Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-09-27 Harbor Commission SummaryAGENDA - Kenai Advisory Harbor Commission, Engineering and Design Proposal Presentations SEPTEMBER 27 th, 8'OO A.M. -- 9:.00 A.M. -- .. ._ 10'00 A.M. -- 10'30 A.M. -- ll-30 A.M. -- 12'00 NOON -- 1'00 P.M. -, 2'OO P.M. 2'30 P.M. -- 3'3O P.M. -- 4-00 P.M. -- 1980, Sheffield House' Kenai 9'00 A.M. REGISTRATION OF GUESTS, Coffee available, Agenda available FIRST PRESENTATION, DMjM/UMA/TETRA TECH 'HARBOR COMMISSION .QUESTIONS, COMMEHTS SECOND PRESENTATION, TIPPETTS, ABBETT, MC CARTHY, STRATTON/DAMES & MOORE HARBOR COMMISSION QUESTIONS, LUNCH BREAK COMMENTS THIRD PRESENTATION, PERATROVICH & NOT'TINGHAM/R & M CONSULTANTS HARBOR COMMISSIO?I QUESTIONS, COMMEHTS FOURTH PRESE?ITATIO:~i, CH2M HILL HARBOR COMMISSiO;I QUEST!O~iS, COMMENTS .. MEETIHG ADJOURHS Special Harbor Commission Meeting September 30, 1980 Kenai Sheffield House For Names of Attendees, please see attached list. Chairman Peterkin opened the meeting at 9:00 a.m. to listen to proposals for the small boat harbor. Guests were introduced and Chairman Peter'kin requested any questions be directed to the chair. Doug jones and Jer.ry Wilson from Dames and Moore would be listening to the presentations. DMJM in Association with UMA & TETRA TECH Del Miller of DMJM began the presentation by stating they have worked in the past with both firms. Fugro Northwest and Ted Forsi and Associates will be doing the geotechnical work and field survey. Mr. Norman Hilton will be the principal in charge. Del Miller is the Manager of the Anchorage office. He will be able to devote nearly all of his time, and will work in close cooperation with the Harbor Commission. Mr. Miller gave a review of the staff. Mr. James Caufield of UMA stated he believed there were answers to our problems. He explained a flat plain or steeP bank can be a factor in harbor sizing requirements. ~ Mr. Caufield stated the short term and long term study plans will have to coordinate with other studies and Borough plans. They must be compatible. He referred to the Harbor Commission's Request for Proposals and what their firm would provide. They would include grids, should include water and sewer, and operating facilities for cranes. The harbormaster's building and residence will probably be two separate buildings. The dry harbor will have to store 500 boats. There will be an industrial park, greenbelt, room for expansion, paved areas and utilities. Security.will need to be addressed. These are the types of things, they felt they will have to discuss with the Commission before they can come up with a tentative design for the project. Mr. C'aufield stated his association felt they must have intimate communication with the Harbor Commission on an on going basis. Perhaps during the regular Harbor Commission meetings a progress report could be done so the Commission is continually informed of the project. , Mr. Caufield said alterna'te preliminary plans are needed for each site. They will make their recommendation to the site. Referring to the time element, Mr. Caufield stated three to four months, it depends on agencies outside of their control. Mr. Frank Chmelik spoke on the "what" of their proposal. He stated in the RFP they renumerated what they felt were the major concerns. Some of these will lesson their significance and others may become more serious. Mr. Chmelik spoke on their ability to immediately respond to any unusual problems~, in a most effective way, without any additional expenditures. Mr. Chmelik added the major physical problem is the soils and sedimentation. The mud flats are highly erodable and saturated. Others were: ice management, clay, earthquakes, inlet sands and silts, and the combination of fresh water and salt water tides. Mr. Chmelik spoke-on the economic feasibility. The vast majority of monies may not come out of the City's economic base, but the maintenance cost will be part of the responsibility of the community funds. They hoped to prepare a program to come up with the most practical program that the City can support. . Mr. Chmelik referred to the protection of the environment and added they have Worked with the persons who are involved with these concerns. They're approach to planning was a coordinated effort to bring these programs together. Also addressed in the study were utilities, sanitation facilities and removal, public transpOrtation, and security and storage. Vandalism is a concern, as well as congestion and damage to boats. He referred to problems with barges. Fuel and fresh water are consideratons. If these things are overlooked it could cost more to do them over. There is a narrow channel in the River. They must be aware of draft capabilities and turning capacities. Mr. Chmelik understood the Corps of Engineers is interested in a study. He added if any agency is planning a study, the agencies must interface so there isn't an overlap. Mr. Chmelik noted of the three sites one falls far below the other two. They felt Site A is the most desirable. Mr. Chemlik reported they expected to work so closely with the, Harbor