2026-09-09 Item 12B Bridge Structure Condition Assessment-final — Encinitas City Council, September 9, 2026

AGENDA REPORT
City Council

MEETING
DATE:

September 9, 2026

PREPARED
BY:

Braden DeWhite
Engineer I

DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR:

Dan Nutter, PE
DEPARTMENT: Engineering CITY
MANAGER:

Jennifer Campbell
SUBJECT:

Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive and file the FY 2025-26 Bridge Structure Condition Assessment (WC26B) Report and Presentation.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:

The action being considered by the City Council is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a “project” under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. The action is also exempt from CEQA under Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines because it involves an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in the direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

This item is not related to the Climate Action Plan.

GENERAL PLAN/CITY COUNCIL FOCUS AREAS:

This item relates to City Council Focus Area 2, Effective and Reliable City Services, Infrastructure, and Communications. Specifically, this item addresses Goal 2.3(C), Identify and Inspect all CityOwned Bridges.

FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action. The FY 2025-26 Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Project (WC26B) included $275,000 for the development of the report. Total expenditures have remained within project budget. 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 1 of 63
BACKGROUND:

The City owns and/or maintains 46 bridge structures located throughout the City of Encinitas. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) defines a bridge as “A structure including support erected over a depression or an obstruction, such as water, highway, or railway, and having track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads, and having an opening measured along the center of roadway of more than 20 feet between under copings of abutments or spring lines of arches, or extreme ends of openings for multiple boxes: it includes multiple pipes, where the clear distance between openings is less than half the smaller contiguous opening”.

Based on this definition, bridges can be on freeways and streets, drainage structures underneath roads, and along walking paths and trails throughout numerous trails and pathways within parkways and City Parks.

Most of these bridge structures located on city roads and highways were constructed by the County of San Diego and Caltrans starting in the 1950s through the 1980s. Most of the pedestrian bridges located within parkways and City Parks were constructed after the adoption of the Recreational Trails Master Plan in the early 2000s. In total, the City maintains 9 traditional deck bridge structures, 11 drainage structures that qualify as bridges, and 26 pedestrian bridges.

Attachment 1 contains a vicinity map of all locations for City bridges, and Attachment 2 provides a comprehensive list of these bridges. Bridge structures should be inspected and evaluated regularly to ensure their integrity is maintained.

On June 18, 2025, the City Council approved the FY 2025-26 Budget, which included adding $275,000 for the inspection of all City owned and maintained bridges and the development of a 10-year capital maintenance program to properly budget and implement future bridge repair, rehabilitation, and/or replacement efforts.

On January 21, 2026 City Council awarded a Professional Services Contract to Kleinfelder, Inc. to provide structural engineering services to inspect all the City’s bridges and prepare a comprehensive condition assessment report, develop a 10‑year capital maintenance program, and update both the Caltrans Local Assistance Bridge database and the City’s GIS systems.

ANALYSIS:

The Inspection portion of the project took place from February 2026 through April 2026. The Final Report was finished in August 2026, as included in this report as Attachment 3.

Inspections were conducted in accordance with City standards and the Specifications for the National Bridge Inventory (SNBI) and completed by Certified National Bridge Inspectors. Basic non-destructive methods were used for each major component of each bridge, including the deck, superstructure, substructure, culvert, and railings. Conditions of each bridge were ranked on a scale from 0-9 (0 meaning Failed, 9 meaning Excellent). The chart below indicates the conditions of each of the 46 bridge structures in the City.
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 2 of 63
The two bridges that were found to be in “Poor” condition were the Highway 101 Bridge over San Elijo Lagoon and the most westerly Leucadia Oaks Park Pedestrian Bridge.

Based on the bridge inspections that were completed and the issues or deficiencies that were identified, repair and rehabilitation strategies for each bridge were developed. It was assumed that several standard repair and replacement procedures were to be developed and applied to each bridge where needed. These were to be scaled appropriately for each bridge based on length, width, or square footage as was appropriate for each bridge. Standard bridge repairs commonly used in Caltrans Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program (BPMP) projects were identified so that opportunities for federal funding could be pursued if applicable. Additional deficiencies, such as known seismic deficiencies, scour or erosion issues, coastal salt damage, vandalism or fire damage, or other deficiencies, were identified with conceptual repairs or rehabilitations.

In order to prioritize the bridge projects, the following criteria provide a method of scoring the projects to assist in determining which bridges should be addressed first. The method assigns values to bridge characteristics within two categories: Likelihood of Failure (LOF) and Consequence of Failure (COF). The LOF category is scored out of a total of 80 possible points and is based solely on the current condition of the bridge as determined by the bridge inspections completed. The COF category is scored out of a total of 20 possible points and is based on the risks & consequences if the bridge were to fail. The total of LOF & COF are added together to determine the overall priority score. The scale ranges from 0 to 100 and a higher score indicates a bridge that has a higher priority for project consideration.

Priority Score = Likelihood of Failure + Consequence of Failure 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 3 of 63
The results of the prioritization process categorized the bridges into three groups: High, Medium, and Low. Bridges in the High category received scores of 40 points or greater, while Medium category bridges scored between 15 and 39 points, Low category was 14 and below.

The graph below shows the priority scores of all 46 bridges within the City.

Bridge Priority Scores
In order to efficiently complete projects, similar scoped repair work was grouped together to maximize economy of scale. A recommended project sequencing and program was created to address the High and Medium bridge priorities over a 10-year period.

In developing the 10-year repair & rehabilitation program, the report indicates these key assumptions:
1) 5% cost escalation for each fiscal year after Year 1. 2) Program assumes that ongoing-regular maintenance by Public Works and Parks staff is being completed under proper field operation procedures. 3) Work is assumed to be prevailing wage Public Work contracts.

The recommended 10-year bridge programming sequence has an estimated cost of approximately $5.9 million. Annual costs of the program typically range between $25K and $3.42 million. The majority of the costs, $3.8 Million, is the local-match cost of the Highway Bridge Program grant for design and construction of the Highway 101 Bridge over San Elijo Lagoon.

These estimates are preliminary in nature and intended to give a programming level 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 4 of 63
understanding of the costs involved. The bar chart below shows the annual expected costs to execute the 10-year program:

In summary, the results of the condition assessment report show our structures to be in relatively good condition overall. The most significant structural concern, the Highway 101 Bridge over San Elijo Lagoon, has already begun the design phase for rehabilitation. The 10-year repair plan includes all bridges that ranked as high and medium priority, and the costs will be included in the City’s 5-Year CIP funding plan moving forward.

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Vicinity Map of City Bridges

2. Comprehensive List of all City Bridges

3. FY 2025-26 Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 5 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 6 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 7 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 8 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 9 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 10 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 11 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 12 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 13 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 14 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 15 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 16 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 17 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 18 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 19 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 20 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 21 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 22 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 23 of 63
No. Structure Name Location
1 Leucadia Blvd over I-5 Leucadia Blvd btwn Piraeus St & Orpheus Ave 2 Requeza St over I-5 Requeza St btwn Devonshire Dr & Beach St 3 Mackinnon Ave over I-5 Mackinnon Ave btwn Warwick Ave & Villa Cardiff Dr 4 Birmingham Dr over I-5 Birmingham Dr btwn Villa Cardiff Dr & Mackinnon Ave 5 Hwy 101 over San Elijo Lagoon Hwy 101 btwn Chesterfield Dr & Ocean St 6 Railroad over Encinitas Blvd Encinitas Blvd btwn Hwy 101 & Vulcan Ave 7 La Costa Ave over Railroad La Costa Ave btwn Hwy 101 & Vulcan Ave 8 Leucadia Blvd over Encinitas Creek Leucadia Blvd btwn Town Center Pl & El Camino Real 9 Town Center Dr over Encinitas Creek
tributary
Town Center Dr btwn Via Cantebria & El Camino Real
10 El Camino Real over Encinitas Creek Intersection of Leucadia Blvd & El Camino Real 11 Lone Jack Rd over Copper Creek (North) Lone Jack Rd btwn Lone Hill Ln & Dove Hollow Rd 12 Lone Jack Rd over Copper Creek (South) Lone Jack Rd btwn Bella Collina & Wildflower Valley Dr 13 B Street over Cottonwood Creek (South) B St btwn 4th St & C St 14 B Street over Cottonwood Creek (North) B St btwn 4th St & C St 15 3rd St over Cottonwood Creek 3rd St btwn B St & C St 16 Hwy 101 over Cottonwood Creek Hwy 101 btwn Encinitas Blvd & D St 17 Encinitas Blvd over Cottonwood Creek
Culvert
Encinitas Blvd btwn Vulcan Ave & Saxony St
18 Brookside Lane over Copper Creek
Brookside Ln btwn Olivenhain Farms Rd & Brookside Ln
dead end
19 Lone Jack Rd driveway over Copper Creek
Lone Jack Rd driveway btwn Bella Collina & Wildflower
Valley Dr
20 Lone Jack Rd over Escondido Creek
tributary
Lone Jack Rd btwn Strafford Knoll & Sante Fe Vista Ct

