Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10032007Special~„~~ -_ HOME OF PELICAN ISLAND SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING COLLIER CREEK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Called by Council Member Wolff AGENDA WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2007 - 6:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA AGENDA ITEMS MAY REINSPECTED /N THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 1225 MAIN STREET, SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA Individuals will address the City Council with respect to agenda items immediately before deliberation of the item by the City Council -time limit five minutes where public input allowed CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. SPECIAL MEETING ITEM A. Collier Creek Project Staff Update (City Engineer Information from 8/22/07 Meeting) B. Council Discussion and Direction 5. ADJOURN (All meetings shall adjourn at 10:30 pm unless extended for up to one half hour by a majority vote of City Council) HEARING ASSISTANCE HEADPHONES ARE AVAILABLE /N THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR ALL GOVERNMENT MEETINGS. City Council tvleetir~gs ire Scheduled for Live Bro~dc~st on Cc~cast Ch~anne125 ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE HEARD. (286.0105 F.S.) IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA), ANYONE WHO NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY'S ADA COORDINATOR AT 589-5330 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THIS MEETING. TO: Members of the Sebasti y Council FROM: AI Minner, City Mana r / RE: SPECIAL MEETIN - LIER'CREEK DATE: Friday, Septemb 8, 2 7 Attached with this correspondence is an update memo from Dave Fisher on the Collier Creek Project and the Special Meeting packet prepared by the Clerk's Officer. The packet contains the same information provided to Council when I had this item placed under my matters at the August 22, 2007 Regular Meeting. In short, these materials summarized that the selected option of construction of the canal with rip-rap is still considered the best alternative. In addition to these materials, Dave Fisher has provided an update. In a-mail from, dated September 28, 2007, Dave has provided information to Council on Canal activities. Basically, the project is now ready to be let for bid by October 23`d. In addition, we have also received notification that the City will receive the EPA/FDEP 319 Grant in the amount of $500,000 to help finance this project. At the Special meeting, I anticipate of short report presented by Dave Fisher. This report will again update Council on the project and visit the work we did over the summer to demonstraight that the rip-rap alternative is still the best construction processes. Also, at the meeting will be CDM. In closing the Special Meeting, I have placed under item 4.6 "Council Discussion and Direction". Here I anticipate any questions, discussion and consideration of changing the course of the project that Council may want to entertain. As always, should you have any questions on this or any other matters, please feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience. Jeanette Williams From: David Fisher Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 10:37 AM To: Alfred Minner Cc: Sally Maio; Jeanette Williams Subject: Collier Canal Dredging Project Update AI -- As discussed, following is a summary update of recent items regarding the Collier Canal Dredging Project. Water Quality Sampling City has recently taken samples in and adjacent to the canal for water quality testing. Testing and analysis of those samples corroborate the estimated loadings in the Watershed Management Model water quality estimates previously submitted to FDEP. City will continue to monitor the water quality in the Collier Canal and Twin Ditches on an ongoing basis. Value Engineering -Design of Rip-Rap Slope Cross-Sections Value engineering discussions and analysis have determined the cross-section of the rip-rap side slope can be revised to eliminate the intermediate