Commission that the Commission will understand how it is built. They will indicate to the Commission what they should be looking for and how to handle growth. Prior to the summary, Mr. Del Miller stated they had given cost much thoUght and felt the best way to proceed is on a cost reimbursable basis on the planning, until the Master Plan Stage where you are dealing with real numbers. Prior to any contractual commitment they would have the numbers Mr. Del Miller summarized by stating each firm has an operating office and staff in Alaska. Experts are only on the payroll on an "as needed" bas is. At this time questions were asked by the Harbor ' Commission. Commissioner Williams asked if the boat harbor can be built so it will function without the costs coming back to the City. Mr. Chemlik answered that is why they need to look more carefully at the problems. They want to protect the City from the cost becoming a major burden down the line. He added it reflects on their companies. Commissioner Williams questioned whether alternate energy sources could be used. He gave examples of tidal power and the use of turbines. Mr. Chemlik stated the stream could not be blocked, siltation goes up, it could effect fish migrations. It could be addressed. Tippett s-.Abbett-McCar thy-St ratton Mr. Phil Perdichizzi began the presentation by introducing the four people the Commission would be dealing with. Phil Perdichizzi is the Vice-PreSident of TAMS, Bill Bunselmeyer is the Project Manager, Gary Schneider is the Manager of the Anchorage office, and Mike Horton will be the Coordinator and is responsible for the technical work. ~Phil Perdichizzi began the presentation stating Dames and Moore will be subconSultants if selected by the City. He spoke on their willingness to work with the COE, and added they have worked with them in the past. He turned the meeting over to Bill Bunselmeyer. Mr. Bunselmeyer gave some background on the company. They were proposing 19 peoPle for different aspe-cts of the work. Sixteen people have direct· port and harbor experience in Cook Inlet with TAMS. They finished the Homer Port development in June. He strongly recommended forming a panel of fisherman and others concerned, to act as an advisory group, and to make sure our concerns are addressed. Mr. Bunselmeyer stated it was their plan to evaluate the three sites and what alternatives we would have at each site. They would consider the "COE scheme", the "Roper scheme" and new schemes. Mike Horton stated he as Project Engineer would be available when the construction came about. He added Gary Schneider served as the Project Coordinator for Homer. He will look at the physical, economic and social issues. He added the Wetlands question and the environmental concerns need to be addressed. Mr. Horton Would be responsible for the development of the job, the 'technical design and ground level needs. His experience includes 10 - 12 years in design. He pointed out we have a unique set of circumstances. The ice, soil and Wetlands, situation mUst be dealt with in a short time frame. Also, the fishing fleet and growth rate need to be carefully analyzed. The Port must serve the fleet. During the first four- six weeks of the project he would have interviews and get ideas, and combine this with his experience and come up with two- four conceptual designs. At the end of three months, they will have prepared a series of designs open for discussion. · Mr. Horton reviewed the steps in order to achieve conceptual design. The prime concern is sedimentation. He added with small boat harbors it is difficult to come up with a low rate of return. From preliminary evaluations they should be able to come up with various conceptual designs. .Within the first six weeks they will review our needs, size, sport fishing boats versus commercial fishing boats, entry and exit patterns, and ~the time it takes to empty the harbor. They will check out the function requirements of the fleet, gradients, and entrance widths. During the first review ~they will seek to work closely with the COE and vital authorities to get their input. Mr. Horton stated they will prepare alternate schemes and possibly have a public meeting. They would then proceed with the final design and move to complete the package. The package must be formed so the contractor's are interested. Mr. Horton said they propose to provide an introductory document, invitation to bid, define legal requirements, conditions of contract, detailed specs, and contract drawings, details of the entry system, berth arrangement, offloading, backup facilities, public boat ramps, paved areas, lighting, sanitary arrangements, 'and life saving systems. TAMS presented a concept scheme to the Commission. Mr. Horton spoke about using a lock system and a dry harbor. It can be a disadvantage when all boats are trying to get out at the same time. The distribution could be split between a wet and dry harbor. The dry harbor will involve a fork lift. It is an expensive system. The area probably will not be paved, but will be graded. He added the barge spaces need to be disucssed