1 / 24

Johnson Street Bridge Replacement Project Update

Johnson Street Bridge Replacement Project Update. Governance & Priorities Committee Engineering Department October 8, 2009. JSB Replacement Project. Overview Aging Infrastructure and Deficit City of Victoria Infrastructure Key findings of the Condition Assessment

Download Presentation

Johnson Street Bridge Replacement Project Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Johnson Street Bridge Replacement Project Update Governance & Priorities Committee Engineering Department October 8, 2009

  2. JSB Replacement Project Overview • Aging Infrastructure and Deficit • City of Victoria Infrastructure • Key findings of the Condition Assessment • Conclusion of the Assessment • Considerations regarding Replacement • Decision to move forward with Replacement • Infrastructure Grant Opportunities • September 24th Special Council Meeting Comments

  3. JSB Replacement Project Aging Infrastructure and Deficit: • FCM press release on November 20, 2007 • The November 2007 report, DANGER AHEAD: The Coming Collapse of Canada's Municipal Infrastructure, says that Canada has used up 79 per cent of the service life of its public infrastructure. It sets the price for eliminating the municipal infrastructure deficit at $123 billion. • Dr. Saeed Mirza of McGill University's Department of Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics, leader of the research team that conducted the study.

  4. JSB Replacement Project • City of Victoria incorporated in 1862 • Owns some of the oldest infrastructure in Canada • Information highlights shared with Council in January 20, 2009 • Engineering Department manages about $1.7 billion in city-wide infrastructure [underground, roads, facilities, operations] • Much of this is nearing or has exceeded its design life

  5. JSB Replacement Project • The City of Victoria’s Engineering Department had sought professional engineering services to undertake a condition assessment of the Johnson Street Bridge. • The City issued a Request for Proposal on November 26, 2007. • The successful consultant was Delcan [out of 6 submissions from qualified and experienced engineering consulting firms]. • Study commenced in May 2008 • Condition assessment work completed for Johnson Street Bridge in February 2009

  6. Structural: Timber foundation under concrete piers. Condition of timber piles unknown Eroded concrete substructure Pack rust and corrosion [e.g., steel plates, rivet heads, gusset plates] Coating system has exceeded service life. Mechanical: Equipment 80 yrs old Maintenance intensive Some components obsolete [e.g., brakes, locks] JSB Replacement Project Condition Assessment Study findings: Electrical: • Obsolete, poor condition • No standby power • No redundancy • End of useful life.

  7. JSB Replacement Project Condition Assessment Study findings - continued: Seismic Vulnerability: • Most seismically active area in Canada • Can expect a 35% probability of a major earthquake in the next 50 years • Not built to any seismic standards • Bridge was modeled based on 6.8 magnitude earthquake in Nisqually, Washington in Feb 2001 • Modeling showed that the bridges would pound together and eventually fail; cascade failure of timber piles under counterweight tower

  8. JSB Replacement Project Conclusion of the Assessment: • City needs to address concerns in the next two to three years • Options considered: • Do-Nothing [leads to bridge closure] • Rehabilitation • Replacement

  9. JSB Replacement Project • Do-Nothing [leads to bridge closure] • Seismic vulnerability • Continued corrosion of steel members • Deterioration of concrete piers and abutments • Potential delays due to mechanical / electrical system failures • Risk and liability associated with Do-Nothing • This is not recommended

  10. JSB Replacement Project • Rehabilitation: • Substandard trail and rail width on rail bridge • City continues to own liability on rail bridge • Retention of S-curve on west side • No on-road bike lanes • Risk of unforeseen costs due to rehabilitation work. • Impact to Heritage appearance of bridge • Limited pedestrian / cyclist link to & from Downtown area: ~ 4,000-6,000 pedestrian / cyclist trips daily on bridge • Not built to current accessibility standards • Impedes ability to achieve Regional pedestrian / cycling mode-share targets at strategic junction of regional multi-use trails

  11. JSB Replacement Project • Rehabilitation con’td: • Annual maintenance cost about double compared to new bridge • 80 injury and 130 property-damage-only crashes [2004-2008] - ICBC • To complete by March 2011, need a 6-month full closure. • Results in significant economic impact for Downtown and surrounding areas [e.g., Cambie Street] • If no full-closure, then temporary lane closures required extending project an additional year [i.e., would take a total of about 30-36 months to complete]. This did not meet grant timelines. • Additional risk that associated costs will increase during the project.