CITY OF ENCINITAS - BRIDGE INVENTORY SUMMARY

CULVERT CONVENTIONAL BRIDGE
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 24 of 63
21 Lone Jack Rd sidewalk over Copper Creek Lone Jack Rd btwn Bella Collina & Wildflower Valley Dr 22 Coastal Rail Trail over Rossini Creek Coastal Rail Trail btwn Liverpool Dr & Birmingham Dr 23 San Elijo Ave sidewalk over Glen Park
drainage swale
24 Glen Park Volleyball Court entrance over
drainage swale
25 Glen Park Playground entrance over
drainage swale
26 Glen Park Pavillion crossing over drainage
swale
27 Oak Crest Park Pavillion to Viewpoint trail
over drainage swale
28 Oak Crest Park to Community and Senior
Center path over drainage swale (North)
29 Oak Crest Park to Community and Senior
Center path over drainage swale (South)
30 Community and Senior Center to Oak
Crest Park trail over drainage swale
Community Senior Center
31 Sun Vista Park path over Encinitas Creek
tributary
Sun Vista Park
32 Moonlight Beach Trail over Cottonwood
Creek
33 Moonlight Beach Trail over Cottonwood
Creek tributary
34 Leucadia Oaks park walkway over drainage
swale (West)
35 Leucadia Oaks park walkway over drainage
swale (East)
36 Cardiff Sports Park path over drainage
swale
Cardiff Sports Park
37 Cottonwood Creek Park to Encinitas Blvd
over Cottonwood Creek tributary (North)
38 Cottonwood Creek Park to Encinitas Blvd
over Cottonwood Creek tributary (South)
39 Cottonwood Creek Park trail over drainage
swale
40 Cottonwood Creek Park driveway sidewalk
over drainage swale
41 Via Di Felicita sidewalk over drainage inlet
42 De Felicita Trail over tributary
43 Ellie's Bridge Trail over Escondido Creek
tributary

PEDESTRIAN STRUCTURE
Olivenhain Trails
Glen Park
Oak Crest Park
Moonlight Beach Park
Leucadia Oaks Park
Cottonwood Creek Park
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 25 of 63
44 Booker Trail over Escondido Creek
tributary
45 Valleyside Ln sidewalk over drainage swale
46 Valleyside Ln sidewalk over Escondido
Creek tributary

PEDESTRIAN

STRUCTURE
Olivenhain Trails
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 26 of 63
City of Encinitas
Citywide Bridge Inspections Project (WC26B)
Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report
Prepared for:

City of Encinitas

FINAL REPORT
August 31, 2026
12/31/2026
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 27 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report Aug. 31, 2026
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................1 2 Investigations.............................................................................................................................................1

2.1 Bridge Inspections...............................................................................................................................1

2.2 Common Problems and Repair Concepts ...........................................................................................2

2.3 Cost Estimate Development ...............................................................................................................5

2.4 Federal Project Funding Information..................................................................................................6 3 Prioritization...............................................................................................................................................8

3.1 Likelihood of Failure............................................................................................................................8

3.2 Consequence of Failure.....................................................................................................................10

3.2.1 Traffic Impact Score for Vehicular Bridges.................................................................................10

3.2.2 Traffic Impact Score for Pedestrian Bridges ..............................................................................12

3.2.3 Risk Score ...................................................................................................................................12

3.3 Bridge Prioritization ..........................................................................................................................14

3.4 Project Groupings .............................................................................................................................16 4 Recommendations...................................................................................................................................16

4.1 Recommended Project Sequencing..................................................................................................16

4.2 Recommended Minor Repairs..........................................................................................................19 Appendix A: Bridge Location Map ........................................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B: Bridge Data ..........................................................................................................................B-1 Appendix C: Bridge Repairs Recommended .............................................................................................C-1 Appendix D: Repair and Cost Detail ........................................................................................................ D-1 Revision Date Description
4 8/31/2026 Revised Final Report
Prepared by: Kleinfelder Inc.
12/31/2026
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 28 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 1 Aug. 31, 2026
1 Executive Summary
Kleinfelder has completed a field inspection and review of the bridge inventory of the City of Encinitas.

Overall, the City’s bridges are in fair shape with very few serious issues. Most of the repairs recommended are for minor issues that do not threaten the structural integrity of the bridges. 46 structures were inspected as part of this program. Of those, 9 are conventional bridges, 11 are culverts, and 26 are pedestrian structures.

The highest priority bridge, Highway 101 over San Elijo Lagoon, is already programmed for rehabilitation with Federal Funds through the Highway Bridge Program (HBP) and currently moving forward through that process. One other pedestrian structure, the Leucadia Oaks Park walkway over drainage swale (West) was found to be in Poor condition. Outside of these two bridges, the remaining structures are in Fair to Good condition. The study below outlines the method used to prioritize the repairs recommended to address most of the issues noted in the inspection reports. Much of the work required involves minor repairs such as repair of timber railings or planks, removal of debris from channels, and minor regrading.

Section 4 of this report presents a 10-year plan for performing the work and includes preliminary cost estimates. The plan focuses on the highest priority structures, accomplishing or initiating the recommended actions for the top 10 priority bridges within a 10-year period. The recommended 10-year bridge programming sequence has an estimated cost of approximately $5.9 million. Most of the cost, $3.8 Million, is for reconstruction of the San Elijo Creek Bridge.

These estimates are preliminary in nature and intended to give a programming level understanding of the costs involved.
2 Investigations
The following section discusses the investigations and background information for inspection of the bridges, additional relevant information on structure types and uses, repair concepts, and cost estimate assumptions.

2.1 Bridge Inspections
Kleinfelder’s bridge team completed hands-on inspections of all bridges and structures identified by the City during the week of April 6th, 2026, with one additional inspection completed for the Town Center Drive Bridge on June 16th, 2026. Inspections were completed in accordance with City and Caltrans standards and policies for conducting Specifications for the National Bridge Inventory (SNBI) inspections.

The inspection teams were led by Certified National Bridge Inspectors. Basic Structural Inventory and Appraisal (SI&A) information was collected at each bridge site.

Basic non-destructive investigation methods were used including sounding of concrete using hammers, probing of timber members to determine competent depths, and measuring of noted cracks, delaminations or other defects. Condition ratings were determined for all the major component groups of each bridge: Deck, Superstructure, Substructure, Culvert, Bridge Railing, Scour Condition. 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 29 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 2 Aug. 31, 2026
Following the inspections an inspection report was prepared for each bridge detailing the findings, relevant bridge data, recommendations, and photos of the bridge and components.

2.2 Common Problems and Repair Concepts
Following the inspection and a review of the recommended actions for the bridge, general repair or maintenance actions were developed to capture the level of effort needed to address issues with the bridges and structures. A summary of repairs for each bridge is provided in Appendix C.

Several common repairs and maintenance actions were noted among the bridges and the severity of defects varies between structures. A discussion of some of the repairs with additional explanation is presented here. A complete listing of the repair concepts including assumptions and cost information is provided in Appendix D: Repair Details and Costs.

Repair Spall / Delamination – Spalling of concrete may
occur due to poor initial construction practices, impact from vehicles or other objects, corrosion of underlying steel reinforcement, or shifting of adjacent components. This defect is fairly common in concrete bridges, particularly those in coastal areas where corrosion of steel can occur more rapidly. Within the structures included in this study, spalling was commonly found within concrete barriers and decks. Some of the spalls appeared to have been repaired in the past and failed anew.

Minor spalls do not typically lead to failure of a structure.

The exposed reinforcing and acceleration of rebar corrosion that occurs with exposed rebar can lead to significantly reduced strength in a member or deck. Early repair of
concrete spalls and delamination is an effective and
recommended maintenance activity.

A proper repair for a concrete spall requires chipping away loose concrete as well as sound concrete around a corroded rebar, cleaning and preparing both the concrete and steel surfaces, and then replacing the concrete. Using appropriate primers to prepare the surface is important and materials selected from the Caltrans Authorized Materials List should work well. A sample detail is included in the figure below.

Photo 1: Extensive Concrete Spalling
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 30 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 3 Aug. 31, 2026
Figure 1. Concrete Spall Repair Detail
Efflorescence – Efflorescence is a white residue that appears on concrete when moisture intrusion migrates through the concrete, depositing salts or chlorides on the surface. This was found in several structures and is a sign that water may be infiltrating through the structure. The efflorescence itself does not compromise the concrete. However, when it is accompanied by cracking in the area or discoloration that indicates rust may be occurring then it can indicate corrosion of the rebar below the concrete surfaces. In situations where signs of rebar corrosion are occurring, the area should be treated like a concrete spall or delamination.

Water Intrusion / Seepage – In several culvert structures there are indications that significant water is seeping through the structure, often at locations where connecting pipes penetrate the sides of the culvert or concrete wall. Some water was also found to be leaking through cracks in the sides. In areas where the water amount is significant and the source or path is unclear; it is recommended to determine the cause of the water intrusion and redirect or provide a path for the water that does not compromise the structure itself.

Photo 2: Excessive water intrusion at
Encinitas Boulevard Culvert
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 31 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 4 Aug. 31, 2026
Timber Member Replacement (Deck/Post/Railing) – Several of the pedestrian structures have timber members in their primary components and railing systems. In several cases, the timber members are cracked, rotted, or otherwise deteriorated to the point of needing to be replaced. Damaged timber members in pedestrian structures can also present tripping or minor injury hazards to pedestrians.

Replacement of timber members should be done
using similarly sized members with comparable
corrosion resistance characteristics to the adjacent
members. This may include pressure treatment or
use of rot resistant wood types such as Redwood.

Fastener systems for timber members should be used
that match the existing configuration although often
longer bolts or screws may be needed than was
originally used in particular if attachment is made to
an older timber component.

Timber replacement can often be completed at low
cost by City staff and does not require special
equipment. However, care should be taken that the method of fastening new members does not damage existing components.

Bracket/Attachment Corrosion – The timber structures also commonly use light-gage metal fasteners, attachments, and brackets. Given the coastal conditions, these components often do not hold up long term and begin to rust or corrode. Replacement of the corroded components can typically be completed with similar components. This type of repair is typically considered normal maintenance upkeep of timber structures.

