HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/17/2014 - Tidelands Management Committee
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
TIDELANDS MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
AGENDA
Civic Center Community Room - 100 Civic Center Drive,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
September 17, 2014 - 4:00 PM
Tidelands Management Committee - Council Members:
Mike Henn - Chair Nancy Gardner Ed Selich
Citizens Advisory Panel:
Linda Beimfohr Paul Blank John Corrough
Jamshed Dastur John Keating Don Lawrenz
Staff Members:
Dave Kiff Michael Torres
Chris Miller Shannon Levin
(1)CALL MEETING TO ORDER - Welcome and Introductions
(2)ROLL CALL
(3)PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public comments are invited on agenda and non-agenda items generally considered to be within the
subject matter jurisdiction of the Finance Committee. Speakers must limit comments to 3 minutes.
Before speaking, we invite, but do not require, you to state your name for the record. The Finance
Committee has the discretion to extend or shorten the speakers' time limit on agenda or non-agenda
items, provided the time limit adjustment is applied equally to all speakers. As a courtesy, please turn
cell phones off or set them in the silent mode.
(4)APPROVAL OF MINUTES
July 17, 2014
(5)ON-GOING BUSINESS
A.Re-Cap of Harbor Commission Agenda Action Items during Previous Three Months
Receive and file attached report. Provide comment as needed.
B.Tidelands Capital Plan
No changes since July 2014. Receive and file Plan. Provide comments as needed.
(6)CURRENT BUSINESS
A.Citizen’s Advisory Panel – Appointment of New Member to Replace Former CAP Member
Jeff Herdman
The Committee will pick one member from the pool of applicants for the Citizen’s Advisory Panel.
B.Balboa Island Seawall Update
Staff will discuss key design parameters for the Balboa Island seawall.
C.Marina Park Update
Staff will update the Committee on the status of the Marina Park project.
(7)ROUNDTABLE OR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
(8)COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A
FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON-DISCUSSION ITEM)
A.Balboa Island Bulkheads - Update
(9)DATE AND TIME FOR NEXT MEETING:
December 17, 2014 (Note: This is the first night of the Christmas Boat Parade)
(10)ADJOURNMENT
This Tidelands Management Committee is subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act. Among other things, the Brown Act requires that the Tidelands
Management Committee's agenda be posted at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance of each regular meeting and that the public be
allowed to comment on agenda items before the Tidelands Management Committee and items not on the agenda but are within the subject
matter jurisdiction of the Tidelands Management Committee. The Tidelands Management Committee may limit public comments to a
reasonable amount of time, generally three (3) minutes per person.
It is the intention of the City of Newport Beach to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") in all respects. If, as an attendee or
a participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, the City of Newport Beach will attempt to
accommodate you in every reasonable manner. If requested, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons
with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and
regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting to
inform us of your particular needs and to determine if accommodation is feasible at (949) 644-3005 or cityclerk@newportbeachca.gov.
NEWPORT BEACH
ITEM TITLE: July 17, 2014
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
July 17, 2014 Meeting Minutes
NEWPORT BEACH
ITEM TITLE: Re-Cap of Harbor Commission Agenda Action Items during Previous
Three Months
ITEM SUMMARY: Receive and file attached report. Provide comment as needed.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Quarterly Review of Harbor Commission Action Items
NEWPORT BEACH
ITEM TITLE: Tidelands Capital Plan
ITEM SUMMARY: No changes since July 2014. Receive and file Plan. Provide comments
as needed.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Tidelands Capital Plan
NEWPORT BEACH
ITEM TITLE: Citizen’s Advisory Panel – Appointment of New Member to Replace
Former CAP Member Jeff Herdman
ITEM SUMMARY: The Committee will pick one member from the pool of applicants for the
Citizen’s Advisory Panel.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
CAP Appplications
NEWPORT BEACH
ITEM TITLE: Balboa Island Seawall Update
ITEM SUMMARY: Staff will discuss key design parameters for the Balboa Island seawall.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Email Communication
1
Miller, Chris
From:Miller, Chris
Sent:Wednesday, September 10, 2014 4:58 PM
To:Miller, Chris
Subject:FW: Balboa Island Sea Walls
From: Jamshed Dastur
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 11:27 AM
Dear Tidelands Management Committee:
Ever since the news broke, almost 3 years ago, about a plan to possibly spend upwards of
$70,000,000 for new sea walls for Balboa Island, I have been trying to understand the need for and
the details behind this evolving proposal. To the extent that I have knowledge of and experience in
marine construction and engineering cost estimates, I have tried to put in my two cents worth. I am
truly thankful to City Council members for having given me the opportunity to participate through my
appointment to the Citizen's Advisory Panel to the Tidelands Management Committee.(TMC)
A lot of new, useful information has been provided by City staff during the last 3 meetings of TMC. I
find it difficult to respond to facts and figures presented at the meeting without taking the time to
understand and digest them over a period of time. My current understanding of the situation, along
with my personal/professional opinion, for what it is worth, is as follows:
1. Balboa Island is protected from sea erosion and tidal flooding by a concrete wall, owned and
maintained by the City. The total length of the wall is approximately 13,200 feet (+/-). The elevation of
the top of the wall varies from a high of 9.1' to a low of 7.7'.
