years for actual work to start on the bridge once it was put in the cycle for replacement. lie
said they would see ifthe present "shape" ol'the bridge could be reconstructed with the new
bridge. Dave further explained that funding at the moment would be covered 88% by the federal
government and the rest of the cost would be covered by the state so cost to City would be zero.
He also said that parts of the bridge could be built off -site and assembled in place thus reducing
the time the bridge would be under construction by many months. He concluded his talk by
saying that the bridge was the property or the City of Newport Beach and the decision of what
happened to it was up to the City.
Summer Meeting Series:
June 20 °' mecting will start at 9:30 AtNI with a short talk by Tawnia Pett of Orange County
Vector Control. Then open forum for Little island Board or Directors. Jeff has made up signs
for members with their names and duties and asked that they give a short summary- of what they
do on the Board. Then anyone that has any questions can ask them.
July 10' meeting - will just be Steve Lewis, Newport Beach Fire Chief, Mickey will remind
him of the meeting.
August 15 "' - Mayor Ed Selich
September 13 °i - In -N -Out truck.
Nlission Statement
The Little Balboa /slam/ Property Owners' Assaciation is dedicated to maintaining a .safe,
eiO rahle, and harmonious neighborhood while increasing the value g0ts nrenrbers' property. I
Meet Your Nei, >hbor — by Ken Yonkers, Vice- President
Dr. Richard and Susan Mays have been married for 49 'h years! He was born in Santa
Barbara, and she in Sacramento. They met at a USC party (even though she attended the
University of Pacific). Both of diem enjoyed Balboa Island as kids. Dick still has a photo his
Mother took of the Pavilion in 1917.
Susan (maiden name Palmer) attended Marlborough Girls High School in
says there are almost a dozen (out of
a class of 80) ladies in the Newport
area that attended Marlborough and
they still get together. Susan has
many teaching credentials, and is
fluent in Spanish. She majored in
Spanish at the University of Pacific.
Her latestjob before retiring was as a
Regional Director for an Educational
Program in Ventura County.
Dick attended USC as an
undergraduate and majored in
zoology. He went on to graduate
from USC's School of Dentistry. He
also graduated from the University of
St. Louis School of Orthodontics, a 3
year graduate program. After years
or running an orthodontics practice in Westlake, he still teaches orthodontics part -time at USC.
Dick enjoys boating, running, and paddling.
Dick and Susan bought their current lot on Crystal Avenue in 1996. They built their beautiful
home with meticulous detail (it took 2 '/ years to build!). They moved to Balboa Island Full time
from their longtime home in Westlake in 2007. Chris & Kim are their children who have blessed
them with five grandchildren. Sailing is "in their family" as their son Chris, and his Wife Julie,
recently sailed around the world.
Both Sue and Dick contribute back to our island community. Susan volunteers each year as a
Docent in Balboa Island's Holiday Hotne'rour. Dick serves on the board for the LBIPOA.
Los Angeles. She
Little Island Brid c Replacement Update
_2 (-)/
On Wcdnesday, December 14°a Councilman Ed Selich and I met with Dayc Webb, Deputy
Public Works Director, City of Newport Beach, and Tom Sandefur, Civil En„ineer for the
public Works Dept., to discuss plans for the replacement of the Little Island Bridge.
At Ibis meeting I learned that the bridge, as u stands now, was last reviewed by the Federal
Government in 2008. At that time the bridge was given a 4.5 rating out of I.tl K seismic
stability. Given the fact that the bridge fell tinder the 5.(1 rating. 100 0o replacement costs I'or the
bridge are available from the Federal Government. The JbIlowing three face justify the
replacement of the Little Wand Bridge:
I. It does not nice[ seismic standards:
I The City has to keep spending money on the bridge to keep it structurally sal:
3. 10015 replacement money is available.
An additional fact is that the City is curromly dealing with an ADA lawsuit that a requiring the
walkways on the bridge to be one ( I ) foot wider. This lawsuit also extends to the Big Island
Bridge where in the nest couple of months you w ill sec hand ON being inmaldod at either ends
of the bridge. and the cobblestone sidewalks at the island end of the bridge will be replaced with
Smooth surface sidewalks. One more additional last is that if the Little Island Bridge is not
replaced, a possible weight restriction may be imposed because of the condition of the pifings
supporting the bridge.
I So learned that over the nest lour months the City will be completing ongineer designs for the
new bridge (State Funded). At that One island residents will be brought into the loop (probably
at one of our summer meetingsh where concept deigns %011 be shared. 'file current footprint of
the bridge w ill be maintained (thc storybook curve), however improved ramps. wider sidewalks,
and enhanced charac(er to the bridge will be accomplished through handrails. street light. and
landscape design. There is a possibility that the ramps will be redesigned [o extend directly
clown to the street instead of the current zigzag design. I asked that the Construction of steps
down to the board walks also be considered. The span of the bridge would be a "clear design
underneath so that boats like a Duffy could pass under the bridge, however that won't be
possible until the eel grass si umion is mitigated. and dredging of the canal can resume.
1Vc are looking a[ 4 in 5 )cars out bcRwc the bridge would be replaced. The reason fix this is
mainly because of the approval process fix. Coastal and Tidelands Commissions 1. Because of
improved teehnologj. how'ev er. the time iranhe for the completion of the bridge is just 3 to 4
months. For example, pre - fabricated steel frames would he dropped into place rather than the
frames having to he built on-sitc. Obviously a tenhporar} bridge is includlcd in [lie overall plans
[hat would be a pre- I'bluicated maul bridge at Balboa .Avc. The cost Fix this temporary bridge is
included in the Federal funds.