Rip Rap Addition / Scour Prevention- Some bridge locations showed signs of erosion of soil around the edges of the structure. This is most often due to high flow events, such as storms which can cause localized erosion. When significant, this erosion can undermine foundations and structures leading to cracking or failure in extreme situations. Several areas were noted where the addition of a minimal amount of
small rip rap or other protection measures are
recommended to arrest the erosion and protect the
structure.

Remove Sediment/Debris/Vegetation- Several
structures, including culverts, have actions noted to
remove debris, vegetation or sediment that may block
the flow of water through or under the structure. This is a maintenance activity that can have significant impact on the performance of the structure during storm
events.

Photo 3: Rot at top of timber beam (Structure #34)
Photo 4: Vegetation Buildup at Lone Jack Rd
Culvert (Structure #21)
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 32 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 5 Aug. 31, 2026
Culverts in particular present a risk of causing or contributing to flooding of surrounding areas during storm events due to blockages or reduced flow through the culvert. Although classified in the reports as routine maintenance, it is prioritized as a preventative measure to maintain hydraulic performance of the structure.

Removal of these materials is typically an activity that can be undertaken using City maintenance crews and standard equipment. In severe cases, a small excavator or Bobcat may be needed to remove larger material such as trees or excessive sediment/rocks.

Evaluation Study – Pedestrian Barrier – Several of the existing pedestrian structures were constructed prior to modern railing standards and have barriers that do not meet current standards for height, opening size, or other pedestrian barrier criteria. One of the common routine actions recommended is to evaluate the barriers for current criteria (PROWAG, Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines).

This action can take the form of a study by the City or others to determine how best to adopt the criteria through modification or replacement of the railings. It would likely be completed covering multiple structures and configurations, however for estimating purposes in this study a cost was assigned to each bridge with this action recommended. This study and implementation scheduling are recommended to be included as part of the City’s ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) transition plan.

Replace Pedestrian Barrier to Current Standard – For pedestrian structures where the existing barriers do not meet current safety standards a repair item of replacing the pedestrian barrier with a new barrier was included as a method of capturing the likely cost to upgrade the railing to current standards. It is possible that some railings could be retrofit or modified to meet standards, but the level of detail was not included in this evaluation.

2.3 Cost Estimate Development
To facilitate planning for future projects and give a representative sample of expected project costs, unit construction costs for each repair alternative were developed. The base unit costs were developed based on experience with similar projects and estimates of time and crews needed to complete the project.

Some repairs may have different degrees of severity impacting the cost. Normal, light, and heavy base costs were assumed when the severity of the task varied greatly between structures in a way that is not captured by increased quantity.

The following assumptions go into each base unit cost:
• The unit costs assume there is sufficient quantity of the repair to avoid very small quantities. For example, the unit cost for timber deck repairs assumes that several small pedestrian bridges have been combined into one project.
• Common units of measure were used (square feet, feet, each, lump sum). • Project costs, including indirect costs, assume a contractor is hired to complete the work. • The base unit costs assume 2027 Construction year costs. Scheduling of projects assumes a 5% simple escalation per year.
• Lump sum items assume all field work associated with the task is included. 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 33 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 6 Aug. 31, 2026
• The cost estimates should be assumed to be at concept level only.

When outlining projects or groups of projects, indirect costs were included in the total assumed project costs. The following assumptions were used for developing these project costs:
• Mobilization of 10 % assumed.
• Design and permitting costs of 20% assumed for projects. • Construction Inspection and Management costs of 20% assumed for projects not completed by City staff.
• Projects assumed to be funded through the HBP or BPMP program assume an additional 25% cost contingency increase to the total costs. The costs presented assume the City’s contribution is 20% of the total cost.
• Contingency costs of 50% based on early concept level of projects.

2.4 Federal Project Funding Information
For bridges which support roadway networks within California bridge projects that utilize Federal Funding participate in the Highway Bridge Program (HBP). The purpose of this program is to replace or rehabilitate public roadways when the bridge is sufficiently important and meets certain requirements. The program is available to all local agencies including Cities and Counties which own and maintain bridges in the State.

The program uses Federal funds from the Federal Highway Administration to contribute a majority of the project costs including design, permitting, right-of-way acquisition, utilities, and project construction costs to the project. The local agency is typically responsible for contributing the remaining portion of the funds, typically on the order of 20%.

Eligible bridges must be owned by a local agency, and have a total span greater than 20 feet. In order to be eligible for replacement or rehabilitation funds, bridge projects which seek funding must then meet at least one of the following criteria:
• Be in poor condition
• Seismically vulnerable
• Scour critical
• Paint condition index less than 70%
Currently, none of the City’s bridges aside from the Highway 101 Bridge over San Elijo Creek, which is already in the program, meet any of these criteria. Therefore, at this time there is not a likely candidate for procuring funds through the main HBP program.

There are two possible candidates which could reach one of the qualifying conditions within the next 10 years:
• The Town Center Drive bridge is in fair condition but shows signs of corrosion and deterioration.

If this corrosion progresses or accelerates, the bridge will likely fall into the ‘poor condition’ category.
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 34 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 7 Aug. 31, 2026
• The La Costa Avenue bridge, which crosses over the LOSSAN railroad, is the most likely candidate to show seismic vulnerability. The bridge was constructed in 1968 prior to current seismic detailing and design methods. There are likely some vulnerabilities due to the reinforcement detailing and connections. However, the type of structure (concrete with monolithic connections between columns and superstructure) is not one that shows inherent vulnerability to seismic activity. Therefore, Caltrans places the burden of showing vulnerability on the local owner to show a need for seismic retrofit. This would require a detailed seismic evaluation of the bridge whose findings Caltrans may dispute.

The general funds are limited to replacement or rehabilitation of the existing bridge only. Other improvements including widening or the addition of approach improvements away from the bridge are not eligible for reimbursement through the program.

Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program
One subset portion of the HBP is the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program (BPMP). This program seeks to keep bridges in good condition and extend their service life. The total cost of proposed work must exceed $200,000, however; bridges with similar work required may be lumped together in this program. Work that is eligible for funding through the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program includes:
• Reducing the amount of water infiltrating a bridge
• Protecting bridge elements
• Slowing the rate of deterioration
• Repairing scour countermeasures
However, the program is targeted at preventative maintenance and not routine maintenance. The following activities are not eligible for BPMP funding:
• Replacement of bridge barriers, railings, fencing, or sidewalks • Damage due to collisions
• Transition railings, approach guardrails, or crash cushions • Warning signs or markers
• Graffiti related damage
• Clearing brush or vegetation
• Minor concrete repairs such as minor spalls that don’t show signs of further progression • Cleaning or maintaining deck drains, joints, curbs, etc. • Correcting approach paving or erosion
• Installation of new scour countermeasures
Of the 9 roadway carrying bridges within the City’s inventory, most of them show deficiencies in the groupings that are ineligible for BPMP funding. If a BPMP program were initiated and successful, these additional repairs and modifications would be considered non-participating and would not be 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 35 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 8 Aug. 31, 2026
reimbursable. A breakdown of how to best group the City’s bridges for BPMP eligibility is further explained in Section 3.3 Project Groupings.

The program is administered by Caltrans Division of Local Assistance and the guidelines are contained in Chapter 6 of the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual. The process for application, approval, and construction of projects through the HBP program can be lengthy and include numerous requirements which greatly increase the upfront costs of the project. 3 Prioritization
The following sections outline the method and recommendations for prioritizing the improvements and repairs to the City of Encinitas Bridge Inventory.

In order to prioritize the bridge projects, the following criteria provide a method of scoring the projects to assist in determining which bridges should be addressed first. The method assigns values to bridge characteristics within two categories: Likelihood of Failure (LOF) and Consequence of Failure (COF). The higher the overall score, the more vulnerable or critical the bridge is. The scores are then summed up with the highest scored bridges being those with highest priority. The scores are set so that maximum possible prioritization score is 100. The lowest possible score would be 0.

Priority Score = Likelihood of Failure + Consequence of Failure

3.1 Likelihood of Failure
The Likelihood of Failure score indicates the condition of the bridge and how significant any current damage is.

Based on the conditions assigned to the major bridge components during the inspection program, each bridge is assigned a condition score in the applicable major component categories. The categories are:
• Deck
• Superstructure
• Substructure
• Culvert
• Bridge Railing
• Channel
The first 4 categories (Deck, Superstructure, Substructure, Culvert) are used to evaluate the conditions that can lead to failure of the bridge structure. They are critical to the stability of the structure itself. The lowest rating in these 4 categories is an important component of funding eligibility and is called the Lowest Condition Rating. This Lowest Condition Rating among these four categories is what is used to typically determine Federal funding eligibility. For this reason, these conditions have the heaviest weighting in the prioritization of bridge repairs.
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 36 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 9 Aug. 31, 2026
The last two categories (Bridge Railing and Channel) can lead to local failures and hazards to the public but will likely not lead to collapse of the structure. These categories are not considered when determining funding eligibility but are important to the function of the bridge.

According to National Bridge Inspection Standards, the ratings in the table below are assigned to each bridge category as part of the inspection process. A higher Condition Rating indicates better condition.

Table 1: Condition Rating Descriptions
Condition Rating
Excellent 9
Very Good 8
Good 7
Satisfactory 6
Fair 5
Poor 4
Serious 3
Critical 2
Imminent Failure 1
Failed 0
Not Applicable NA
For the inventory of structures owned by the City of Encinitas, the lowest Condition Value present in any structure for any component was a Condition Value of 4, which corresponds to a Poor condition. Two bridges had a designation of Poor as the Lowest Bridge Condition Rating, four bridges had Poor conditions for Bridge Railing, and one bridge rated Poor in Channel condition. The bridges with Poor ratings are shown in the table below.