layer of gravel between the fabric lining and the rip-rap rock thereby avoiding the need to draw down the water level during construction. This measure will enable faster, more inexpensive construction and avoid potentially bothersome drawdown pumping operations. Asbestos An ongoing review of the asbestos issues indicates "the chances that asbestos is present in the sediment in amounts that could possibly be harmful are extremely low, if not impossible. The asbestos report indicated that the [bulkhead material -chrysolite] contained 10% asbestos. The report also indicated that 1 % is the EPA threshold for asbestos- containing material. Therefore, the [total amount ot] sediment that is excavated must contain 10% asbestos [bulkhead material -chrysolite] to contain 1 % asbestos overall. [But] the volume or mass of [bulkhead material] ... is [relatively] insigniifcant compared to the volume or mass of [total] sediment that will be removed. ... Although there is little, if any, chance that the sediment could contain harmful amounts of asbestos, it is prudent to recommend testing to prevent potential issues.... {The expectation is] that nothing will be found. The analytical results coupled with a calculation of the amount of asbestos [bulkhead material] it would take to comprise 10% of the sediment should easily satisfy even the most cautious mother whose child might play in that pile of dirt" [even if allowed, which it won't be]. • EPA /FDEP 319 Grant for $500,000 City has received confirmation it is being awarded a $500,000 matching funds grant for the project. The grant contract agreement can be in place within 6 weeks following confirmation of the project scope (say by early December) and allow the City to be immediately reimbursed for anything spent on the project since 1 October 2006 (about $60,000) with ongoing reimbursement going forward for any further project expenditures up to an overall total of $500,000. A significant condition of the grant is an ongoing water qulaity testing program - onging for the next 3 to 4 years at least. • Out to Bid Schedule Project is currently on track to go out to bid by 23 October 2007. • Pedestrian Bridge over Collier Canal at Hardee Park Detailed plans are now going forward to for the design and construction of a long-span steel frame pedestrian bridge adjacent (but not connected) to the Barber Street road bridge at Hardee Park. This bridge can be in place within the next 9 months and would pose no conflict with canal navigation or impending project construction operations. -- Dave Fisher Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit Project Review of Status 16 August `07 Introduction The Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit Project, aka the Collier Canal Dredging Project, is now ready for final evaluation prior to soliciting bids for construction. This purpose of this report is to update and summarize the status prior to the construction bid process. Background Since construction of the City's canal system in the 1960s, no continual maintenance dredging program has been pertormed. This has resulted in severe deposition and erosion problems that have led to a degradation of water quality both in-canal and of discharge to downstream areas, particularly in the approximately one-mile stretch of Collier Creek canal from CR-512 running in a northwesterly direction to the control structure near Hardee Park. Further, there is extensive bulkhead failure occurring along much of the perimeter of that particular stretch of the Collier Creek canal To remedy the problems of the canal and to restore the area to a system that functions as it was originally intended, the City proposes to do the following. • Dredge the canal to lower the bottom elevation approximately 8.5 feet to increase the permanent pool storage volume and improve water quality of the stormwater runoff discharged to the St. Sebastian River. • Stabilize the existing vertical side slopes to prevent erosion of the adjacent land into the. detention facility by retrofitting the existing canal bulkheads with fabric