HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 0401 CC REG ITEM 08IITEM 2 • �
MOORPARK
799 Moorpa.* Avenue Moorpark, California 93021..
(805 5295864
4., ._
1992-
-T;ON
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: The Honorable Planning Commission
Works
M: Kenneth C. Gilbert, , Director of Public
DATE: March 11, 1992 (Commission Meeting 4 -1 -92)
SUBJECT: Consider Authorizing a Study of the
Spring Road Bridge
OVERVIEW
This requests authorization to proceed with a study to evaluate
the Spring Road bridge.
In the past the City Council has discussed the inadequate width
of the Spring Road bridge and the feasibility of modifying the
bridge to better accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
The question of adding two additional vehicle travel lanes has
also been discussed. In light of recent events, this requests
clarification of future direction with respect to the
disposition of the bridge.
DISCUSSION
The Spring Road bridge was constructed by Caltrans (old Route
23) in 1952. A copy of the bridge design plans are being sent
to the City by Caltrans.
As you may be aware, the bridge is supported by a number of
piles placed in the middle of the arroyo Simi. During the
recent storms a considerable amount of debris (including large
trees) did not pass under the bridge, but instead collected on
these bridge support piles. This debris obstructed the flow of
storm water under the bridge. At one point the storm water
flows were splashing over the top of the bridge. The volume and
velocity of the storm water flows exerted a great deal of
lateral force
PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. BERNARDO M. PEREZ SCOTT MONTGOMERY ROY E. TALLEY JR. JOHN E. WOZNIAK
Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember Councilmemaer Councilmember
Spring Road Bridge
Page 2
against the debris and the bridge support piles behind the
debris. Although staff was not sure what amount of lateral
force the bridge could have withstood, staff was fearful that
the bridge was in danger of being damaged or destroyed.
Although the bridge survived this event, staff remains fearful
that the bridge is in danger of sustaining future damage from a
severe storm.
It became apparent from this episode that the Spring Road bridge
design is incompatible with the volume and character of storm
flows during a severe storm. The volume of storm water run -off
in 1952, when this bridge was constructed, was much less than it
is today. It is possible that this bridge design was compatible
with the nature and character of storm flows at that time. The
volume of storm water and, more importantly, the amount of large
trees and debris generated in the Arroyo Simi has increased
dramatically:
This matter was recently discussed by the Public Works /
Facilities Committee. It was their recommendation that the City
Council consider having a study prepared to evaluate the present
condition of the bridge, and the possible options to considered
regarding retaining and /or reconstructing the bridge.
The following is a list of the types of questions and analysis
such a study would address:
• an evaluation of the present condition and function of the
Spring Road bridge;
• the review of Ventura County Flood Control District design
standards and criteria for this segment of the Arroyo;
• the review of prior City actions, such as the Calrlsberg
Specific Plan, pertaining to bridge design elements
(i. e., travel lanes, bike lanes, pedestrians, etc.);
• a discussion of various design parameters, including a
discussion of a design for a two lane bridge which can
accommodate future expansion to four lanes;
• the development of alternative recommendations pertaining
to the possible need for the modification and /or
reconstruction of the bridge (including a do nothing
alternate;
• the development of cost estimates for each alternate
discussed; and,
Spring Road Bridge
Page 3
an analysis of the available funding sources for such a
project, including Spring Road and Tierra Rejada AOC funds
and other possible sources.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of staff and the Public Works /
Facilities Committee that the City Council authorize staff to
proceed with the above described study. If approved, it is the
recommendation of staff that Proposal be requested from the City
Engineer and other qualified Civil Engineering firms.