Table 2: Bridges with Poor Ratings
Bridge No./ Name Poor Rating Categories

1. Leucadia Blvd over I-5
Bridge Railing

3. Mackinnon Ave over I-5
Bridge Railing

5. Hwy 101 over San Elijo Lagoon Deck, Superstructure,
Substructure, Bridge Railing

33. Moonlight Beach Trail over Cottonwood Creek Tributary Channel

34. Leucadia Oaks Park Walkway over Drainage Swale (West) Superstructure

41. Via Di Felicita Sidewalk over Drainage Inlet Bridge Railing 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 37 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 10 Aug. 31, 2026
For the purposes of this prioritization, the following LOF scores were applied based on the bridge’s condition ratings. The LOF score captures the three primary areas: Lowest Condition, Bridge Railing, and Channel condition rating. A bridge could gain LOF points from multiple categories.

The maximum LOF points possible from combining all categories is 80 indicating the bridge is already at the point of failure. If any of the condition ratings are less than 3 (Critical (2), Imminent Failure (1), Failed (0)), then the maximum LOF score of 80 is given. This automatic maximum LOF score is intended to prioritize structures that are near failure.

Condition values greater than 5 (Satisfactory or better) are considered to have no likelihood of failure and receive zero LOF points.

For example, the Highway 101 Bridge over San Elijo Creek has a Lowest Condition Rating of 4 and a Bridge Railing rating of 4, so it received an LOF Score of 40 + 10 = 50.

Table 3: Likelihood of Failure Score Descriptions
Criteria LOF
Score
Criteria LOF
Score
Lowest Condition Rating > 5 0 Bridge Railing or Channel Rating > 5 0 Lowest Condition Rating = 5 10 Bridge Railing or Channel Rating = 5 5 Lowest Condition Rating = 4 40 Bridge Railing or Channel Rating = 4 10 Lowest Condition Rating = 3 55 Bridge Railing or Channel Rating = 3 20 Lowest Condition, Bridge Railing or Channel Ratings < 3: LOF Score = 80

3.2 Consequence of Failure
The Consequence of Failure Score (COF) captures the likely impact to the community in the event of failure of the bridge or a component of the bridge. This score is a result of the functionality and use of the structure. The COF score has a maximum total value of 20 points and is a combination of the impacts from Traffic Impacts and Risks.

Consequence of Failure Score (COF) = Σ Traffic Impact Scores + Σ Risk Scores 20 points Maximum
The contributing traffic and risk scores are outlined below.

3.2.1 Traffic Impact Score for Vehicular Bridges
The traffic score is intended to capture the impact of the bridge on local traffic. Criteria for structures carrying vehicular traffic is applied differently than pedestrian structures. 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 38 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 11 Aug. 31, 2026
For bridges or culverts carrying vehicular traffic the score is a summation of the traffic usage as indicated by ADT (Average Daily Traffic) values, the required detour length, and whether the route lies on the City’s primary Fire Evacuation Route. There are 8 Points possible under Traffic Impacts for Vehicular Bridges.

Table 4: Traffic Impact Scoring Values - Vehicular Bridges ADT Scoring Value Detour Length (miles) Scoring Value
> 20,000 3 > 4 2
10,000 – 19,000 2 2 – 4 1
1,000 – 9,999 1 < 2 0
< 1000 0
The City’s Fire and Marine Safety Department currently has a Fire Evacuation Route (FER). These routes are shown in the figure below. Bridges that lie along this route are given additional priority per the values shown in the table below.

Table 5: Traffic Impact Scoring – Fire Evacuation Route Bridge Lies on FER Scoring Value
Yes 3
No 0
Figure 2. Fire Evacuation Route
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 39 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 12 Aug. 31, 2026

3.2.2 Traffic Impact Score for Pedestrian Bridges
For pedestrian bridges, impacts to traffic are typically not as significant. The traffic impact scores for pedestrian bridges are only included if there is not a viable alternative route. Alternative routes may be sidewalks or alternative paths. Viability also depends on proximity of the alternate route. If an alternate route is less than 1000’ from the structure it is considered viable. There are 4 Points possible under Traffic Impacts for Pedestrian Bridges.

Table 6: Traffic Impact Scoring - Pedestrian Bridges
Alternate Route Scoring Value
Yes 0
No 4

3.2.3 Risk Score
One intention of the scoring prioritization is to assist in improving the overall network and minimizing future maintenance needs or risks for the City. Several of the structures present risks of future impacts due to current conditions, these may be safety or user related, and others may be related to minimizing impacts from unpredictable events such as storms or vehicle collisions. There are 20 points possible under the Risk score.

In order to capture these risks in prioritization, the following score additions are included based on the City’s bridge inventory, engineering judgement of the damage and siting of the structure, and observations made during the inspections. Each bridge may present more than one of these risks. The scoring values are subjective and were developed based on balancing scoring while highlighting potential future concerns for the City. As such, the risk score is intended as a planning tool and not a formal engineering risk assessment.

The Maintenance category is intended to capture current damage that if left unresolved may deteriorate at an accelerated rate. This may include corrosion of rebar in primary load carrying members, rot in timber members, etc. This risk was determined by examining the damage of each structure within the inspection results.

The Stability Risk category captures current issues that could lead to instability of the structure if they worsen. This is primarily dealing with scour or erosion events that can rapidly change in a major stormwater event. This risk is identifying risks to the structure itself rather than surrounding areas.

The Flood Risk category captures risks to surrounding areas that may occur if a bridge or culvert is blocked or clogged during a storm event. This may be due to existing debris or debris that enters or obstructs the structure during a flood event. Where the flood risk may impact habitable property or flood primary roads, this risk was triggered. In determining this risk, the location and surrounding areas of each bridge was considered as well as the likelihood of the channel becoming obstructed. Areas where potential flooding would only impact uninhabited areas, park areas for example, were not considered to have this risk.
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 40 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 13 Aug. 31, 2026
The Vehicle Safety category captures potential damage to users’ vehicles. Minor damage may be due to potholes, poor joints, or approach issues. Major damage may include crash risks or safety issues. Some of these condition issues are captured in the LOF condition scoring for the bridge as well, but are included as a potential consequence of the damage to the public. Therefore, they are identified within the risk score as well.

The Pedestrian Safety category is similar to vehicle safety but for pedestrian users. Minor issues may be trip hazards or hand injuries due to the type of railing on the bridge. Major issues would be safety issues such as major fall potential if a barrier fails or is inadequate.

Table 7: Risk Condition Scoring Summary
Risk Condition
Scoring Value Category Risk
Maintenance Potential for acceleration of deterioration 1 Stability Risk Potential for scour or bridge stability issue 3 Flood Risk Potential for major impacts from storm event (ponding or flooding of primary road or
habitable property)
3 Vehicular Safety Potential for minor vehicular damage (potholes, approach misalignment)
1 Potential for major vehicular damage
(missing/inadequate traffic barrier)
3 Pedestrian Safety Potential for minor trips/falls (approach misalignment or railing inadequacy)
1 Potential for major pedestrian injury (railing
failure/ high fall potential)
2 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 41 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 14 Aug. 31, 2026

3.3 Bridge Prioritization
Based on the scoring outlined above, the following is the bridge prioritization list for bridge priorities 1 to

29. The remaining bridges had a prioritization score of 0.

Table 8: Bridge Priority List
Bridge
Number
Bridge Name Priority
Score
Priority
Ranking
5 Hwy 101 over San Elijo Lagoon 60 1
34 Leucadia Oaks park walkway over drainage swale (West) 41 2 14 B Street over Cottonwood Creek (North) 26 3
33 Moonlight Beach Trail over Cottonwood Creek tributary 26 3 3 Mackinnon Ave over I-5 22 5
2 Requeza St over I-5 18 6
4 Birmingham Dr over I-5 18 6
1 Leucadia Blvd over I-5 15 8
9 Town Center Dr over Encinitas Creek tributary 15 8
13 B Street over Cottonwood Creek (South) 13 10
38 Cottonwood Crk Park to Encinitas Blvd over Cottonwood Crk trib. (S) 11 11 41 Via Di Felicita sidewalk over drainage inlet 11 11
31 Sun Vista Park path over Encinitas Creek tributary 10 13 37 Cottonwood Crk Park to Encinitas Blvd over Cottonwood Crk trib. (N) 10 13 21 Lone Jack Rd sidewalk over Copper Creek 8 15
8 Leucadia Blvd over Encinitas Creek 6 16
18 Brookside Lane over Copper Creek 6 16
20 Lone Jack Rd over Escondido Creek tributary 6 16
24 Glen Park Volleyball Court entrance over drainage swale 6 16 7 La Costa Ave over Railroad 4 20
10 El Camino Real over Encinitas Creek 4 20
17 Encinitas Blvd over Cottonwood Creek Culvert 4 20
43 Ellie's Bridge Trail over Escondido Creek tributary 4 20 46 Valleyside Ln sidewalk over Escondido Creek tributary 4 20 11 Lone Jack Rd over Copper Creek (North) 3 25
16 Hwy 101 over Cottonwood Creek 3 25
12 Lone Jack Rd over Copper Creek (South) 2 27
15 3rd St over Cottonwood Creek 2 27
19 Lone Jack Rd driveway over Copper Creek 1 29
23 San Elijo Ave sidewalk over Glen Park drainage swale 1 29 25 Glen Park Playground entrance over drainage swale 1 29 26 Glen Park Pavillion crossing over drainage swale 1 29 27 Oak Crest Park Pavillion to Viewpoint trail over drainage swale 1 29 28 Oak Crest Park to Community & Senior Center path over swale (N) 1 29 29 Oak Crest Park to Community & Senior Center path over swale (S) 1 29 30 Community & Senior Center to Oak Crest Park trail over swale 1 29 32 Moonlight Beach Trail over Cottonwood Creek 1 29
40 Cottonwood Creek Park driveway sidewalk over drainage swale 1 29 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 42 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 15 Aug. 31, 2026
The bridges are separated into different priority thresholds based on priority score. A bridge with a priority score over 40 is considered a high priority as this score indicates both poor condition and accompanying risk factors.