and stone rip-rap on 3:1 side slopes extending down to two feet below normal water level. • Adjust the water control structure at the downstream end of the canal near Hardee Park to effectively control the discharge of runoff subsequent to storm events. Current Status In the course of planning, designing, and permitting the project over the past several years, the following items and guidelines have been established. • The current budgeted amount for the project within the City's Stormwater Capital Improvement Bond Funding is $3,513,000 of which approximately $466,000 has been spent to date in the planning, design, and permitting for the project. There is a $500,000 grant now in process and expected to be awarded for this project within the next few weeks from FDEP through the EPA. The proposed perimeter /side slope stabilization measures have been discussed and reviewed extensively. The current design calls for rip-rap cladding on the perimeter side slopes as opposed to sod or new vertical bulkheads. A further recent engineering investigation into the viability of two specific alternatives, (1) a sodded side slope scenario and (2) a new vertical bulkhead combined with a 20-foot natural horizontal "ledge" along the interior perimeter on each side of the canal, produced findings that generally indicate: (1) the sodded side slope alternative is feasible from a construction and maintenance point of view but the intended improvement to water quality is significantly diminished; and (2) the scenario involving a new vertical bulkhead combined with a 20-foot ledge on each side provides significantly enhanced water treatment and 16 August `07 Pg 1 of 5 DWF Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit Project Review of Status 16 August `07 quality but cannot be recommended as a responsible alternative because of a very low factor of safety in the resulting slope stability from the ledge downward into the dredged area. [See the attached memo /report from CDM regarding this further investigation and comparison of perimeter /cross-section options.] These findings support going forward with the current design calling for rip-rap on the side slopes. • Permits now in hand from St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) reflect approval for the rip-rap side slopes and also call for: • The proposed dewatering area for dredged material to be located on a portion of Hardee Park; • Wetland mitigation measures in the area of Hardee Park; and • A detailed and pre-approved dewatering program to maintain water quality and flow in the canal and to protect perimeter /slope stability during construction. • City policy established and/or stated during project planning and discussion includes the following items: • There is to be no special assessment to property owners adjacent to the retrofitted canal for this project. • The City accepts the responsibility of maintaining the canal, including its perimeter within the City right-of-way. • The original planning criteria for the project of supporting and further establishing a future curb and gutter program in the area of the canal is now abandoned. There is no longer any plan for such a curb and gutter program. • The project may go forward in phases as available funding permits. • Construction of the project will be contracted out through a controlled bid process to determine the best responsible, responsive contractor with the lowest proposed construction cost. The construction contract will include major insurance requirements, payment and performance bonds, and provisions for liquidated damages. • The construction program will call for close monitoring and inspection and will include an important component for ongoing information, communications, and relations dealing with concerns of property owners adjacent to and impacted by the retrofitted area(s). Such concerns will likely include existing pools and docks, clearing of trees and vegetation, irrigation lines drawing water from the canal, handling of existing bulkhead material, construction access and traffic, noise levels and temporary disruptions due to construction operations, and restoration of top of slopes to an acceptable condition at the end of construction. The construction bid process will call for alternative bids for doing the project in phases or combined phases. The extent of the work to be done under the initial construction contract will be determined at least in part by the lowest acceptable bid package. A first phase of construction, at a minimum, will include mitigation and the retrofitting of Collier Creek canal from CR-512 to the Fleming Street bridge. 