Until next iMonth......
leffand Ken
COWAN
L A W G R d C P
October 15, 2013
Delivered Via Personal Delivery to Cijy Clerk
Keith Curry, Mayor
Rush Hill, Mayor Pro Tem
Michael Henn, Council Member
Tony Petros, Council Member
Leslie Daigle, Council Member
Edward Selich, Council Member
Nancy Gardner, Council Member
Aaron Harp, City Attorney
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Dave Webb, Public Works Director
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Re: Health and Safety Risks
Park Avenue Bridge Deconstruction/Construction
RECEIVED
2513 OCT 15 R 2, 34
OFFICE OF
Tt Ji MY CLR
GII,, r" ' ,'; O R -9,H
Date t 5 l
Copes Sent To:
City Couneff
City Manager
City Attomey
Fiie
Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Messrs. Harp, Kiff and Webb:
This office represents Linda and John Kensey, who reside at 305 East Bay Front, on Little
Balboa Island.
At the City Council meeting held on October 8, 2013, Mr. Kensey expressed his concern with
what appears to be the City of Newport Beach's plan to provide controlled, alternating traffic on a
one -lane bridge at the Park Avenue location during the Park Avenue Bridge deconstruction/
construction as opposed to a two -lane temporary bridge placed over the Canal at Balboa avenue. The
Kenseys believe that this approach will create a substantial health and safety risk to the residents of
the Little Island. Accordingly, they strongly believe that the temporary bridge approach should be
employed unless there are compelling economic and feasibility reasons against it.
Through conversations with the City's engineering staff over the past six months, Mr. Kensey
was led to believe that an economic and safety study of these two alternatives had not yet been
performed, but would be the first step provided for in the contract for engineering work that the City
Council was to approve on October 8u'. As it turns out this is not the case and, as Mr. Kensey
pointed out, no such study is set to be performed. Rather, at the October 8"' meeting, the Council,
after hearing Mr. Kensey's statement, was informed that it was the "advice of the consultants" to
pursue the one -lane bridge approach. Mr. Kensey believes that to make such a decision without a
formal study of the alternatives by competent professionals puts the safety of the Little Island
15 Corporate Plaza, Suite 100 • Newport Beach, California 92660 • T 949.333.0919 • F 949.203.6428
City of Newport Beach
October 15, 2015
Page 2
residents at unnecessary risk and potentially exposes the City to costly claims should first
responders be delayed in the event of an emergency. Many of Little Balboa Island's residents are
elderly and have a greater risk of life- threatening health issues than the general population. It is,
therefore, imperative that emergency vehicles be able to reach them without delay and, if necessary,
transport them to medical facilities as quickly as possible. In many cases, even a few seconds of
delay can mean the difference between life and death.
The replacement of the Park Avenue Bridge has been in the planning stages for nearly 10
years. Until recently, conversations with City officials and the City's own documents all indicated
that the City planned to install a temporary two -lane bridge to handle traffic between Balboa Island
and the Little Island during the Park Avenue Bridge deconstruction/construction process.
Presumably, this was the case because City officials understood that, in comparison to providing
limited access on one lane of the existing Park Avenue Bridge, a temporary two -lane bridge would
not only be a more expeditious and less expensive method of construction, but even more
significantly, an important means of protecting the health and safety of Little Balboa Island's
residents because it would allow emergency vehicles to travel to and from Little Balboa Island with
minimal delay.
As previously stated, the Kenseys attended the City Council meeting on October 8th and
came away from the meeting with the strong impression that the City had made a decision not to use
a temporary two -lane bridge, but instead to provide controlled access on a single lane of the Park
Avenue Bridge during the deconstruction/construction process without the benefit of a formal study
of the alternatives. Based on the health and safety issues mentioned above, and to a lesser extent
cost issues, the Kenseys are extremely concerned that the City may be taking steps that will
jeopardize the lives and health of the Little Balboa Island residents, and at the same time increase the
cost of construction. Given the critical nature of these issues, we would appreciate a response from
the City to the following questions:
How, specifically, does the City intend to handle traffic to and from Little Balboa
Island during the Park Avenue Bridge construction/deconstruction process if the one-
lane approach is employed? How will emergency access be facilitated?
2. On what economic and feasibility factors is the City's decision to utilize the traffic
scenario identified in Question No. 1 based?
What studies, analyses or other documents support the City's decision to use the
traffic scenario identified in Question No. 1?
15 Corporate Plaza, Suite 100 • Newport Beach, California 92660 • T 949.333.0919 • F 949.203.6428
City of Newport Beach
October 15, 2013
Page 3
We would appreciate responses to the above questions by October 25, 2013
In addition, please consider this a formal demand, pursuant to California Government Code
Section 6250 gt BgQ., for copies of all documents identified in the City's response to Question No. 3
as they may relate to both the due diligence the City performed in connection the decision to utilize
the one -lane, controlled access approach and for minimizing the health and safety risks associated
with the Park Avenue Bridge deconstruction/construction process.
S' ce ely,
Jose M. owan
15 Corporate Plaza, Suite 100 • Newport Beach, California 92660 • T 949.333.0919 • F 949.203.6428