Bridges with priority scores between 15 and 40 are considered medium priority, they have some improvements needed, but should not pose immediate risks. Planning to resolve these bridge issues should be initiated and projects initiated as soon as possible.

Bridges with scores lower than 15 are considered low priority. Low priority projects should be observed and improvements made when resources are available.

A figure showing the breakdown of project prioritization scores and thresholds is provided below.

Figure 3. Bridge Prioritization Groupings
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 43 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 16 Aug. 31, 2026

3.4 Project Groupings
In order to efficiently complete projects, it is recommended that similar repair types or structure types be grouped together. This will provide for more efficient pricing when a contractor is used. Additionally, many of the repairs recommended are minor in nature and can be completed by City maintenance staff with general carpentry and construction skills. Several groupings are presented below that are intended to take advantage of similarities and efficiencies between projects.

BPMP – I-5 Crossing Bridges
The four bridges within the City’s inventory that cross I-5 have similar repairs needed and all fall within the top 10 in the priority ranking. Per the agreement with Caltrans, the City is responsible for maintenance of the bridges from the deck surface upward. This includes barriers and fences as well as deck surfaces.

The deck resurfacing and sealing recommended on one of the bridges (Requeza over I-5) is a very common BPMP repair. While barrier upgrades and replacements are not allowed under the BPMP program, it does allow concrete repairs for significant spalls that have structural impacts on the longevity of the bridge.

These significant spalls should qualify for that repair as well. The Leucadia over the I-5 bridge has already been programmed for railing repair due to the spalling present. Additionally, because Caltrans has responsible for these bridges, they should be more amenable to a cooperative repair plan for the bridges.

For the barrier and deck deficiencies identified, it is recommended to apply for funding for these bridges.

Coastal Culvert Repairs
Two of the coastal culverts (Moonlight Beach (13) and B Street (14)) fall within the top 10 prioritized list of projects with the B Street culvert within the top 3. These culverts are close in proximity and share some deficiencies. It is recommended that they be grouped together as a rehabilitation project to create a single project sizeable enough to efficiently utilize a contractor. No specific funding program is available for these types of repair projects.
4 Recommendations

4.1 Recommended Project Sequencing
A recommended project sequencing and prioritization is presented in the tables below. This prioritization targets addressing the top ten bridge priorities over a 10-year period, additional bridge projects with minor repairs needed may also be addressed as noted in the Minor Repairs section (4.2). This list excludes the recently completed Leucadia Bridge over I-5 Railing Repair Project; however, it includes costs for future work that is not currently underway.

For programming purposes, project costs include Mobilization (10%) and Contingency (50%) for all projects. Projects assumed to be performed by contractor also include Design/Permitting (20%) and Construction Management (20%).

There are projects noted below which are assumed to receive Federal funding through the BPMP program. For these projects there is an additional 25% contingency added to the total cost, however, 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 44 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 17 Aug. 31, 2026
the construction cost indicated is only 20% of the total construction cost accounting for the expected Federal contribution. Preliminary studies to prepare and get the authorization for Federal Funding are indicated as well with the full cost accruing to the City.

There is also a 5% escalation per year added for each cost estimate, such that the cost estimate is better reflective of the cost to be incurred in the year the project is undertaken.

Table 9: Year 1 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
1A San Elijo Lagoon 5 Design Additional Funding $388
1B Initiate I-5 Bridge BPMP
Program
1, 2, 3, 4 Prepare and submit application for
BPMP project for I-5 crossing
bridge repairs.
$25
Subtotal $413
Table 10: Year 2 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
2A I-5 Bridge BPMP Program 1, 2, 3, 4 Design for BPMP Project Federally Funded
$60
2B Leucadia Oaks Pedestrian
Bridge
34 Minor Timber Repairs, remove
debris, other minor repairs
$65
Subtotal $125
Table 11: Year 3 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
3A I-5 Bridge BPMP Program 1, 2, 3, 4 Approvals for BPMP Project Federally Funded
$25
Subtotal $25
Table 12: Year 4 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
4A I-5 Bridge BPMP Program 1, 2, 3, 4 Construction for BPMP Project Federally Funded
$140
Subtotal $140
Table 13: Year 5 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
5A San Elijo Lagoon 5 Construction Funding Allocation $3,420 Subtotal $3,420
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 45 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 18 Aug. 31, 2026
Table 14: Year 6 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
6A Town Center Drive Bridge
Design Phase 1
9 Design and Permitting for Repair of
Arch Bridge
$80
Subtotal $80
Table 2: Year 7 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
7A Town Center Drive Bridge
Design Phase 2
9 Design and Permitting for Repair of
Arch Bridge
$80
Subtotal $80
Table 16: Year 8 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
8A Town Center Drive Bridge
Repair Construction –
Phase 1
9 Construction for Repair of Arch
Bridge – Phase 1
$582
Subtotal $582
Table 17: Year 9 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
9A Town Center Drive Bridge
Repair Construction –
Phase 2
9 Construction for Repair of Arch
Bridge – Phase 2
$582
9B Coastal Culvert Repairs
Design
13, 14 Design and Permitting for Culvert
repairs
$75
Subtotal $657
Table 18: Year 10 Projects
Project Bridges Work included Cost ($000)
10A Coastal Culvert Repairs 13, 14 Concrete spall repair, remove debris, repair joint, repair fencing
$390
Subtotal $390
The recommended 10-year bridge programming sequence has an estimated cost of approximately $5.9 million. Annual costs of the program range between $25K and $3.4M (San Elijo Construction). The majority of the costs, $3.8 Million, is for design and construction of the San Elijo Creek Bridge (bridge 5). 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 46 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report 19 Aug. 31, 2026

4.2 Recommended Minor Repairs
The City of Encinitas, through the Public Works Department and Parks, Recreation & Cultural Arts Department act as owners of these facilities and provide regular, routine maintenance of these facilities.

There are two main categories of minor repairs that would potentially align with ongoing maintenance programs run by the City.

Minor Timber Repairs - Timber bridge components tend to have a lifespan of 20 to 40 years depending on the conditions. Most of the smaller timber pedestrian structures show a need for minor repair and replacement. These repairs include replacement of damaged timber members as well as replacement of brackets and connection hardware. It is recommended that these projects be lumped together into groups of 4 to 6 bridges each year starting with those with the highest priority. The work on each bridge would entail replacement of damaged timbers and re-attachment and replacement of minor corroded hardware. The costs are minimal, particularly if able to be completed by City staff. If a contractor is used, then it is recommended that all timber pedestrian bridges be grouped into a single project for efficiency.

No specific funding program is available for these types of projects.

Debris and Vegetation Removal - Debris and vegetation with the potential to block stormwater flow from properly entering or exiting a culvert or passing under a bridge can create significant risks of flooding.

Recent storms in San Diego County have led to significant flooding traced to improperly maintained flood channels and culverts. It is recommended that a vegetation removal project be completed to clear all structures with indications of vegetation or debris removal. These should be prioritized as those indicated in the study as having a major storm impact risk. No specific funding program is available for these types of repair projects.

The table below provides a list of projects and bridges that should be further coordinated with department staff to determine if staff forces can support these projects.

Table 19: Potential Minor Repair Projects for City Staff Project Bridges included
Minor Timber Repairs / Replace
or Re-Attach Hardware
19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 41, 42, 43 Vegetation Removal 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 14, 18, 33,
Debris/Sediment removal 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 23, 28, 29, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46
Minor Rip Rap placement 39, 40, 43, 46
Minor AC Paving Repair /
Pothole Filing
10, 17, 43
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 47 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report Aug. 31, 2026
Appendices
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 48 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report A-1 Aug. 31, 2026
Appendix A
Bridge Location Maps
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 49 of 63
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 50 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report B-1 Aug. 31, 2026
Appendix B
Bridge Data
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 51 of 63
Condition Dimensions (ft, ft2)
Encinitas
Bridge No.