16 August b7 /~V~ Pg2of5 DWF Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit Project Review of Status 16 August `07 The construction bid package and construction management program will call for detailed specific programs and methodology for: dewatering operations in the canal work areas; handling, containment, and dewatering of dredged material; required mitigation; handling of asbestos and other problematic materials; noise and traffic control; and addressing property owner concerns in a proactive, timely manner. • Criteria in determining approval of a construction contract package will include the possibility of applying savings in construction costs on this project to other projects in the City's Stormwater Capital Improvement Program that may be underfunded. • There are a number of privately owned vacant-lots along the Collier Creek canal that might be utilized for construction access and operations. Such tots may be acquired or leased by the City under agreement(s) with the owners. • The City is now going forward with the construction of a new pedestrian bridge that will span the Collier Creek canal on the north side of the Barber /Lake Street bridge at Hardee Park. Planning, design, and construction of this bridge will be done simultaneously with going forward with the Collier Creek Canal Retrofit Project. Conclusion /Recommendation Staff now recommends that going forward with the Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit Project as designed, permitted arid previously authorized by Council is now possible and timely. To that end, arrangements are being made to have the project out to bid by October 2, 2007. Construction bids can be ready for initial review by the City on November 13, 2007. Should Council decided not to move forward with this project or modify its scope; it is recommended that the items detailed in this report be discussed in a Special Meeting. Also note that any change in the project's scope will delay the project by approximately 6 months. 16 August ~7 Pg3of5 DWF Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit Project Review of Status 16 August `07 Outline of Options for Perimeter /Cross-Sections Option Estimated Some Some Range of Cost Advantages Disadvantages Going Forward (A) Rip-Rap cladding on side slo es. Now designed and permitted and Access to /from canal waters ... Scenario 1: From CR-512 to ready to out to bid for construction becomes problematic. Flemin Street Bride $1,300,000 by early October with completion ... Scenario 2: From CR-512 to in more than 18 months. This alternative is a "compromise" a rox.1/2 wa betty. brid es $2,500,000 solution and may not be happily ... Scenario 3: From CR-512 to Likely affordable to do entire canal embraced by all adjacent property Barber /Lake Street bride $3,800,000 as originally proposed. owners. ... Scenario 4: From CR-512 to be and Barber St. bride $4,400,000 (B) Sodded side slopes. Provides better, more gentle Significant reduction in water ... Scenario 1: From CR-512 to $1,500,000 access to canal waters. treatment and resulting quality. Flemin Street Brid e ... Scenario 2: From CR-512 to $2,400,000 Likely to be more inexpensive Will take additional design and a rox.1/2 wa betty. brid es overall than rip-rap alternative if permitting but is not likely to save ... Scenario 3: From CR-512 to $3,300,000 entire canal project is done. significantly more entire canal'is Barber /Lake Street bride not done. ... Scenario 4: From CR-512 to $3,700,000 be and Barber St. bride High level of