further. Phil Perdichizzi stated they have available the latest in house computer capabilities and plotter. They have used a lock system in Saudi Arabia. Ice will be a' problem, but they have experience in that in the St. Laurence Seaway. Bill Bunselmeyer estimated the date of completion as October 1. Referring to the concept TAMS presented, Commissioner Dragseth asked if 300 boats could get out in one hour? Mike Horton answered it takes approximately ten minutes per boat. Phil Perdichizzi answered not with the size of concept they have shown. It would probably take two hours. Mayor O'Reilly asked if TAMS had experience in building ports in which there was a mix of fresh and salt water, and a poor land base? Bill Bunselmeyer said the Port of Anchorage wouldn't classify as a small boat harbor. Phil Perdichiz'zi stated there was this type of situation at the small boat harbor they did at the 1964 World's Fair in Flushing Meadows. Mike Horton explained he did one in Ecuador. In addition, it was close to the edge of a canyon and was in an earthquake zone. Mayor O'Reilly asked about the work done in Kodiak. Phil Perdichizzi stated they did not do the work in Kodiak, they were called in afterwards. Mayor O'Reilly indicated we made a promise to the State that some of the funds would go to the bluff erosion problem. Mr. Perdichizzi stated they would take everything that is available and make an analysis of that. Hopefully that will be sufficient. Mayor O'Reilly asked Mr. Perdichizzi what he saw as the most critical element of the entire project. Mr. Perdichizzi answered there is a gap between the information we now have, what has been written, and what the City would like to do. He added there is no technical barrier to getting this built. The problems there are they can find answers to. Chairman Peterkin asked if they were going to base their recommendation and experience on information that has aleady been done, or on original work. Mr. Horton said their approach to the existing data is to take tests results and run them through their analysis. It is very easy to keep studying and not come up with anything positive. Commissioner Williams indicated we are looking for an inovative design. Also, it has been strongly recommended by the Dept. of TransPortation we give attention to dry storage harbor. Thirdly, the bluff erosion problem must be addressed. The user fees must not come back to the City. Mr. Perdichizzi remarked they are used to working with DOT and Don Statter. At this time the Meeting recessed for One hour for lunch, lunch. Perat~,ovich & Nottin~ham/R & M Consultants Dennis Nottingham of Peratrovich & Nottingham, and Brent Drage of R & M Consultants gave the presentation. They gave a slide~ presentation showing some of the problems in Alaska. Included were slides of the Kenai River Bridge, the Sitka Harbor Bridge, Juneau Harbor, the recent job they did in Homer, Columbia Ward, Sand Point Harbor, and ice problems. Dennis Nottingham stated Kenai has weak soils similar to Dillingham. There is alot of soils information available because of work done when the Highway was put across the River. Mr. Nottingham stated they identified three sites. It would take about 1/4 acre to get enough area for.a basin for 600 boats. Mr. Nottingham stated that artesian water may be a problem. Brent Drage referred to the land for the boat harbor. Marina facilities, parking lots, and storage will require additional land. Availability of land is an important factor to consider. Mr. Drage noted the COE determined soils studies in the sixties. Their firm would use a circular flow to measure the settling characteristics. Mr. Nottingham stated in their proposal they have tried to itemize step by step their approach and budget dolla.rs to it. On the preliminary plans there are approximate cost figures. He invisioned when they come to certain points they will get with the Commission to work things out. The interplay will be critical. On' a time element he felt construction should start in late 1981 or 1982. This way the contractor would have the entire summer of 1982. If everything goes right, including funding, it may be shortened. Dennis Nottingham said the personnel the Commission would be working with are Brent Drage and himself. They have backup people working with them. The Yukon River Bridge was built by six people. You don't need a large 'staff. Brent Drage concluded .he and Dennis Nottingham are from two different firms. They do not plan on relying on other subconsultants. He suggested meetings with the Harbor Commission. With the team developed they have the technology for each step. Dennis Nottingham added the task is difficult but it can be done. Commissioner Wagoner ,stated there is information available on sedimentation. Would the firm do additional studies? Dennis Nottingham answered no. He had already done his own samples and they were the same as the COE. We are now talking about the next step. Commissioner Williams mentioned we have about three months before January. Does the firm feel comfortable with that time frame? Will the concepts be ready