Caltrans Bridge
No. Bridge Name Traffic Type Deck Type ADT Deck
Superstruct
ure
Substructur
e Culvert
Bridge
Railing Channel
Lowest
Condition Length
Deck Width
o-o
Curb-Curb
Width
Total
Sidewalk
Width
Total
Barrier/Rail
Length Deck Area
Roadway
Area
Sidewalk
Area
Vehicle
Detour
Length
Alternate
Pedestrian
Route
B.ID.03 B.ID.01 B.ID.02 B.H.09 B.C.01 B.C.02 B.C.03 B.C.04 B.C.05 B.C.09 B.C.13 B.G.01 B.G.05 B.G.06 B.G.7+8 Miles Y = 1 ; N =
0 1 57C0554 Leucadia Blvd over I-5 Roadway Concrete 25000 6 NA NA NA 4 NA 6 210 100 84 10 420 21000 17640 2100 1.9 2 5570532 Requeza St over I-5 Roadway Concrete 8000 5 NA NA NA 5 NA 5 248 35 25 7 496 8680 6200 1736 2.2 3 570530 Mackinnon Ave over I-5 Roadway Concrete 5000 5 NA NA NA 4 NA 5 500 37 25 10 1000 18500 12500 5000 0.87 4 570529 Birmingham Dr over I-5 Roadway Concrete 12000 5 NA NA NA 5 NA 5 232 35 26 7 464 8120 6032 1624 0.92 5 57C0210
Hwy 101 over San Elijo
Lagoon Roadway Concrete 20300 4 4 4 NA 4 7 4 223 75 69 6.5 446 16725 15387 1449.5 5.87 6 57C0276 Railroad over Encinitas Blvd Railroad Concrete NA 7 6 6 6 7 NA 6 168 18 16 0 336 3024 2688 0 NA 1 7 57C0316 La Costa Ave over Railroad Roadway Concrete 11800 7 7 7 NA 6 NA 7 114 35 24 0 228 3990 2736 0 2.8 8 57C0811
Leucadia Blvd over Encinitas
Creek Roadway Concrete 26000 6 7 7 NA 6 6 6 105 137 120 11 210 14385 12600 1155 1.67 9 NA
Town Center Dr over
Encinitas Creek tributary Buried Buried 10000 NA NA NA 5 6 6 5 30.3 90 70 10 60.6 2727 2121 303 0.59 10 57C0189
El Camino Real over
Encinitas Creek Roadway Concrete 29000 NA NA NA 6 7 7 6 50 220 120 13 100 11000 6000 650 1.67 11 NA
Lone Jack Rd over Copper
Creek (North) Buried Buried 6000 NA NA NA 7 6 6 7 21.2 30.37 25 0 42.4 643.844 530 0 2.05 12 57C0569
Lone Jack Rd over Copper
Creek (South) Roadway Buried 6400 NA NA NA 6 6 6 6 34 50 28 0 68 1700 952 0 1.5 13 NA
B Street over Cottonwood
Creek (South) Buried Buried 5000 NA NA NA 6 NA 6 5 19.1 273 53 0 38.2 5214.3 1012.3 0 NA 1 14 NA
B Street over Cottonwood
Creek (North) Buried Buried 5000 NA NA NA 5 5 5 5 10 335 47 0 20 3350 470 0 NA 1 15 NA
3rd St over Cottonwood
Creek Buried Buried 12000 NA NA NA 6 NA 7 6 12.5 70 48 10 25 875 600 125 0.6 16 NA
Hwy 101 over Cottonwood
Creek Buried Buried 20000 NA NA NA 6 NA 7 6 17.5 550 72 10 35 9625 1260 175 0.5 17 NA
Encinitas Blvd over
Cottonwood Creek Culvert Buried Buried 20000 NA NA NA 6 NA NA 6 26 1350 80 10 52 35100 2080 260 2.22 18 NA
Brookside Lane over Copper
Creek Buried Buried 400 NA NA NA 6 6 6 6 25.2 69 18.7 0 50.4 1738.8 471.24 0 NA 0 19 NA
Lone Jack Rd driveway over
Copper Creek Buried Buried 400 NA NA NA 6 7 7 6 14.8 40 21.5 0 29.6 592 318.2 0 1.46 20 NA
Lone Jack Rd over Escondido
Creek tributary Buried Buried 6000 NA NA NA NA 6 7 6 45.1 75 29.5 0 90.2 3382.5 1330.45 0 NA 0 21 NA
Lone Jack Rd sidewalk over
Copper Creek Pedestrain Wood NA 6 7 6 NA 6 6 6 48 8 7.8 0 96 384 374.4 0 NA 0 22 NA
Coastal Rail Trail over Rossini
Creek Pedestrain Concrete NA 8 7 7 NA 7 8 7 50 13.3 12 0 100 665 600 0 NA 1 23 NA
San Elijo Ave sidewalk over
Glen Park drainage swale Pedestrain Wood NA 6 6 7 NA 6 7 6 13 5 4.8 0 26 65 62.4 0 NA 1 24 NA
Glen Park Volleyball Court
entrance over drainage swale Pedestrain Wood NA 6 6 7 NA 5 7 6 9 9 9 0 18 81 81 0 NA 1 25 NA
Glen Park Playground
entrance over drainage swale Pedestrain Wood NA 6 6 7 NA 6 7 6 9 7 5.6 0 18 63 50.4 0 NA 1 26 NA
Glen Park Pavillion crossing
over drainage swale Pedestrain Wood NA 6 6 7 NA 6 7 6 9 5.3 4.3 0 18 47.7 38.7 0 NA 1 27 NA
Oak Crest Park Pavillion to
Viewpoint trail over drainage
swale Pedestrain Wood NA 6 6 6 NA 6 7 6 5.3 6.7 6 0 10.6 35.51 31.8 0 NA 1 28 NA
Oak Crest Park to
Community and Senior
Center path over drainage
swale (North) Pedestrain Concrete NA 7 7 NA NA 6 7 7 4 4 6 0 8 16 24 0 NA 1 29 NA
Oak Crest Park to
Community and Senior
Center path over drainage
swale (South) Pedestrain Concrete NA 7 7 NA NA 6 7 7 5.8 6.6 5.3 0 11.6 38.28 30.74 0 NA 1 Conventional Drainage
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 52 of 63
Condition Dimensions (ft, ft2)
Encinitas
Bridge No.

Caltrans Bridge
No. Bridge Name
B.ID.03 B.ID.01 B.ID.02
1 57C0554 Leucadia Blvd over I-5
2 5570532 Requeza St over I-5
3 570530 Mackinnon Ave over I-5
4 570529 Birmingham Dr over I-5
5 57C0210
Hwy 101 over San Elijo
Lagoon
6 57C0276 Railroad over Encinitas Blvd
7 57C0316 La Costa Ave over Railroad
8 57C0811
Leucadia Blvd over Encinitas
Creek
9 NA
Town Center Dr over
Encinitas Creek tributary
10 57C0189
El Camino Real over
Encinitas Creek
11 NA
Lone Jack Rd over Copper
Creek (North)
12 57C0569
Lone Jack Rd over Copper
Creek (South)
13 NA
B Street over Cottonwood
Creek (South)
14 NA
B Street over Cottonwood
Creek (North)
15 NA
3rd St over Cottonwood
Creek
16 NA
Hwy 101 over Cottonwood
Creek
17 NA
Encinitas Blvd over
Cottonwood Creek Culvert
18 NA
Brookside Lane over Copper
Creek
19 NA
Lone Jack Rd driveway over
Copper Creek
20 NA
Lone Jack Rd over Escondido
Creek tributary
21 NA
Lone Jack Rd sidewalk over
Copper Creek
22 NA
Coastal Rail Trail over Rossini
Creek
23 NA
San Elijo Ave sidewalk over
Glen Park drainage swale
24 NA
Glen Park Volleyball Court
entrance over drainage swale
25 NA
Glen Park Playground
entrance over drainage swale
26 NA
Glen Park Pavillion crossing
over drainage swale
27 NA
Oak Crest Park Pavillion to
Viewpoint trail over drainage
swale
28 NA
Oak Crest Park to
Community and Senior
Center path over drainage
swale (North)
29 NA
Oak Crest Park to
Community and Senior
Center path over drainage
swale (South)
Conventional Drainage
Fire Evac
Route
Bridge
Eligible for
HBP Local
Assistance
Program
Bridge
Eligible for
BPMP
Local
Assistance
Program Maintenance Stability
Major
Storm
Impacts
Minor
Vehicle
Damage
Major
Vehicle
Damage
Minor
Ped.

Safety
Major Ped
Safety
Condition
Score
Traffic
Score
Risk
Score
Priority
Score
Priority
Ranking
Y = 1 ; N =
0 Y/N Y/N Maint. Maint. Storm Vehicle Vehicle Ped Ped
1 N Y 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 3 2 15 8
1 N Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 2 1 18 6
1 N Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 1 1 22 5
1 N Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 2 1 18 6
1 Y Y 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 50 5 5 60 1
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
1 Y Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 20
1 Y Y 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 16
Y Y 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 4 15 8
1 Y Y 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 1 4 20
1 Y N 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 25
1 Y N 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 27
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 3 0 13 10
N N 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 20 3 3 26 3
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 27
N N 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 25
1 N N 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 20
N N 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 6 16
N N 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 29
1 Y N 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 16
N N 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 4 8 15
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 1 6 16
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
Risk Score Categories ( Yes = 1, No = 0)
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 54 of 63
Encinitas
Bridge No.

Caltrans Bridge
No. Bridge Name
B.ID.03 B.ID.01 B.ID.02
1 57C0554 Leucadia Blvd over I-5
30 NA
Community and Senior
Center to Oak Crest Park trail
over drainage swale
31 NA
Sun Vista Park path over
Encinitas Creek tributary
32 NA
Moonlight Beach Trail over
Cottonwood Creek
33 NA
Moonlight Beach Trail over
Cottonwood Creek tributary
34 NA
Leucadia Oaks park walkway
over drainage swale (West)
35 NA
Leucadia Oaks park walkway
over drainage swale (East)
36 NA
Cardiff Sports Park path over
drainage swale
37 NA
Cottonwood Creek Park to
Encinitas Blvd over
Cottonwood Creek tributary
(North)
38 NA
Cottonwood Creek Park to
Encinitas Blvd over
Cottonwood Creek tributary
(South)
39 NA
Cottonwood Creek Park trail
over drainage swale
40 NA
Cottonwood Creek Park
driveway sidewalk over
drainage swale
41 NA
Via Di Felicita sidewalk over
drainage inlet
42 NA De Felicita Trail over tributary
43 NA
Ellie's Bridge Trail over
Escondido Creek tributary
44 NA
Booker Trail over Escondido
Creek tributary
45 NA
Valleyside Ln sidewalk over
drainage swale
46 NA
Valleyside Ln sidewalk over
Escondido Creek tributary
Pedestrian
Fire Evac
Route
Bridge
Eligible for
HBP Local
Assistance
Program
Bridge
Eligible for
BPMP
Local
Assistance
Program Maintenance Stability
Major
Storm
Impacts
Minor
Vehicle
Damage
Major
Vehicle
Damage
Minor
Ped.