maintenance req'd. (C) New vertical bulkheads with 20' wide ledge on each side inside canal ROW. Provides vertical bulkheads Cannot be recommended because ... Scenario 1: From CR-512 to $2,100,000 combined with "ledges" suitable for of too low factor of safety for slope Flemin Street Bride flora and fauna. stability downward from the ledges ... Scenario 2: From CR-512 to $3,300,000 into the dredged area. a rox.1/2 wa betty. brid es Is likely to be preferred by adjacent ... Scenario 3: From CR-512 to $6,200,000 property owners to alternatives Probably not enough funding Barber /Lake Street bride involving side slopes (either rip-rap available to do the entire canal ... Scenario 4: From CR-512 to $7,200,000 or sod). area initially proposed. be and Barber St. brid e (D) New vertical bulkheads without any ledge inside canal ROW. Provides good water quality and is Relatively expensive and will ... Scenario 1: From CR-512 to $2,900,000 likely the preferred scenario by require additional design and Flemin Street Bride adjacent property owners. permitting. ... Scenario 2: From CR-512 to $5,500,000 a rox.1/2 wa betty. brid es Probably not enough funding ... Scenario 3: From CR-512 to $8,700,000 + available to do the entire canal Barber /Lake Street bride area initially proposed. ... Scenario 4: From CR-512 to $10,000,000 + be and Barber St. brid e 16 August 07 Pg4of5 DWF Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit Project Review of Status 16 August `07 RECAP -RANGE OF ESTIMATED FURTHER COST FOR VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES Scenario 1: Scenario 2: Scenario 3: Scenario 4: From CR-512 to From CR-512 to From CR-512 to From CR-512 to Plan Fleming Street approx. half-way Barber /Lake beyond Barber / Comment Bridge between bridges Street bridge Lake bridge 1250 LF 3000 LF 5000 LF 5900 LF Now permitted f (A) Rip-Rap cladding on $3,800,000 $4,400,000 bidding by early October (with side slopes. construction completion within 18 months). Additional design (B) Sodded side slopes. $3,300,000 $3,700,000 and permitting required. (C) New vertical bulkheads Cannot be combined with 20' wide (edge $2,100,000 $3,300,000 $6,200,000 $7,200,000 recommended due to low factor on each side of safety for slope inside canal stability. ROW. (D) New vertical bulkheads Most expensive without any ledge Inside $5,500,000 $$,700,000 $10,000,000 solution. canal ROW. (+) (+) Scenarios 1 and 2 Vertical bulkhead alternatives (Plans Comment under all Plans (A-D) C and D) likely not affordable for are likely affordable. Scenarios 3 and 4. \\ 16 August b7 Pg5of5 DWF CDNI Memorandum To: City of Sebastian From: Doug Moulton, P.E. Date; August 13, 2007 Subject: Collier Canal Stormwater Improvement Project - Amendment No. 2 The water quality modeling provided previously for the City of Sebastian's EPA 319 grant for Collier Canal was revised based upon two alternative cross sections. The results of this water quality. modeling are compared with the original results. The alternative cross sections are defined as follows: ^ Sodded sideslopes from top of existing walls at 4 foot horizontal to 1 foot vertical to canal center ("sod"), and ^ Replacement of failing bulkheads with 12 foot wall; maintaining existing canal bottom for 20 feet into channel; dredging 10 feet deep in center of canal only ("hybrid"). These two configurations are shown on Figures 1 and 2, respectively. The effectiveness of water quality treatment is largely a function of the permanent pool volume (PPV) (i.e. volume of water below the normal water level (NWL)). Due to the varying width and depth of Collier Canal along its length, in the original analysis the PPV in both existing and proposed conditions was calculated using the functionality of AutoCAD. In the current analysis, as the alternative cross sections have not yet been incorporated into the design drawings, a simpler method was used- to calculate the volume. The cross sectional area was calculated based upon Figures 1 and 2 and this was multiplied by the length of the canal (6,000 feet). Table 1 presents the cross sectional