2. Of the 13,200 feet of wall, about 3,800 feet (along the Grand Canal and the West end of the big
island) has
deteriorated to the extent that it would be prudent to replace it within the next 5 to 7 years. There is no
impending emergency to replace this section of the wall immediately, although planning, engineering
and permitting needs to be addressed and is being addressed currently. The remaining 9,400 feet of
wall has at least 20 to 25 years of useful life left, with normal routine maintenance. (This conclusion
was supported by the City's consultant at one of the TMC meetings) With competing claims for scarce
tax dollars, it would be a non-starter to consider any replacement of this section of the wall, any time
soon.
3. There is general consensus that the sea level has risen in the past 20 years and is continuing to
rise. The top elevation of 7.7' for a significant portion of the existing sea wall poses a present and
imminent danger of swamping the island during a king tide combined with an ocean surge and a
heavy rain storm. The probability of this happening may be small, but the consequences would be
catastrophic. This issue needs to be addressed on an expedited basis.
4. The political football as to who should pay for any or all of the costs associated with these issues is
finally being kicked around. The suggestion that Balboa Island property owners be required to pick
up a substantial portion of the costs associated with sea walls, further muddies the already murky
waters.
2
5. Current thinking and planning is for the City to put all issues - the entire 13,200 feet of the sea
walls, ferry terminal & fuel dock, bridge retrofits, etc. - into one package for permitting and financing;
this leads to the daunting $72,000,000 number. It also forces a design decision for 75% of the wall
that does not need to be made for the next 25 years.
Based on the above premises, I would like to put forth these ideas for your consideration.
A. As a first order of business, engineer and construct a cap addition to the 9,400 feet of wall that
has a remaining life expectancy of 25 years, so that the top elevation is 9'. This can be accomplished
along the lines of the cap addition done to the Little Island's South Bay Front. This would not entail
any extraneous issues such as access to private docks and the beach, permitting for encroachment,
ADA issues, home-owner views, etc. The total cost associated with this, per the City's estimate of
$250 - $300 per foot would be $2.4 to $2.8 million. The cost for this should be borne by the City. Do
not have this issue tied up with planning or permitting for a new wall.
The reason for opting for a height limit of elevation 9.0 is that this 9,400 feet long wall will be
replaced at some date in the distant future. At that time, we will have a better understanding of how
fast the sea is rising as well as what is being done holistically about rising sea level for the rest of the
inner harbor.
B. Proceed cautiously with the planning, engineering and permitting of the 3,400 feet of new wall.
The total cost associated with this, per the City's estimate of $3,800 - $4,000 per foot (I believe this
number already has contingencies built into it and does not need additional contingency on top of
that) would be $14.4 to $15.2 million. Since this is a new wall and expected to serve for the next 75 to
100 years, the preferred top elevation should be 10'. The City should be able to find the money, from
the tidelands fund and supplemented by the General Fund, to get this done over the next 5 to 7
years.
C. Its is premature and counter-productive to reconfigure the entire ferry landing for future high tides.
Re-grading the sidewalk and Agate street to provide protection up to elevation 9' can be
accomplished at minimal cost out of the General Fund. The same applies to retrofitting of bridges.
The above course of action reduces the monumental $72,000,000 problem to a more manageable
$15,000,000 to $20,000,000 problem that addresses issues for the next 20 to 25 years while we
continue to look for holistic solutions for the entire harbor, for the future beyond.
I am available to meet with anyone of you if you are so inclined, to discuss my views in detail.
Thank you for your indulgence in reading this presentation.
Jim Dastur
1
Miller, Chris
From:Miller, Chris
Sent:Wednesday, September 10, 2014 5:00 PM
To:Miller, Chris
Subject:Balboa Island Sea Walls
From: Jamshed Dastur
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 12:03 PM
To: Stein, Robert
Robert:
Please bear with me while I run through some thoughts that have been bugging me.
I understand that the City, with the blessings of the Tidelands management Committee, is proceeding forward with a
conceptual wall consisting of H piles and concrete planks as opposed to a steel sheet pile wall. This decision is based on
the premise that the former is aesthetically superior and is possibly a little less expensive. However, this conclusion
ignores two other parameters - functionality and constructability.
Functionality: The new sea wall, eventually will require a dewatering system to control the water table on the island. A
sheet pile wall, where all of the sheets go deep into the soil, would provide a much better sub-soil water barrier than the
concrete planks which do not go as deep. In fact, the main function of the concrete planks is to retain the soil and will
provide little or no relief from water intrusion. This will necessitate a considerably bigger dewatering system for that option.
Constructability: Installation of the sheet pile wall is a single operation - drive sheet piles. This activity is done without
disturbing the soil or having any construction activity under water. However, in order to install the concrete planks, under-
water excavation will have to be done in front of the existing fragile wall. This will raise issues in the permitting process
regarding control of turbidity and the handling/disposal of excavated material. Any excavation done below the existing wall
could trigger a local failure of the wall, during construction, endangering the safety of adjoining homes. This system also
requires multiple pieces of equipment for different activities - pile driving, hoisting concrete planks, excavation, disposal of
excavated material - in a very congested area. Although, generically an H-pile/Concrete Plank wall may be a little less
expensive than a steel sheet pile wall, I believe that in this special situation, it may not be the case.
I hope the above factors are given due consideration before it is too late.
Thank you for your indulgence.
JIM