Safety
Major Ped
Safety
Condition
Score
Traffic
Score
Risk
Score
Priority
Score
Priority
Ranking
Y = 1 ; N =
0 Y/N Y/N Maint. Maint. Storm Vehicle Vehicle Ped Ped
Risk Score Categories ( Yes = 1, No = 0)
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 10 13
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 25 0 1 26 3
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 40 0 1 41 2
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 10 13
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 1 11 11
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
N N 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 29
N N 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 1 11 11
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
N N 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4 20
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 20
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 55 of 63
City of Encinitas – Bridge Structure Condition Assessment Report C-1 Aug. 31, 2026
Appendix C
Bridge Repairs Recommended
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 56 of 63
Encinitas Bridge
No.

Bridge
Number Bridge Name Repairs Recommended
Construction
Cost Mobilization (10%)
Contingency (50% &
BPM/HBP additional
25%)
Design &
Permitting
(20%)
Construction
Management
(20%)
Current Year
Cost Year 2 Cost Year 3 Cost Year 4 Cost Year 5 Cost Year 6 Cost Year 7 Cost Year 8 Cost Year 9 Cost Year 10 Cost 1 57C0554 Leucadia Blvd over I5
• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Barrier• Replace Sidewalk Section• Concrete Repair• Monitor Cracking $7,000 $1,000 $6,000 $2,000 $2,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 2 5570532 Requeza St over I-5
• Replace Fencing• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Barrier• Concrete Deck Seal• Repave bituminous pavement approaches $83,000 $9,000 $63,000 $17,000 $17,000 $38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 $59,000 3 570530
Mackinnon Ave over I5
• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Barrier• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Sidewalk/Gutter• Repave bituminous pavement approaches• Remove Vegetation $63,000 $7,000 $48,000 $13,000 $13,000 $29,000 $30,000 $32,000 $34,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 4 570529 Birmingham Dr over I5
• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Barrier• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Sidewalk/Gutter• Repave bituminous pavement approaches• Remove Vegetation $87,000 $9,000 $66,000 $18,000 $18,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 $59,000 $62,000 5 57C0210 Hwy 101 over San Elijo Lagoon
• Replace Barrier - Traffic• Replace Sidewalk Section• Special• Concrete Repair• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Concrete Repair• Replace Traffic Paint & Markings $10,000 $1,000 $5,000 $2,000 $2,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 $24,000 $25,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 6 57C0276
Railroad over
Encinitas Blvd
• Repaint Member • Concrete Repair• Repair erosion/undermining • Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Repaint Member $1,855,000 $186,000 $928,000 $371,000 $371,000 $3,711,000 $3,897,000 $4,092,000 $4,297,000 $4,512,000 $4,738,000 $4,975,000 $5,224,000 $5,485,000 $5,759,000 7 57C0316
La Costa Ave over
Railroad
• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Barrier• Repair/Replace Railing• Replace Traffic Paint & Markings• Re-attach/replace hardware• Repave bituminous pavement approaches• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $49,000 $5,000 $25,000 $10,000 $10,000 $99,000 $104,000 $109,000 $114,000 $120,000 $126,000 $132,000 $139,000 $146,000 $153,000 8 57C0811
Leucadia Blvd over
Encinitas Creek
• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Barrier• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Sidewalk/Gutter• Repave bituminous pavement approaches• Remove Vegetation $126,000 $13,000 $63,000 $26,000 $26,000 $254,000 $267,000 $280,000 $294,000 $309,000 $324,000 $340,000 $357,000 $375,000 $394,000 9 NA
Town Center Dr over
Encinitas Creek
tributary
• Special• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Special• Replace Fencing• Remove Vegetation• Remove Sediment/Debris• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Concrete Deck Seal• Remove Vegetation• Remove Sediment/Debris• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $393,000 $40,000 $197,000 $79,000 $79,000 $788,000 $827,000 $868,000 $911,000 $957,000 $1,005,000 $1,055,000 $1,108,000 $1,163,000 $1,221,000 10 57C0189
El Camino Real over
Encinitas Creek
• Repair Pothole• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Repair erosion/undermining • Replace Pedestrian Barrier to Current Standard $62,000 $7,000 $31,000 $13,000 $13,000 $126,000 $132,000 $139,000 $146,000 $153,000 $161,000 $169,000 $177,000 $186,000 $195,000 Projected Escalated Cost (+5% annual escalation)
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 57 of 63
Encinitas Bridge
No.

Bridge
Number Bridge Name Repairs Recommended
Construction
Cost Mobilization (10%)
Contingency (50% &
BPM/HBP additional
25%)
Design &
Permitting
(20%)
Construction
Management
(20%)
Current Year
Cost Year 2 Cost Year 3 Cost Year 4 Cost Year 5 Cost Year 6 Cost Year 7 Cost Year 8 Cost Year 9 Cost Year 10 Cost Projected Escalated Cost (+5% annual escalation)
11 NA Lone Jack Rd over
Copper Creek (North)
• Remove Vegetation• Remove Sediment/Debris• Repair/Replace Railing Post• Concrete Deck Seal• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $19,000 $2,000 $10,000 $4,000 $4,000 $39,000 $41,000 $43,000 $45,000 $47,000 $49,000 $51,000 $54,000 $57,000 $60,000 12 57C0569
Lone Jack Rd over
Copper Creek (South)
• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Replace Barrier - Traffic• Repair/Replace Railing Post• Remove Sediment/Debris• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $27,000 $3,000 $14,000 $6,000 $6,000 $56,000 $59,000 $62,000 $65,000 $68,000 $71,000 $75,000 $79,000 $83,000 $87,000 13 NA
B Street over
Cottonwood Creek
(South)
• Replace Barrier - Pedestrian• Repair Culvert Joint• Remove Sediment/Debris• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $30,000 $3,000 $15,000 $6,000 $6,000 $60,000 $63,000 $66,000 $69,000 $72,000 $76,000 $80,000 $84,000 $88,000 $92,000 14 NA
B Street over
Cottonwood Creek
(North)
• Remove Sediment/Debris• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Concrete Repair• Remove Vegetation• Repair Fencing• Special• Remove Sediment/Debris $95,000 $10,000 $48,000 $19,000 $19,000 $191,000 $201,000 $211,000 $222,000 $233,000 $245,000 $257,000 $270,000 $284,000 $298,000 15 NA 3rd St over
Cottonwood Creek
• Remove Sediment/Debris $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 $14,000 $15,000 16 NA Hwy 101 over Cottonwood Creek • Concrete Repair • Concrete Spall/Delam - Other • Remove Sediment/Debris
$16,000 $2,000 $8,000 $4,000 $4,000 $34,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 17 NA
Encinitas Blvd over
Cottonwood Creek
Culvert
• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Concrete Repair• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Repair erosion/undermining • Special• Remove Sediment/Debris $148,000 $15,000 $74,000 $30,000 $30,000 $297,000 $312,000 $328,000 $344,000 $361,000 $379,000 $398,000 $418,000 $439,000 $461,000 18 NA
Brookside Lane over
Copper Creek
• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Remove Vegetation• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Repair Culvert Joint• Remove Sediment/Debris $43,000 $5,000 $22,000 $9,000 $9,000 $88,000 $92,000 $97,000 $102,000 $107,000 $112,000 $118,000 $124,000 $130,000 $137,000 19 NA
Lone Jack Rd
driveway over Copper
Creek
• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Repair Culvert Joint• Remove Sediment/Debris $17,000 $2,000 $9,000 $4,000 $4,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 20 NA
Lone Jack Rd over
Escondido Creek
tributary
• Repair/Replace Railing Post• Remove Sediment/Debris• Concrete Spall/Delam - Other• Remove Sediment/Debris $37,000 $4,000 $19,000 $8,000 $8,000 $76,000 $80,000 $84,000 $88,000 $92,000 $97,000 $102,000 $107,000 $112,000 $118,000 21 NA
Lone Jack Rd
sidewalk over Copper
Creek
• Re-attach/replace hardware• Repair/Replace Railing• Remove Sediment/Debris• Repair erosion/undermining • Evaluation / Analysis / Study $23,000 $3,000 $12,000 $5,000 $5,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 $59,000 $62,000 $65,000 $68,000 $71,000 $75,000 22 NA Coastal Rail Trail over
Rossini Creek
• Remove Sediment/Debris• Repaint Member $120,000 $12,000 $60,000 $24,000 $24,000 $240,000 $252,000 $265,000 $278,000 $292,000 $307,000 $322,000 $338,000 $355,000 $373,000 23 NA
San Elijo Ave
sidewalk over Glen
Park drainage swale
• Repair/Replace Railing• Timber Deck Replacement• Re-attach/replace hardware• Remove Sediment/Debris• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $17,000 $2,000 $9,000 $4,000 $4,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 24 NA
Glen Park Volleyball Court entrance over
drainage swale
• Repaint Member • Re-attach/replace hardware• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Replace Pedestrian Barrier to Current Standard $12,000 $2,000 $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 $30,000 $32,000 $34,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 25 NA
Glen Park Playground
entrance over
drainage swale
• Repaint Member • Re-attach/replace hardware• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Replace Pedestrian Barrier to Current Standard $12,000 $2,000 $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 $30,000 $32,000 $34,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 58 of 63
Encinitas Bridge
No.