areas, and the residence time in days. The residence time was calculated by applying the ratio of the alternative PPV to the 14 Day of PPV as shown on Table 2-5 in the EPA 319 Grant Application. The 14 Day PPV was calculated to be 66.3 ac-ft. ~3 t)ocumenteode City of Sebasti, July 5, 2007 Page 2 Table 1- Cros: Scenario Original Propo; Altemative (rip- s Altemative 1 s Altemative 2 h brid 594 81.8 17.3 Based upon the calculated residence times and the equations presented in Evaluation of Alternative Stormwater Regulations for Southwest Florida Draf 1 Report (ERD, 2003) the pollutant removal efficiencies are presented in Table 2. I~ Table 2 -Removal Efficiencies for Conventional Pollutants O-fg/nal Proposed Altemative N -a Alternative 1 so AftemaBve 2 N N 46.2% .44.0% 51.3% Phos horns 62.8% 60.7% 67.6% TSS 72.0% 69.4% 78.0% BOD 61.4% 51.8% 82.4% Malting use of the original Watershed Management Model (WIVIlVI) two additional scenarios were developed malting use of the removal efficiencies presented in Table 2. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 3. As shown. Table 3, Alternative 1(sod) provides a lower level of treatment than the original configuration (rip-rap). Based upon the calculated residence time, which is 2.2 day less than the original (rip-rap), this is a reasonable reduction. It is noted; however that there still remains a significant reduction in the pollutant loading which ultimately will discharge into Indian River Lagoon. ]n contrast, Alternative 2 (hybrid) provides a greater level of treatment. In this case the residence time increases from 9.5 to 17.3 days, this provides a significantly more treatment than either of the other two alternatives. Doamentcode City of Sebastian July 5, 2007 Page 3 Table 3 -Pollutant Load Reduction BMP's Installed TSS TP TN BOD Wet Detention I r I r I r 1 r m Pre-Pro ect 45,189 518 5,832 19,472 EQ ~ Post-Pro ect 37 214 458 5 327 12 632 Q ~, . ~ .' . Load Reduction 7 975 60 505. 6840 ~ t ~ % Reduction 17.6% 11.6% 8.7% 35.1% c Pre-Pro ect 45189 518. 5 832 19 472 Post-Pro ect 40,670 484. 5545 15 774 is Load Reduction 4 518 34 287 3 698 m a % Reduction 10.0% 8.6% 4.8% 19.0% ~. Pre-Pro ect 45189 518 5,832 19 472 s a Post-Pro ect 29 240 399 4 822 5 760 m ~ Load Reduction 15 849 119 1 010 13 712 m a % Reduction 35.3% 23.0°~6 17.3% 70.4% cc: Document code `'( J` ./1 ~z n ~ a' J ~I 2 v N * t l7~ ? F- ~• ~~~ 1 W in a O ~ Y W N ¢Q O~Z~ ~ 4 ~ a ¢ WOW a `~ ^ $ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ , ~ a ` i ,. I ~ ~~ 1 p ~ M i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SONO~InOO 1 J • NNMYnIrt Smm i• i ~ ~ Q dddddddd ~~GG~C~~ ~' -- ~ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~' t' ~~ O ~ +++++++~F ~w '^~ a I p~ •. Z oroao~mm~n NN NMIMN4Db ~rc O U to Z ~ o ~ddddddF &~ ~ , ~ ~ O ~ ~n~n~rifn~nrn~nln a0 V # ~ J m u °d l` ~ T (I` 1 ~ cn ~ JQ ~~ ~ pJ pJJpJ OJJpJJ ? Zc OJ CCC + I U ~ x ++~10+++~ FO m1 * OZ 1 ~•' ~ ~ ~mnO~nN1n0 .- NNYi A ton lal ~ ' / ~ rr rr rr NViN~I~RNNV1 ~ O F 1 ~/ ~ ~ I 1 I I I I I I k M ~~ 1 ,. p ~ ~ W o p o S~iSSNgi v°>S y g ~ ~~{$ U ~ f r~ ' ON +a+DOr~r NNMIn t0 ~ ~,.9C f ~~~~4 I I~ ~~ ~ - 3 ~~~3 / ,_J ~'" 1 _ ~n n~ii~ii~ii~nai{ n ~ ~I1~ r ~ Ly I~ ~ W to zw f5 ~ ~ o,5oy~ o a r ~ ax Wx~ W~ g ~ , i XN NU r ( t wa ~ ~viza~sz g ~ ~ ° ~ 0 ~~ Sw c10 9, ~!!,/ // /y j S w3 B NO J ~3p4 Q p w O Q ~' F ~ x t . " ~ O 1 JJ ~ Z p04 OS~ O~ ~~ ~f y . ~i ' \ /I t ~ ~\ ,' a1 av=irc~dag~ Z ~ ~ '~ ~ ` wa~w i~~rn N ~ ~ U r W N a W W U O X a a AS F- WZ Ua \ ~ W U W ~N~ J W p S ~~ N j `~ riW ~ O K ~0~~¢ 6. p ~~ pw .~ ~ >WdUO Z g4 = F Vl a ' iti • F JCW'JOK`~NK (Oj 4 Y W m WWZ W m r ..~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ Q ~ p ja J U UfO tiJWx Z W ~ ~_~~ K a O<~5 ~~ J -N +~`.~ ~ Wt 070W ONWp 3 W Z ~~~~UUf~ ~ ~ ~~~ p~ w f X O ~ V1 rc~aa o z O ~ o ~ N ~ O W W~ ~ Q- KFmma U/ S J~ J d ! - O 1- ~?W3~~O~a W ~ a _ O F-KWa' x0 Z~OUpaNNLL N O J Y1N K a .~ 7 .tTr 1~ z r7 N O ~ ~.y ' J Q 3 I1,,~...,,, ~ ~ w' ~ ~ Q t _ 4 f V ~ ~ Z ~ L ~R` ~ i~~ ~ W Q ZZQ ZZ O~Z~ rc ~~ .