My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/20/1979
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1979
>
6/20/1979
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:43:39 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 11:04:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/20/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
THE BOARD NEXT CONSIDERED THE BRIDGE INSPECTION PROGRAM FOR <br />INDIAN RIVER COUNTY AS PROPOSED BY SVERDRUP & PARCEL AND ASSOCIATES, INC., <br />AND BEINDORF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (A .JOINT VENTURE). <br />JOHN ROBBINS OF THE .JOINT VENTURE INFORMED THE BOARD THAT HE <br />WAS ADVISED BY THE DOT BRIDGE DEPARTMENT IN FORT LAUDERDALE THAT THE <br />STATE HAS PREPARED AN INVENTORY LIST WHICH INDICATES THAT 11 OF THE <br />BRIDGES FORMERLY OWNED BY THE STATE NOW HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE COUNTY AS <br />THEIR RESPONSIBILITY. THIS BRING THE TOTAL BRIDGES FOR WHICH THE COUNTY <br />IS RESPONSIBLE TO 88, HE WENT ON TO EXPLAIN THAT THERE ARE FOUR INDE- <br />PENDENT BRIDGES IN THE WABASSO STRUCTURE, AND THEY PLACED A LUMP SUM OF <br />$11,000 IN THEIR PROPOSED CONTRACT TO COVER THIS INSPECTION, MR. ROBBINS <br />CONTINUED THAT THEY WILL FOLLOW THE STATE'S COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE, AND <br />EACH STRUCTURE WILL HAVE TO BE PHYSICALLY MEASURED. HE EXPLAINED THAT <br />THEY WILL WORK IN TWO 3 -MAN TEAMS, MR. ROBBINS STATED THAT COLLIER COUNTY <br />AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ARE UNIQUE IN THAT THE DOT ORIGINALLY PERFORMED <br />ALL THE BRIDGE INSPECTIONS IN THESE COUNTIES, BUT OVER THE YEARS THE <br />STATE HAS BEEN DELETING SOME OF THE BRIDGES, HE NOTED THAT, IN SOME <br />CASES, EVEN THOUGH THE ROAD BELONGS TO THE STATE, THE BRIDGE STILL WOULD <br />BE THE COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. <br />ADMINISTRATOR .JENNINGS COMMENTED THAT THE STATE IS TAKING, 27TH <br />AVENUE AND PUTTING IT ON THE SECONDARY ROAD STATUS. <br />CHAIRMAN WODTKE NOTED THAT THE COUNTY MIGHT WANT TO ARGUE WITH <br />THE STATE ON A BRIDGE OR TWO AND NOT TAKE WHAT THEY WANT TO GIVE US. <br />COMMISSIONER LOY ASKED IF THE STATE HAD INDICATED ON THEIR <br />RECORDS WHEN THE BRIDGES WERE LAST INSPECTED, AND MR. ROBBINS REPLIED <br />AFFIRMATIVELY. HE STATED THAT HE REQUESTED COPIES OF THE RECORDS OF ALL <br />THE BRIDGES FOR WHICH THE COUNTY IS RESPONSIBLE AND WAS ADVISED THAT <br />WHEN THE STATE MOVED THEIR FACILITIES A YEAR AGO, PARS" OF THESE RECORDS <br />WERE LOST OR MISPLACED. MR, ROBBINS STATED THAT IF A LIST OF BRIDGES <br />IS SUBMITTED TO THE STATE, THEY WILL MAKE AN ATTEMPT TO GO BACK THROUGH <br />THEIR FILES AND TRY TO LOCATE THE RECORDS, <br />DISCUSSION WAS HELD ABOUT THE INSPECTION OF THE WABASSO BRIDGE <br />THAT WAS MADE IN 1978, AND ADMINISTRATOR JENNINGS STATED THAT THE SLAB <br />SHIFTED ON THE BRIDGE AND IT WAS CORRECTED; AN UPDATED REPORT WAS REQUESTED <br />BUT NEVER RECEIVED, <br />COMMISSIONER Loy WONDERED WHY, IF THE DOT HAD MADE INSPECTIONS <br />30 <br />JUN 201979 <br />BOOK 41 pAcE 30 <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.