Bridge
Number Bridge Name Repairs Recommended
Construction
Cost Mobilization (10%)
Contingency (50% &
BPM/HBP additional
25%)
Design &
Permitting
(20%)
Construction
Management
(20%)
Current Year
Cost Year 2 Cost Year 3 Cost Year 4 Cost Year 5 Cost Year 6 Cost Year 7 Cost Year 8 Cost Year 9 Cost Year 10 Cost Projected Escalated Cost (+5% annual escalation)
26 NA
Glen Park Pavillion
crossing over
drainage swale
• Repaint Member • Re-attach/replace hardware• Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Replace Pedestrian Barrier to Current Standard $12,000 $2,000 $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 $30,000 $32,000 $34,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 27 NA
Oak Crest Park
Pavillion to Viewpoint
trail over drainage
swale
• Timber Deck Replacement• Re-attach/replace hardware• Repair/Replace Railing Post• Remove Vegetation• Remove Sediment/Debris• Repair/Replace Railing Post $8,000 $1,000 $4,000 $2,000 $2,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 $24,000 $25,000 $26,000 28 NA
Oak Crest Park to
Community and
Senior Center path
over drainage swale
(North)
• Repair/Replace Railing• Re-attach/replace hardware• Remove Sediment/Debris $5,000 $1,000 $3,000 $1,000 $1,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 $14,000 $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 29 NA
Oak Crest Park to
Community and
Senior Center path
over drainage swale
(South)
• Concrete Repair• Re-attach/replace hardware• Remove Sediment/Debris $5,000 $1,000 $3,000 $1,000 $1,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 $14,000 $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 30 NA
Community and
Senior Center to Oak
Crest Park trail over
drainage swale
• Re-attach/replace hardware• Repaint Member • Evaluation / Analysis / Study• Replace Pedestrian Barrier to Current Standard $17,000 $2,000 $9,000 $4,000 $4,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 31 NA
Sun Vista Park path
over Encinitas Creek
tributary
• Repaint Member • Evaluation / Analysis / Study $23,000 $3,000 $12,000 $5,000 $5,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 $59,000 $62,000 $65,000 $68,000 $71,000 $75,000 32 NA
Moonlight Beach Trail
over Cottonwood
Creek
• Repaint Member • Repair/Replace Railing• Re-attach/replace hardware• Special• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $73,000 $8,000 $37,000 $15,000 $15,000 $148,000 $155,000 $163,000 $171,000 $180,000 $189,000 $198,000 $208,000 $218,000 $229,000 33 NA
Moonlight Beach Trail
over Cottonwood
Creek tributary
• Remove Vegetation• Remove Sediment/Debris• Re-attach/replace hardware• Special• Timber Deck Replacement $13,000 $2,000 $7,000 $3,000 $3,000 $28,000 $29,000 $30,000 $32,000 $34,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 34 NA
Leucadia Oaks park
walkway over
drainage swale
(West)
• Regrade Approach• Remove Sediment/Debris• Timber Deck Replacement $18,000 $2,000 $9,000 $4,000 $4,000 $37,000 $39,000 $41,000 $43,000 $45,000 $47,000 $49,000 $51,000 $54,000 $57,000 35 NA
Leucadia Oaks park
walkway over
drainage swale (East)
• Remove Sediment/Debris• Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Sidewalk/Gutter $3,000 $1,000 $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 $14,000 $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 36 NA
Cardiff Sports Park
path over drainage
swale
• Re-attach/replace hardware $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000 $14,000 $15,000 37 NA
Cottonwood Creek
Park to Encinitas Blvd
over Cottonwood
Creek tributary
(North)
• Repaint Member • Remove Sediment/Debris• Remove Sediment/Debris• Re-attach/replace hardware• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $22,000 $3,000 $11,000 $5,000 $5,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 $59,000 $62,000 $65,000 $68,000 $71,000 38 NA
Cottonwood Creek
Park to Encinitas Blvd
over Cottonwood
Creek tributary
(South)
• Repaint Member • Remove Sediment/Debris• Remove Sediment/Debris• Re-attach/replace hardware• Evaluation / Analysis / Study $22,000 $3,000 $11,000 $5,000 $5,000 $46,000 $48,000 $50,000 $53,000 $56,000 $59,000 $62,000 $65,000 $68,000 $71,000 39 NA
Cottonwood Creek
Park trail over
drainage swale
• Repair erosion/undermining • Remove Sediment/Debris• Remove Sediment/Debris $9,000 $1,000 $5,000 $2,000 $2,000 $19,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 $24,000 $25,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 40 NA
Cottonwood Creek
Park driveway
sidewalk over
drainage swale
• Repair erosion/undermining • Remove Sediment/Debris• Remove Sediment/Debris $9,000 $1,000 $5,000 $2,000 $2,000 $19,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 $24,000 $25,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 41 NA
Via Di Felicita sidewalk over drainage inlet
• Repair/Replace Railing• Special• Timber Deck Replacement $12,000 $2,000 $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 $29,000 $30,000 $32,000 $34,000 $36,000 $38,000 $40,000 2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 59 of 63
Encinitas Bridge
No.

Clean any exposed rebar, apply a
corrosion inhibitor, and patch with
an approved high-strength repair
mortar
Normal - $600 / EA Assumes a typical standard spall averaging 6"- 12" in diameter that exposes rebar
Timber Deck Replacement Remove existing damaged or rotten timber deck boards and install new
deck boards with fasteners
Normal - $50 / SF Assumes specific boards are swapped out for new boards
Repair/Replace Railing Post Remove existing damaged or rotten posts and repair or replace.

Light - $50 / LF
Normal - $200 / LF
Concrete Deck Seal Clean the concrete surface and
apply sealer.

Normal - $8 / SF Deck area is taken as the bridge length by bridge width plus the approach slab area
Concrete Repair General repair in miscellaneous
concrete elements. Includes surface
preparation, removing deteriorated
material, and applying patch
Normal - $150 / SF
Concrete Spall/Delam Repair - Sidewalk/Gutter Chip out loose, delaminated concrete on the sidewalk/gutter
down to sound substrate. Clean any
exposed rebar, apply a corrosion
inhibitor, and patch with an
approved high-strength repair mortar
Normal - $300 / EA Assumes a typical standard spall averaging 6"- 12" in diameter that exposes rebar
Evaluation / Analysis / Study Conduct an engineering assessment to determine the adequacy of
existing conditions or determine the
root cause of an issue
Light - $2,500 / LS
Normal - $5,000 / LS
Heavy - $10,000 / LS
Pricing is proportionate to the approximate
level of engineering effort required and
complexity of analysis.

Monitor Cracking Establish baseline measurements
and log the change over a period to
check for active movement
Normal - $5,000 / LS
Re-attach/replace hardware Tighten or replace missing and corroded fasteners, bolts, nails
Light - $100 / EA
Normal - $250 / EA
Remove Sediment/Debris Clear accumulated sand, soil,
and/or trash from structure
Light - $2,000 / LS
Normal - $10,000 / LS
Assumes light debris is minimal accumulation
consisting primarily of small brush, loose trash,
or similar that can be cleared with hand tools.

Normal debris is considered sediment build up
and larger debris that would utilize special
equipment.

Remove Vegetation Trim or remove brush growing near
structure
Light - $1,500 / LS
Normal - $5,000 / LS
Heavy - $25,000 / LS
Assumes light vegetation is routine
maintenance consisting of trimming, mowing
and removing overgrown vegetation. Normal is
assumed to be more intense and dense growth
over larger areas.

Repaint Member Prepare the surface of the member
to remove failed coating and apply
new paint
Normal - $100 / SF
Heavy - $150 / SF
Repair erosion/undermining Place riprap or compacted fill at abutments or footings to prevent
future erosion
Light - $5,000 / LS
Normal - $10,000 / LS
Heavy - $50,000 / LS
Light is minor erosion typically on pedestrian
bridges that require minor amounts of fill to fix.

Heavy requires large areas of riprap for
abutment slopes
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 62 of 63
Repair Task Description of Work Required Cost Information Cost Assumptions Repair Fencing Remove damaged section of fence
and splice in new fence, tightening
tension wires
Normal - $75 / LF
Repair Pothole Remove water and debris from
pothole. Place hot or cold patch mix
material and compact.

Normal - $1,000 / EA
Concrete Spall/Delam - Other Chip out loose, delaminated concrete on the element down to
sound substrate. Clean any exposed
rebar, apply a corrosion inhibitor,
and patch with an approved highstrength repair mortar
Normal - $3,000 / EA
Heavy - $5,000 / EA
Assumes a typical standard spall averaging 6"-
12" in diameter that exposes rebar
Repair/Replace Railing Repair localized damage on existing railing or replace with new railing
sections
Light - $50 / LF
Normal - $200 / LF
Repave bituminous pavement approaches Clean and mill existing surface, repair any base failures, apply a new
asphalt mix overlay
Normal - $20 / SF Assumes 25' approach length on either side of bridge
Replace Barrier - Pedestrian Remove damaged section of barrier and install new barrier
Normal - $250 / LF
Replace Barrier - Traffic Remove damaged section of barrier and install new barrier
Normal - $500 / LF
Replace Fencing Remove existing damaged fencing
sections and install new fencing
Normal - $150 / LF
Replace Sidewalk Section Saw cut and remove damaged
sections. Recompact the subgrade,
set forms, place reinforcement, and
pour new concrete finished to match
existing sidewalk sections
Normal - $50 / SF
Replace Traffic Paint & Markings Restripe faded traffic marking and replace equipment like lane
reflectors
Normal - $75 / LF
Regrade Approach Excavate or fill the structure
approach to fix settlement issues
Normal - $10,000 / LS
Repair Culvert Joint Clean out failed joint material and reseal
Normal - $10,000 / EA
Special Custom scope of work addressing a
unique issue or non standard repair
Varies from $2,500 -
$20,000
Assumptions are listed in the notes of each
specific repair
Replace Pedestrian Barrier to Current Standard Remove existing pedestrian barrier and replace with a code compliant
new pedestrian barrier
Normal - $300 / LF
2026-09-09 Item #12B Page 63 of 63

Encinitas City CouncilSeptember 9, 2026

Encinitas City Council
September 9, 2026