~ ~~ I p ~ 4 tr 0 / (L 0. _1 ~ m g N(1 ZK ~y t 1 a°t ~W ~-) > a 1 1 [V ~~~ 3 Y ~ I '.. _ __--. . _....... ~_. t _. rc 1 « ~~ :~ ~rc~rc~~~~~ i ~ ~n ao' 0 000000 oSaou~aoo 1 ~~~ . ~• +u+ion+awNm c~Nnnav~mm S \ Q ddddddld-d N~~~~~N~ ~ 1 i ~ ~ ~~~ 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 J ~ ~~ ~~~ tr ow 88~+88+~ ~W "J N m~~ e Z NN N1'1171mfim (n0 ~O OU I ~ ° ' ~ -~ ,~G~,~~~~G ~~ ~1 i J m x ~ ~~it - Q ~ ~ ~ S ~ F~,~ ~ ` ~~ ~' JJ JJ JJJJ ° ° ° ° ~Ja \ Q _ ~Nn n on g o Fo Z 1 i ~ a ~ ~mmm~rnlno ~ NN'f l[Imn ~' O i ""r Z dddl1d-..l1d--dldla1-- r r ow ~ I ~ f"' h ~ l /I VI V! f /1 VI IA Z K R 1 ~ ~~~ ~ _ ~ 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 E q Eg gAgA $ ;~ ! ~ W pp op pp pp pp p p p S1As1fINR11[IS g g 4 g 4~Xi~B r U 1 ON.+a+D+n n ~~NN~iln~m _ ~R ~ ~~ EQ I ~f dddddddd z ~agi~~ - ~ !~ ;~~~y~~~ ~ ill 6 ~ Hl Q ( • ~ Z I ~ O=O w Na I J ~ d F=WU i~ v ~~= W xr w¢ xW I 1 sz ~ >~g V1p wi~io NO~ V!m ~ o µOµ11 1. i , J k F 1 Q ua -g ~c~ ¢~N Boa orc ~i d C~ Fi I ` ~ ox-o ~ v ~ ~ , ~j~~d~tga z ~ ~ { T ~~ ~~= a zg ° ~ ~ \ f • F ~ Uw~S ~ w °d ~ r zwz ZZW QW '~ nw O~ \ - ~ .. 1 •:- U av~im QZQro~ WF W Z1¢..m s1~W W 41 ~3 d Z ~ Q~ • s ~~`' ~~o z ~ vri a a ~ o JJ ~ U O ~ W m ~. ~ - f;~'\ JOy jO W Z ~ J m JJ m J U ~Z I i 0¢W~ ~ ON fy K¢ W J \. . W Q WO~~ ~ONWO 3 r W ZO ~~ ~UU O IW/1 H~°~,SgW~ ~, ~ ~ W rc aac W ~ o z ~ o a~ -o ~mma Iris ~ a = ~ _ 1nZ K~H~ JJ6 W /~~ Y V W a ~~ J F- SO O rd'WK Z~OU' Oa ~1l1~ N 0 h VI d ~q d 7 i Q"^ ~-~-.' Iq Ft IVlemorandum To: Jennifer ebster ~,~.' From: Tom Nichols and Honghua Zhao Date: 27 June 2007 (revised 13 August 2007) Subject: Slope Stability Analyses Two Alternative Designs Canal Stormwater Retrofit City of Sebastian, Florida As requested, we have completed the slope stability analyses for two alternative canal cross sections proposed by the Owner. These alternatives include slopes that are both steeper and, shallower than the permitted slope. The proposed alternatives include: (a) Sodded side slopes from top of existing walls to canal center. (b) Replacement of bulkheads with 12 foot sheet pile wall; maintaining existing canal bottom for 20 feet into the channel;-dredging 10 feet deep in center of canal only. Design Soil Profile Information from two previous geotechnical reports conducted by Universal Engineering Sciences was used to develop the design soil profile: ^ Subsurface Exploration & Testing, Proposed Canal Dxedging, January 21, 2005 ^ Subsurface Exploration, Proposed Seawall Replacement, July 26, 2004. The design soil profile and slope stability analysis of the current permitted design was summarized in the CDM Memo to Jeiuzifer Webster, dated 13 December 2006. Stability Analysis The current permitted design includes a 3H: 1V slope starting at EL 8.5 and rising to the top of the existing pile cap elevation which is approximately EL 19 with a geosynthetic wrapped riprap protection starting at EL 13.5. The proposed alternative (a) slopes are 4H: 1V beginning at the canal bottom at EL 8.5 and rising to the top of the existing pile cap elevation which is approximately EL 19. The proposed 2~ C:\Documenls and Se111ngslnichdstwlDesktoplTlNN-JlW-07-o1.doc ' Jennifer Webster 27 June 2007 Page 2 alternative (b) slopes are 1.5H:1V beginning at the canal bottom at EL 5.5 and rising to EL 13.5 and then connecting to the 20-foot riprap protected slope portion. The sheet pile wall will. remain with the pile cap at EL 19. For both alternatives, the existing canal bottom is much shallower and will need to be excavated/dredged to the final shape. Slope stability modeling was conducted using SLOPE/W, a two dimensional simulation software package, released by GEO-SLOPE/W International Ltd. (2004). The stability analyses were first run on the proposed alternative (a) and (b) models assuming the canal water level and groundwater behind the slope were equal. Additional analyses were made assuming the canal water Level was lower than the groundwater behind the slope by 1 foot and 2 feet to simulate potential rapid drawdown conditions. The results of the analyses are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 Slope Stability Analyses Results ____ _ Water Table Factor of Safe Condition Alternative (a) -Sod Alternative (b) - Hybr7d 15.5 ft 2.08 1.03 ;:.NGVD 1929 ; __ _ _ _ 13.5 ft 2.04 0.96 ,NGVD 1929. _- 1 foot , 1.92 1.Q2 Drawdown 2-foot 1.77 0.