  12. JSB Replacement Project • Replacement: • Enhances safety for all users • Provides multi-use trail and rail corridor that meets current standards • Accommodates on-road cyclists on bridge • Enhances local and regional transportation objectives • Provides linkage to future Harbour Pathway and E&N Rail Trail • Meets currents standards for accessibility • Eliminates S-curve on west side • Improves pedestrian and cycling amenities on bridge and approaches • Improves marine accessibility through wider bridge channel • Annual maintenance cost less than existing bridge

  13. JSB Replacement Project Considerations regarding Rehabilitation versus Replacement: • Embodied Energy • Heritage Assessment • Life Cycle Assessment • Regional Growth Strategy Objectives • Accessibility • Safety • Pedestrian • Cycling (Commuter and Recreational) • Marine Traffic • Traffic and Business Disruption

  14. JSB Replacement Project Decision to move forward with Replacement: • Bridge does not require weight restrictions and is currently safe • City must act soon (next two to three years as of February 2009) • In balance of all the considerations, the replacement option was preferred • Council approved-in-principal the replacement of Johnson Street Bridge – April 23, 2009 • City applied to the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund Grant Program – May 1, 2009

  15. JSB Replacement Project Infrastructure Grant Opportunities: Infrastructure Stimulus Fund ($4 billion nationally) • City first advised on April 24,2009 • Application deadline May 1, 2009 • Replacement of the Johnson Street Bridge ($63M) • Required completion date March 31, 2011

  16. JSB Replacement Project September 24th Special Council Meeting Comments: • Capital and O&M Costs • Additional amenities with Rehabilitation Option • Lane closures • Sustainability

  17. JSB Replacement Project • Rehabilitation [with seismic] • Capital ~ $25-$30 million [MMM] • Bridge service life extended 40 years • Annual Operating & Maintenance ~ $100,000 with significant works required about every 10 years [MMM] • Lane closures required for repainting, etc. [~a year+] • No improvements to pedestrian / cycling facilities or approaches • S-curve and existing approaches retained

  18. JSB Replacement Project • Replacement • Capital = $63 million [MMM] • Bridge service life 100 years • Annual Operating & Maintenance ~ $25,000 with repainting about every 20 years [MMM] • Partial lane closures as required • Single lane closure required to accommodate cyclists with removal of rail bridge. Traffic queues will likely increase unless alternative travel patterns develop [e.g., modes, routes] • S-curve eliminated • New approaches

  19. JSB Replacement Project Issues raised at September 24th Special Council Meeting: • Rehabilitation with additional amenities [incl. seismic] • Previous review of 5 m cantilevered multi-use path on north side of rail bridge not viable – additional weight, bridge unbalanced, bearings on one side to be modified, counterweight adjustment, lift motor resizing, approach modifications to link path • Separate bascule bridge for multi-use trail users ~ $10 – $12 million not including approaches or soft costs [MMM] • Improved bridge deck for cyclists adds weight – heavier counterweight, lift motor resizing required. Could potentially add ~ 100 t to bridge at very rough cost of $5 – $10 million • Does not improve cyclist facility.

  20. JSB Replacement Project Lane / bridge closures required with or without Grant: Rehabilitation: [$25 - $30 M] • Grant: 18 to 24 months project duration, including 6 month bridge closure • No Grant: could limit to partial lane closures, but will lengthen project by an additional year for a total of 30 to 36 months. Replacement: [$63 M] • Grant: 18 month project duration with partial lane closures as required, including single lane closure to accommodate cyclists • No Grant: could extend project duration; partial lane closures as required; require single lane closure to accommodate cyclists

  21. JSB Replacement Project Sustainability Review: • Embodied energy assessment indicated that the replacement option was the least impact. • Sustainability expert member of Citizens’ Advisory Committee • The replacement option will incorporate TBL approach in the RFP for the Design-Build Contractor. • RFP will address sustainability aspects such as; • Use of local labour, equipment and materials, • Reuse, recycling of construction material • Reuse of existing bridges • Waste management • Use of low impact standards such as living walls, rain gardens, bio-swale • Lighting treatment, • Energy efficiency • Minimize traffic impact

  22. JSB Replacement Project Rail Options: • No Rail extension across Harbour • Protect future rail corridor consistent with Bylaws and Policies [i.e., Official Community Plan] • Review with Island Corridor Foundation and Via Rail

  23. JSB Replacement Project It is recommended that Council: • Receive this presentation for information; and • Report back to Council at next available GPC

  24. Thank YouQuestions

More Related