Barfield Bridge repair underway

— Beginning this week, the N. Barfield Bridge will be closed to through traffic for major repairs. This closure will require detour of traffic traveling on Barfield north of Collier and any traffic traveling easterly from Bald Eagle.

Signs will direct traffic along these detours. Access for local traffic will be allowed at all times during the closure. This bridge closure will continue for at least two to three weeks.

© 2013 marconews.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 21

marcofriend writes:

This is a new bridge. Why is there nothing explaining what type of repairs it needs and why it will take 3 weeks before it is open for traffic? City has kept this very quiet until the very day they closed the bridge.

marco826 writes:

As a citizen of Marco, you are not privy to this information. Only the elite owners of our tax dollars are allowed to know...

happyhorowitz34145 writes:

The repairs are due to the construction company that the city first hired to build the bridge.
Poor attempts of trying to bond hot top to concrete on the approach ramps, shoddy concrete work causing spawling to occur and expose rebar, concrete sidewalks settling or breakin apart, and erosion on the sides of the sidewalks due to poor planning and engineering.
All this at a cost to taxpayers at a cost of 100K plus.
The seawall at the base of the bridge is also being repaired due to poor work.
Also, Barfield Dr. in the original bid (according to the city website)was to never be closed to thru traffic dduring the repairs.

marcofriend writes:

in response to happyhorowitz34145:

The repairs are due to the construction company that the city first hired to build the bridge.
Poor attempts of trying to bond hot top to concrete on the approach ramps, shoddy concrete work causing spawling to occur and expose rebar, concrete sidewalks settling or breakin apart, and erosion on the sides of the sidewalks due to poor planning and engineering.
All this at a cost to taxpayers at a cost of 100K plus.
The seawall at the base of the bridge is also being repaired due to poor work.
Also, Barfield Dr. in the original bid (according to the city website)was to never be closed to thru traffic dduring the repairs.

Thanks for the information. No wonder the City doesn't want to be transparent with this project. It would be nice if they explained what went wrong and how in the future they will correct their procedures so major construction projects will not be completed using these shoddy techniques.

ajm3s writes:

in response to happyhorowitz34145:

The repairs are due to the construction company that the city first hired to build the bridge.
Poor attempts of trying to bond hot top to concrete on the approach ramps, shoddy concrete work causing spawling to occur and expose rebar, concrete sidewalks settling or breakin apart, and erosion on the sides of the sidewalks due to poor planning and engineering.
All this at a cost to taxpayers at a cost of 100K plus.
The seawall at the base of the bridge is also being repaired due to poor work.
Also, Barfield Dr. in the original bid (according to the city website)was to never be closed to thru traffic dduring the repairs.

Excellent update. And quite informative.

For comparison.....

Here is the official posting of the repair to the bridge and interestingly it was posted on the same date the repairs begin:

http://www.cityofmarcoisland.com/inde...

JDonMarco writes:

Not so Marco friend. There was a story about closing it on the Marco radio station local news a couple of days before it closed and I think I read it on Bill Mcmellen's e mail a few days before hand too.

1Paradiselost writes:

Nice to let us know how they are spending our tax dollars!

WMissow writes:

Just for a moment. Tell me who was in charge of building this bridge, just a few years ago?

Could it be our friend R.J.? The champion of asbestos and sewer construction?

26yearsonmarco writes:

in response to happyhorowitz34145:

The repairs are due to the construction company that the city first hired to build the bridge.
Poor attempts of trying to bond hot top to concrete on the approach ramps, shoddy concrete work causing spawling to occur and expose rebar, concrete sidewalks settling or breakin apart, and erosion on the sides of the sidewalks due to poor planning and engineering.
All this at a cost to taxpayers at a cost of 100K plus.
The seawall at the base of the bridge is also being repaired due to poor work.
Also, Barfield Dr. in the original bid (according to the city website)was to never be closed to thru traffic dduring the repairs.

None of the problems you are sighting are “Structural”, but rather a result of poor inspection practices during the construction process, which I assume falls on the shoulders of someone working for the City.

The same non-structural problems exist with the Smokehouse Bay Bridge which “We the People” are about to spend over $11M to replace it.

Even if it cost ten times as much to repair the Smokehouse Bay Bridge that is being spent on the Barfield bridge, “We the People” will save $10M, and not be taking a detour for over one year.