$9 Drawdown Conclusions A minimum factor of safety of at least 1.5 is generally considered acceptable for global slope stability. Based on our analyses, the factor of safety of 1.5 was not met by proposed Alternative (b) -Hybrid for any of the four scenarios presented above. Therefore, this alternative is not recommended, However, the factors of safety for slope stability analyses for Alternative (a) -Sod were satisfactory and exceeded the factor of safety of 1.5. During construction, temporary lowering of the water ul the canal c1n temporarily reduce the factor of safety. If the proposed Alternative (a) -Sod is selected, it is still recommended that drawdown occurs gradually and does not exceed 2 feet. Water levels behind the slope will need to be monitored during conshuction using piezometers and restrictions will be required on how far the canal water level can be lowered during construction. Z2 CaDocumanls and SetlingstriicholslwlDesktoplTWN,1LW-0T-01 doc Jennifer Webster 27 June 2007 Page 3 firosion protection is required for the 4H to 1V slope in Alternative (a) -Sod within the zone where water level fluchxations will occur. Closure These recommendations have been prepared for design of the proposed Collier Canal Stormwater Retrofit located in the City of Sebastian as understood at this time and described in this report. The alternative design cross sections provided by Jennifer Webster were used as a basis for our analysis. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. C:1Documenls end Selt(ngsVitcholshvl0asktopClWN~.1lW-0T-Ot.doc 23 T 3 .. ..... ££ ` I j { 1901 HighwayA-f-A, Suite 301 Yero'Beach;"Florida 32963 Celt 772 23:1-4301 fax: 772 231 •.4332 August 16, 200.7 ~l'x., David Fisher, P,E, City Engineer City of Sebastian 1225 IVI'an.StlAeet Sebastian, !Florida 32958 Subjeetr Collier Canal Stormwater Reh oft.Project Slope Stability Analyses ariel Water Quality Modeling Deax 1klr. Fisher: CD1~!1 performed slope stability arlaiyses anel evaluated: the water. quality benefits for -two alternative crass sections, The alternative cross sections are defined as folio°ws: ^ Alternative 1. Sodded sdeslopes from top: of existing walls at 4 foot 11o~~izontai to 1 foot vertical.to canal center ^ Alternative 2: Replacement of fayling bulkheads with a;12 foot wall; rnaisitairiing existing canal boftom for 20 feet info channel (and: protecting with xip/rap) and dredging 10 feet deep rn center of canal :only at a 1.5 to 1 sicleslope The sIape stability analysis determined that Alternative 1 meets. the acceptable factor of safety ciite>.~ia; as long as the water level: in fine -canal is moxutored and the drawdown does not exceed 2 feet.. The .analysis cletex.mincci, that Alternative 2 does not meet the factor of safety criteria and is not:recoxnrrl:ended. Please see the attached slope stability analysis rnemorandurn. , The water quality modeling shows that the largest pollutant reduction comes fi om Alternative 2, therefore the slope stability analysis shows this alternative is not feasible. Altei~iative 1,-shows a reduction aver the existing conditions, however not as large a reduction as the pe>.znitted cross section (rip/rap). Please see the attached water quality memorandum. Z5 consultln .•en ineerin jb1368.doc 9 .9 g • consfruetion • operations ~i 'Mr. David Fisher, P.E. August 1f, 2U07 Page 2 T'fte reduction m water quality associated with Alternative 1 may jeopardize grant funding and: increase x~utigation costs. Further investigation with both St. John's River Water Management District and The Florida Department of Environmental Protection to deterxr-ine the potential extent of i~€pact this may have on the project. 'V"ery!trtt~~ ynu~rs; ,. o~ 1.~.e ~~enrti~cr L. tNe'bster Camp Dresser & 1VIcKee Ine. Files 2582=430:56-0~3 ec: Ana I3eMelo, CDI~!I/WPB Epic Grotlce, CT~1+I/URB Tom Nielols, ~DIVI/QRL 'D:t~ug 1Vlpvlt9xl; CDIVI~DR~.. Z ~ jb1388.doc