to present to the Legislature? Dennis Nottingham stated they have the capabilities. They can come up with the conceptual ideas. Mr. Nottingham stated the cost they have come up with is $14,000,000. Commissioner Williams asked if that Would be sufficient to include bluff erosion control? Mr. Nottingham replied no. That would be a few million extra. Commissioner Williams asked him to define few. Mr. Nottingham replied three. Mr. Drage stated we are looking at 3/4 of a mile. He thought 3 - 4 million. Commissioner Williams stated it appears we will need rip-rap. Where did they plan on getting the material? Mr. Nottingham replied they hav~ 8-1/2 square yards for _concrete _ blankets from the slope. The rock is a problem. He stated they realized these logistics are critical. Commissioner Peterkin asked if they included the industrial park in that $14,000,000. Mr. Nottingham answered he included some. Mayor O'Reilly asked if-they saw a need for an Environmental Impact Statement or Assessment. Mr. Drage didn't think it would be necessary. Mayor O'Reilly asked what is the most critical element. Dennis Nottingham answered the sequence of work, artesian water and soils. Mayor O'Reilly pointed out R & M did some work for Mr. Rope r. Mr. Nottingham said the work done for Mr. Roper was a very preliminary attempt. Chairman Peterkin asked about the maintenance. It must be at a level where the City can afford it. Mr. Nottingham stated maintenance is what design is all about. Their hope is to develop a maintenance free project. It must allow for growth. There was some discussion on the need for a Environmental Impact Statement or Assessment. Mr. Drage didn't think a full blown statement needed to be developed. Chairman Peterkin referred to letters from Fish & Wildlife regarding the creek. Mr. Drage said the creek deserves some attention. Mr. RoyCe Weller, of the audience, asked how long it takes to get a permit from. the COE. Mr. Nottingham stated it can be done in six weeks. Six months is more common. There was further discussion on the sedimentation problem and Dillingham. .CH2M Hill. Mr. Loren Leman introduced the team the Commission would be working with, outlined experience and outlined problems. Other persons giving the presentation were Bob Adams, A1 Mercer, and John'Aho. Gordon Nicholson was in the audience. Mr. Leman began the presentation by stating CH2M Hill has worked with the City. in other projects. They include the Airport, Sewer -reatment Pl'ant and Interceptor Line. They have worked on many types of projects. They have a staff of approximately thirty. Their office is in Anchorage. We are lOoking at a small boat harbor. .They also ~design large ports. The key things they are looking at are sedimentation, icing, river hydraulics and environmental concerns. Mr. Leman continued saying CH2M Hill is familiar with the Kenai area. They have a good working' capacity with the City and the COE. They have extensive marina and port experience. They have the local staff capability to do the work. Mr. Leman reviewed the Work Plan. Number 1, they will aid the Commission in selecting a site. Based on this selection they will go into conceptual design. The elements of design include surveying, field work, sedimentation, ice and hydraulics. Mr. Leman stated he assumed that all that would be required. If a statement is required, it will increase the time of development. The harbor, industrial park, lighting and paving will be part of the contract documents. The bluff erosion study is a separate item. He was involved-with the bluff study in 1977. One item that wasn't in the proposal but they felt was important was the Economical Financial Plan. Mr. Aho spoke on the major experience of people on the project. Loren Leman will be the liaison with the City of Kenai. He will keep the client totally involved. He has in depth knowledge of the environmental and legal concerns that become apparent. John Aho is the Project Manager an.d is responsible for the overall development of the project, and will see it's kept on schedule. Also, he is responsible for the quality control of the project. Mr. Joe Scott is the Task Coordinator and is involved in the actual design of the project. 10 Mr. Aho stated the Legislature has required work in economics and planning which their firm has. Their company will have reviews of everything they do. He estimated ten months time from site evaluation to final design. They hoped that during the preliminary engineering phase a cost estimate will be included for the Legislature. Their firm is familiar in dealing with the Legislature. Mr. Aho continued saying an Environmental Impact Assessment study will take approximately four months. If a Statement is needed, it could extend the schedule. Their firm will have "milestone" meetings with formal reports for the City Council or Commission. They have the manpower and can stay within this schedule. Referring to fee estimate, they have a range of fees because of some uncertainities. Later they will be able to narrow it down. A1 Mercer discussed sedimentation and icing problems. Mr. Mercer