WMissow writes:

26,

Could you explain what poor inspection is as it requires closing the bridge for 3 to 4 weeks?

I hope it doesn't mean that they did not take enough pictures during construction ;-).

Something is wrong that it will take that long to repair, don't you think?

marcofriend writes:

in response to JDonMarco:

Not so Marco friend. There was a story about closing it on the Marco radio station local news a couple of days before it closed and I think I read it on Bill Mcmellen's e mail a few days before hand too.

While I did not hear the radio announcement, I did read Mr McMullan's Eye on Marco and it basically took me to the article in the local papers, which didn't say what was wrong, only that maintenance needed to be done and it was to be closed for 2-3 weeks.
I was aware it was closing, but I'd like to know why a new bridge has this many problems and needs to be closed for so long. There is something wrong with this picture.

naples_rocket writes:

get rid of this bridge! It's completelly unnecassary

26yearsonmarco writes:

in response to WMissow:

26,

Could you explain what poor inspection is as it requires closing the bridge for 3 to 4 weeks?

I hope it doesn't mean that they did not take enough pictures during construction ;-).

Something is wrong that it will take that long to repair, don't you think?

I have not seen a scope of work for the project, and base my assumption on the above remarks by happyhorwitz34145.

For example, the “shoddy concrete work” is a result of the rebar not being coated, and set to high in the concrete. The concrete coverage over steel rebar is a minimum of 1.5 inches to prevent salt from coming in contact with the steel which causes the steel to rust and swell resulting in spawling.

This item, and the others mentioned are a result of “shoddy inspection”, and could have been prevented.

2themoon writes:

The parallels between this city govt and the Obama administration is uncanny. Coverups, misinfomation, pass the buck, tax and spend, intimidate opponents...just uncanny..

2themoon writes:

Although with the addition of Petrricia, Hoenicker and Sarcher on council i do believe we are moving in a more 'transparent' direction.

WMissow writes:

Who was responsible for the bridge inspections during the original process? Is it anybody who is still working for the city? What company did the original construction? Let us make sure this does not happen again with the bridge on Collier when it comes down to it.

marcofriend writes:

in response to WMissow:

Who was responsible for the bridge inspections during the original process? Is it anybody who is still working for the city? What company did the original construction? Let us make sure this does not happen again with the bridge on Collier when it comes down to it.

Not sure who did the original work, but we can all feel good to know that QE (Quality Enterprises) is on sight. I saw two of their trucks on the bridge this afternoon.

2themoon writes:

did I actually see in the paper that Rony Joel is on the Planning board or some such board???
What are we doing here folks?

happyhorowitz34145 writes:

in response to 26yearsonmarco:

None of the problems you are sighting are “Structural”, but rather a result of poor inspection practices during the construction process, which I assume falls on the shoulders of someone working for the City.

The same non-structural problems exist with the Smokehouse Bay Bridge which “We the People” are about to spend over $11M to replace it.

Even if it cost ten times as much to repair the Smokehouse Bay Bridge that is being spent on the Barfield bridge, “We the People” will save $10M, and not be taking a detour for over one year.

Actually Mr. 26, the "spawling" that has occured and is occuring is a severe structual problem.
The now "concerned" settlement of the bridge abutment on the north side with the possible placement of pilings is a severe structual problem, starting with the engineering design that was accepted by the "city" and built by a "not so good construction company" as quote by the Phoney PHD!

WizeOlMarco writes:

2themoon writes:
The parallels between this city govt and the Obama administration is uncanny. Coverups, misinfomation, pass the buck, tax and spend, intimidate opponents...just uncanny..

What are we doing here folks?

Listening to conservative radio. Perhaps.

26yearsonmarco writes:

in response to happyhorowitz34145:

Actually Mr. 26, the "spawling" that has occured and is occuring is a severe structual problem.
The now "concerned" settlement of the bridge abutment on the north side with the possible placement of pilings is a severe structual problem, starting with the engineering design that was accepted by the "city" and built by a "not so good construction company" as quote by the Phoney PHD!

Like I said before, I did not see the scope of work, or inspect the problems, so I assume you are correct, and have a similar construction background to mine.

The Devil is always in the details, and if we have people doing inspections who are not familiar with them, we will continue to see issues with City projects as simple as new sidewalks.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features