Citywide Bridge Structure
Condition Assessment &
10-year Capital Improvement Plan
Item 12B
September 9, 2026
R e c o m men ded A c ti o n
Receive and file the FY 2025-26 Bridge Structure Condition Assessment (WC26B) report and presentation.
2 P r o j e c t O v e r vi e w
1. Evaluate inventory of all bridges within
the City
2. Document current condition of bridges
and develop repair recommendations
3. Prioritize repairs
4. Prepare cost estimates
5. Develop a 10-year Capital Improvement
Plan
6. Provide guidance for potential funding
opportunities
7. Update City GIS data and bridge
inventory
3 C i ty S tr u c tu res I n v e n to r y
4 Conventional Bridges
9 total
Storm Drain
Culvert Structures
11 total
Park & Trail
Pedestrian Bridges
26 total
46 Bridges
5 I n s p e c ti o n P r o g r a m
6 C o m m o n D e fi c i e n c i e s
7 Concrete Spalls Timber
Deterioration
Vegetation/ Debris
Removal
B r i d g e C o n d i ti o n S u m m a ry
8 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
Number of Bridges
Condition Number
Pedestrian
Culvert
Conventional Bridge
P o o r C o n d i ti o n B r i d g e s
9 Coast Hwy 101 over San Elijo Lagoon
• Column cracking
• Deck and soffit corrosion and
concrete delamination
• Sidewalk and Parapet
deterioration
Leucadia Oaks Ped Bridge
• Timber beams show significant
rotting
• Settlement at abutments
“Poor condition”: primary structural components are still sound, with some components starting to show signs of deterioration. Bridge is still safe for use and not in danger of collapse.
P r i o r i ti z a ti o n M e th o do l o gy
10 Priority Score =
Likelihood of Failure (LOF) +
Consequence of Failure (COF)
P r i o r i ti z a ti o n M e th o do l o gy – L i k e l i h o o d o f F a i l u r e S c o r e 11 Criteria LOF
Score Criteria LOF Score
Lowest Condition Rating =
Satisfactory or better 0
Bridge Railing or Channel Rating =
Satisfactory or better 0
Lowest Condition Rating = Fair 10 Bridge Railing or Channel Rating = Fair 5 Lowest Condition Rating = Poor 40 Bridge Railing or Channel Rating = Poor 10 Lowest Condition Rating = Serious 55 Bridge Railing or Channel Rating = Serious 20
Lowest Condition, Bridge Railing or Channel Ratings = Serious or worse: LOF Score = 80 Priority Score = Likelihood of Failure (LOF) + Consequence of Failure (COF) P r i o r i ti z a ti o n M e th o do l o gy - C o n s e q ue nce o f F a i l u r e S c o r e 12 Priority Score = Likelihood of Failure (LOF) + Consequence of Failure (COF) Consequence of Failure (COF) = ∑ Traffic Impact Scores + ∑ Risk Scores P r i o r i ti z a ti o n M e th o do l o gy – C O F Tr a ffi c I m p a c t S c o r e 13 Consequence of Failure (COF) = ∑ Traffic Impact Scores + ∑ Risk Scores 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
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Detour Length
Bridge Lies on FER Scoring
Value
Yes 3
No 0
Alternate Route Scoring
Value
Yes 0
No 4
Fire Evacuation Route (FER) Alternate Route for Ped Bridges P r i o r i ti z a ti o n M e th o do l o gy – C O F R i s k S c o r e 14 Consequence of Failure (COF) = ∑ Traffic Impact Scores + ∑ Risk Scores Risk Condition Scoring
Category Risk Value
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 B r i d g e P r i o r i ty S c o r e s
15 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 0 10 20 30 40 50
Priority Score
Bridge Number
High Priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority
Culverts Pedestrian Structures
Conventional
Bridges
16 High Priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority
1 0 Ye a r P l a n D e v e l o p men t
17 • Address high priority bridges within first 5 years • Group similar projects types together
• Cost Assumptions
• Based on scope of work for each project type
• Escalation costs incorporated for each future year
R e c o m men ded P r o j e c ts – 1 0 Ye a r P l a n
18 • Hwy 101 San Elijo Lagoon Bridge Rehabilitation
• I-5 Crossing Bridges
• Leucadia Oaks Westerly Pedestrian Bridge – Timber Repairs • Town Center Drive Rehabilitation
• Coastal Culvert Repairs
✓
R e c o m men ded F e d e ra l F u n d i n g O p p o r tu ni ti e s to P u r s u e 19 1) Railing Repairs for I-5 Crossing Bridges utilizing the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program (BPMP)
• 20% Local Match requirement
• Bridges involved:
• Requeza St
• Mackinnon Ave
• Birmingham Dr
2) Town Center Drive Structural Repairs utilizing the
Highway Bridge Program (HBP)
• 20% Local Match requirement
10 -Ye ar P l a n S u mma ry
20 Total 10 Year Cost Estimate: $5.91M
$-
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
Year 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5Year 6Year 7Year 8Year 9
Year 10
Cost ($x,000)
Recommended 10-Year Bridge Capital Program
Hwy 101 San Elijo Bridge
Culvert
Pedestrian
Conventional Bridge
K e y Ta k e awa ys
21 • Out of the 46 structures, 2 are currently in “Poor” condition. • The Highway 101 over the San Elijo Lagoon is the highest priority structure and is already programmed for rehabilitation with Federal Funds. • All remaining structures are in Fair to Good condition with few issues.
R e c o m men ded A c ti o n
Receive and file the FY 2025-26 Bridge Structure Condition Assessment (WC26B) Report and Presentation.
22