represenated Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, Ltd. They are a firm of technical specialists that work a wide range of projects. Mr. Mercer stated they were very comfortable working with CH2M Hill, and have in the past to solve their technical problems. The harbor at Kenai is a project that will have some problems. Mr. Mercer explained some photos showing river behavior. Northwest' Hydraulic is basically a Canadian firm and is familiar with ice problems, they will use hydraulic models. He further discussed sedimentation, the ice problem and modeling. Mr. Bob Adams, Chairman of the Technical Review Team, Vice-President of CH2M'Hill, showed photos of harbors, marina boat basin development, breakwaters, cleansing actions, icing and maintenance which he mentioned is a prime consideration in this project. He discussed concrete float systems, how it can be put together in blocks, and can be separated and removed. Ways the boats can be put in and out of the water were addressed. Questions were addressed to CH2M Hill. Commissioner Williams asked if they believed it was technically feasible to develop this harbor concept and keep low maintenance. Mr. Aho replied they believed it was a viable project, there are ways to solve some of the problems. The City of Kenai is not the first to have problems with development. Maintenance and 11 Operation costs will have to be determined. There are three sites that are quite different, each has advantages and disadvantages. Any one of these sites could be developed with enough money. Commissioner Williams stated CH2M Hill's figures indicate 16% between high and low figures. The City is locked in the amount of funds we have. He asked if they were comfortable with these numbers. Mr. Aho answered they will stay in their limit. The only thing is, an Environmental Impact ~tatement would be expensive and time consuming. Cost estimates are usually made at different stages. He didn't think they could tie it down until they go through the pr eliminary stages. Commissioner Wagoner asked how comfortable CH2M Hill is with working with existing studies. Mr. Aho stated they would gather data and if it conflicts they would investigate. He added the COE is a good and valuable source. Commissioner Wagoner asked if they had any figures for modeling. Mr. Mercer replied until you have a specific site it's a refinement of design., He added he would be very comfortable with $50,000.. Commissioner Wagoner pointed out that we may not need modeling at all. Mr. Mercer stated that might well be. There was some discussion on modeling. Mayor O'Reilly asked if aquafer is a problem. Mr. Loren Leman stated that would be something the geological team would locate. Mayor O'Reilly asked what they would consider the most critical element in this project. 12 Mr. Leman stated site selection and addressing the problem in the correct way. Mayor O'Reilly asked if the sedimentation is a problem that has been solved in the past. Mr. Leman stated the problem can be solved. Mr. Mercer felt the siltation is the most pressing problem along with winter maintenance. Chairman Peterkin clarified CH2M Hill will build it's design and A1 Mercer will tell the specifics. Mr. Mercer replied yes, although there may be some discussion on design before the modeling. Commissioner Wagoner brough up a cost on the budget. He referred to the cost of six meetings and eight man days per meeting. Mr. Aho stated the budget would probably take in all the meetings with the City of Kenai. This was a proposed cost estimate, the amount may vary. Chairman Peterkin thanked the men for their presentation. The meeting adjourned at approximately 4:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Klm Howard Admin. Assistant 13 _. .. . . . .' ................................................................... qo,~ ~z q~, -~ ............................................................ ~m c ~4o~,) ~ - _ ..... _~~~, · . ........ ~~1 ================================================================================================ ,,~o.. ~,~ ~.~ -- ~a I~ . ,. : _:~':,'. ,:~?.:,.~:/:::,..~..: ............ ..:.._v.: .... ~ ., , ......~. , :..., ..- -.: .:~.,,.,..... .... -.:: :::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::.-.....>.:.:.':?: . :.:: ': : :. : :.::: .'.' .... ..,.....:...-.... ............................ ~ ~,~. ~,,~, ~ ~NE 1~7l '"".. ". ..... :'".- ' ' ~ S~ No. s7~2~ ........................ '~~~ ~~~u~ .... ~ ~ & ~ ........... ~=,~. A~. ,, ... . . ................. ~..~~ .~~~ - , ~. ~ 7~~ ....~ .................... W~ ~.__~ ......... ~~,o/~,~~~ ....... ~~~~~.~-,~ .................... ~.~~~ )n~;L~~C,<~ ~~~ ~~ ~~e~ ~~ ........... ~.~~ ~ ~5 . :....'... ....... . .....:.........:. .- '.-.. .. ." ... . - ::'~ ............ ~~ ~~ ........ ~,~. ~z~ ~~~,' ...... . ,...'..--....'-........:-...:...-...::"...:'_ ........... ~~:~ ~~ ....... ....................... ~ ~ ~:,~ . . . . .. '. . . ~ ~ / ~ ..... , ~~~"~~~ : · .--- '.- ,'.'-..- .'. '"'".. ...... ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~-e ~,~ _ ~~~~' ..~~ :~~., ,, ' ~~, ...... ~- ~~~/, ~P~Z~/J~