BocaBeacon.comThe Boca Beacon is Boca Grande's weekly community newspaper.

Subscribe via email

Grab our RSS Feed

Residents to bridge board: Size matters

About 60 island residents attended the quarterly meeting of the Gasparilla Island Bridge Authority on Wednesday, and their message to the board was clear: Smaller is better.

Smaller in the fact that all three bridges slated for replacement should remain as much like the old ones as possible in the first Request for Proposal to be sent to the bridge engineers. Before the RFP’s first option was entirely discussed, though, GIBA board members and people in the audience were protesting the specifics.

That led to discussion by the board to hold more meetings to get public input between now and spring of 2010.

That, in turn, lead many in the room to voice their frustration at the board spinning their wheels.

After lengthy discussion, the board determined the engineering committee would meet one more time and discuss details concerning the RFP before voting on the matter. They will present their findings to the board in a special January meeting, the date of which has yet to be determined.

When the specifics of several bridge replacement timelines were presented within the newest version of GIBA’s RFP, each option included an increase in tolls and wider lanes. When the first proposal was given and included widening lanes to 34 feet, several board and audience members were not happy.

Rohrer briefly explained the options that were presented in the RFP.

The first, which he called “fast tracking,” would work if the board decided to design the bridges right away and build them as quickly as possible. In the fast tracking plan, construction would start in 2010 and GIBA would borrow $25.5 million. Tolls would be increased by $1.50 a vehicle in 2013 to cover the debt, and all three bridges would be in service by 2017.

The second option would include a basic “phased” design. The new loan amount would be $8 million and would be taken out in 2018. Tolls would increase by $1 a vehicle in 2010, and all three bridges would be in service by the year 2020. In this option the south bridge would be done first, the center bridge second and the swing bridge, last.

The third option would also work on a basic phased design plan, but the middle bridge would be last for replacement. New loans in the amount of $14 million would have to be incurred in 2015, and tolls would increase by $1 a vehicle in 2010. All three bridges would be in service in 2019.

“The timing of the bridge replacement has a significant effect on the amount of money we have to borrow,” Rohrer said. “I’m not advocating any of these ideas, I’m just throwing them out there. It’s something we need to discuss.”

Rohrer said he thought it was necessary to create a new committee to check over certain aspects of the RFP, such as the timing of replacing the bridges, a cash flow analysis projected out to 30 years, lane widths, bike lanes, sidewalks and toll increases.

“The effects of toll increases on residents and businesses need to be considered,” he said. “I’m hoping over the next three to six months the committee would consider those items.”

Board member Thor Johnson said he felt the committee was not needed and that the board needed to make a decision soon.

“We have a finance committee more than capable of handling this,” he said. “We have an engineering committee that has already addressed most of this. We’ve already done this. Why have a long-range planning committee to do what we’ve already done? We’ve been fiddling around and we have critical problems with these bridges.”

Board member George Castrucci agreed, and said, in his opinion, that the board had progressed very little since the first public meetings in 2007.

“We’ve had two public meetings for the community to come forward, Thor had his committee meetings and combined meetings between finance and engineering, then they came forth with recommendations, some of which were rejected by the board. We’ve done a whole lot of planning. It’s a good objective. But most of this work is sequential.”

Castrucci seemed to sum up the crowd’s feelings, and received applause after saying, “We need to describe for the community in some detail the bridges we visualize building,” he said. “We have a very good idea of what the community wants and needs. I believe they want a minimalist approach to building these bridges, that’s very clear. Let’s show them we aren’t planning to build more bridge than the community wants and needs.”

Board member Grace Harvey addressed the board and said, “I really want to hear more from the community. This will impact all of us. We haven’t heard a lot from them, but the message I’m getting is ‘smaller is better.’”

One man in the audience asked why lane widths and other specific details were not laid out in any finite manner in the RFP. Rohrer told him they hoped to have details narrowed down in the next three months, but that they needed to push ahead with the generalized proposal.

“When I ask someone to design a building for me, I don’t just ask them to design me a building,” the audience member said. “I tell them I want a 5,000 square foot, two-story building and to give me their best design. The answer you get from them is predicated by the questions you ask. If that’s the case, then why don’t you just tell them you want to build a bridge and leave it at that?”

Johnson stressed to the board that expediency was required.

“We need to get moving on this,” he said. “By the time we get permits, get the design done and build, we are in a tight time frame. If one of these bridges goes, all of this discussion is moot. We will have lost. Get this RFP and swing bridge RFP as soon as possible.”

Cooper said the board will make sure the public is kept aware of the committee’s findings, and will have the opportunity to comment before any final decisions are made with the RFP.

In other business, the board decided to wait to fill the position left open by the death of Lyman Randall. Three candidates, Julius Frager, Dick Hayes and Peter Strong, have applied.

There will a meeting scheduled soon for the applicants to meet with members of the applicant review team.

Cooper also gave an update on bridge maintenance, and explained that three new cracks were found in the beams of the south bridge. He said he was advised by the engineers “not to worry,” as the beam isn’t considered vital to the bridge’s structural integrity.

Cooper said the bridges would be inspected in the first week of December, and more information would be obtained.

The new toll system, Cooper said, is being tested now as well.

“It’s going to be transparent to the public that there is a new system,” he explained. “When it’s complete, people with the toll cards or bar code stickers can drive through the self-scan lane, and if you’re in the general vicinity of the bar code reader, you’re in.”

Cooper said that customers will have the option of getting a hangtag bar code instead of a card, which the Radio Frequency Identification system will pick up automatically if it is hanging from the rearview mirror. He believes they will be ready sometime around Christmas.

The old “slot” system to swipe the card through will be gone as well, replaced by a flat screen that will read the card if it is passed anywhere within its range.

“The system has the ability to read through glass, but it can’t read through a purse or pocket,” he said. “We started testing last week, but until we have 100 percent accuracy we won’t clear the old system.”