Fort Myers Beach, Lovers Key residents flood Big Carlos Bridge meeting
Nearly 500 islanders filled Bay Oaks Rec Center Thursday night to peruse Lee County plans for the Big Carlos Pass bridge.
The county had both a virtual tour of the alternative options proposed and two to-scale models of a new 24-foot bridge and a new 60-foot bridge, but many people came to the meeting with their minds made up.
A plethora of residents from the south end came to the meeting bearing signs – “Refurb it” or “Repair not Replace” or “24 feet.”
“At the southern end, there are four quaint bridges,” said Tina Galganske of Marina Towers, speaking of the bridges that connect the small islands of Lovers Key to Bonita Springs and Fort Myers Beach. “We have beautiful water, it’s picturesque. We want our residential bridge.”
Galganske was one of many who oppose the county’s taller option.
Lee County is working on its project development and environmental study for a Big Carlos Bridge repair or replace project. Part of that study process is obtaining public input. It has three main options up for debate: a “no-build” refurbishment of the current bridge; a new bridge of the same 24.5-foot height; and a new 60-foot bridge. Both new bridge options would come with a 10-foot multi-use path on one side, a 6-foot sidewalk on the other and bike lanes on the road.
The Big Carlos Bridge was built in 1965, in a time before modern construction standards and practices, said Randy Cerchie, the county’s Director of Transportation. He called the 53-year-old bridge “fracture critical” and “scour critical.” Bridge scour is the removal of the sediments around the bridge pilings by saltwater, which compromises the foundation of the bridge.
“With the condition it’s in now, it takes $180,000 a year to maintain,” Cerchie said.
Big Carlos is a concrete bridge, not a steel bridge, and when it was built people were using “regular” rebar, Cerchie said. Now, rebar is coated with rubber to protect it from moisture.
According to the county’s professional engineering estimate, refurbishing the current bridge could extend its lifetime about 20 years, and then it would have to be replaced.
Refurbishing would cost an estimated $29.4 million for the “initial capital investment,” according to a handout from the county. The new bridge of the same height would be between $60.5 and $60.7 million, and the 60-foot bridge would cost and estimated $48.1 million. In either new bridge option, the new bridge would be built alongside the current bridge, so the county would have to decide to build to the Gulfside or bayside of the current bridge footprint.
The county’s handout on construction costs also shows figures totaling the bridge options’ “lifecycle” maintenance and repair costs to the capital costs. The new bridge options have a 75-year lifecycle.
According to the cost evaluation matrix, the “total cost,” or the capital investment plus 75 years of maintenance and operations estimates are: $167.4 to $167.6 million for the 24.5-foot drawbridge and $87.7 million for the 60-foot bridge. The refurbish capital cost plus an additional 20 years of maintenance would cost an estimated $40.2 million.
Assistant County Manager Doug Meurer said building a new drawbridge, even at the same height, would cost more because of the mechanical equipment needed for the drawbridge and staffing the drawbridge with someone there to operate it.
“The equipment is expensive, and it’s expensive to operate and maintain,” he said.
Meurer conceded that some operational costs could probably be cut down if that option was selected, as modern technology can allow drawbridge operation remotely. The current bridge’s age prevents that, however – it needs to have someone on site lifting and lowering it with more scrutiny, he said.
The county meeting included a number of graphics, virtual views and models to help residents compare the different options. It provided feedback surveys to collect opinions, too.
Meurer said it will take until the end of 2018 to complete all the requirements of the PD&E study, including the environmental impacts study, which is still ongoing.
“It takes a while to condense the info from here,” Cerchie said.
It will still take likely until Fall 2019 before any construction will begin.
For Bob Miniger, the potential harm to the local wildlife is one of his top concerns. He’s opposed to building a new bridge even at the same height and wants to see the current bridge refurbished.
“What’s at stake is the environment,” he said. “We see manatees, dolphins, ospreys, bald eagles. If we disrupt that, we’re deficient.”
Miniger, a Marina Towers resident, has a lanai that faces the bridge. Recently he had to replace some windows in his condo – and he was tasked to use a special kind of glass that safely prevents turtles from being attracted to lights inside the condo.
If he had to use “turtle glass,” he argues the headlights on a tall bridge would be a danger for sea turtles.
“This town is very receptive to environment issues,” he said. “Let’s protect what we have.”
Cerchie said the impacts of headlights shouldn’t change from what people experience now, since the bridge is aligned with Estero Boulevard and not “pointing” at a particular condo tower. There would also be 4-foot barriers between the roadway and the sidewalks on the bridge.
Bob Galvanoni of Carlos Point said he supports a new bridge, as long as it stays at the same height. It’s a popular recreational tool, as many people walk, bike, run and fish off of it. He’d rather not see the county spend money on having an on-site person to man the drawbridge, but he was pleased to see the county had kept the beginning of the bridge from impacting his or his neighbors’ driveways.
“I’m happy they’ve taken us into consideration,” he said. “I support a new bridge, but the same height. I see a lot of people fishing there. Fort Myers Beach is about recreation and relaxing.”
A tall bridge would have the biggest view impact on Island’s End III, a short condominium tower just to the east of the current bridge, Island’s End II residents on the west side whose lanais face the bridge, and to Lovers Key Beach Club and Island Beach Club, two towers on the east side of the bridge on Lovers Key. A 60-foot apex would mean the bridge ramp near Island’s End would increase by 15 to 20 feet in elevation above what’s currently there.
Although a majority of residents who attended the meeting oppose the 60-foot option, not everyone was against it.
Joshua Tuyls, a Fort Myers Beach resident and owner of Flipper’s on the Bay restaurant on Lovers Key, thought the county’s presentation of the issue and the options was “excellent.” He hasn’t reached a final conviction, but leans toward the 60-foot option.
“The economic benefit is it’s cheaper,” he said. “From a boater’s standpoint, it doesn’t matter how high it is. The water is so shallow I’d need a bigger boat to care.”
For Joe and Gloria Wittig, Island Beach Club residents, a tall bridge would mean they’d lose even more of their view from their second-floor condo. They’re already looking toward the bridge.
Joe Wittig said he and his wife, who is a board member of their condominium association, both support a new bridge at 24.5 feet that would be built on the Gulfside of the current bridge.
“It protects the aquatic preserve and our property values,” he said.
The Wittigs also like to walk the bridge for exercise, so a tall option would be an impediment for them, he said.
“The county should be facilitating (resident’s) quality of life and not putting in a bridge that would detract from that quality of life,” he said.