Phase 1: Alternatives Review

Phase 1 of the Warren Bridge Multimodal Project involves looking at viable alternatives that improve crossing conditions for cars, bikes and pedestrians. Working with stakeholders, the City’s Complete Streets Committee, City Council and the general public, we’ll weigh everyone’s needs and preferences with engineering and cost practicalities.

PROJECT NEED

While the Warren Avenue Bridge is the major connection between east and west Bremerton, its pedestrian and bicycle facilities are substandard.

• At 3.5’ wide, current walkways do not meet minimum ADA requirements and are too narrow for wheelchairs and pedestrians to safely pass

• With no bike lanes, cyclists are forced to contend with high-speed traffic or use walkways

Improvements are also important because the bridge:

• Is a central link in Bremerton’s Bridge-to-Bridge urban trail system

• Needs a pedestrian and bicycle connection to be consistent with the City’s comprehensive and non-motorized transportation plans

• Provides access to facilities including Olympic College, healthcare and social services, Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS), and the ferry terminal

PROJECT INTENT

To add ADA-accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities where none currently exist.

Other improvements may include lighting and other features to enhance traffic safety and aesthetics.

FUNDING

The current available budget for design and construction is $26.5M, which includes:

• A $1.5M Washington State grant to design the project, including preliminary engineering and permitting, was awarded to the City in 2020

• $25M in construction funding, secured through the Moving Ahead Washington funding package was approved during the 2022 legislative session

Alternative Screening Process

Arriving at a preferred alternative will be the result of a series of screenings and evaluations that will successively reduce the number of alternatives that move forward. This screening process includes input from the stakeholder group as well as the public.

Warren Avenue Bridge Alternatives

The following alternatives were developed through a review of existing planning documents, input from the Washington State Department of Transportation and stakeholders. Elven alternatives were identified and evaluated using the alternative screening process. The alternatives are summarized in the table below.

Click on the image to display full-screen.

Initial Screening (Level 1)

The first step in screening the alternatives is completing a fatal flaw analysis. There were two identified fatal flaw categories for this project, structural and maintenance access. Each category is discussed in further detail below with an explanation of the features for a particular alternative that resulted in a fatal flaw determination.

Structural Fatal Flaws

The Warren Avenue Bridge Pedestrian Improvements project proposes to modify the existing Warren Avenue bridge, therefore there are limits to the amount of weight that can be added to the bridge structure. If an alternative exceeds the allowable amount of additional weight (capped at 10%), it would require a major retrofit. This retrofit would double or triple (or more) the project cost, therefore any alternative that exceeds the weight requirement is determined to be infeasible and not considered for further evaluation.

Maintenance Access Fatal Flaws

The Warren Avenue Bridge is currently inspected using a “Under Bridge Inspection Truck” or “UBIT.” The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) uses UBIT trucks throughout the state to perform periodic inspections, maintenance, and repairs.

Click Here for a video demonstration of WSDOT deploying a UBIT.

An alternate method of inspection is by the use of a “rope access team”. These rope access teams will repel using climbing ropes to gain access to parts of a bridge that are not accessible by UBIT truck. These types of inspections are very uncommon but typical for steel bridges that are very tall. While the Warren Avenue bridge does have a steel main span, the support columns under the bridge are concrete and do not require frequent inspection access.

Through many discussions with WSDOT during the development of the feasibility and alternatives analysis, it was determined that alternatives that require the use of a rope access team were not feasible as they would put a safety burden on WSDOT for future inspections.

After removing fatally flawed alternatives, the following seven alternatives remained.

Click on the image to display full-screen.

Alternatives Evaluation(Level 2)

Community and Agency Feedback

The project team identified the following screening criteria through a comprehensive coordination process with WSDOT’s Office of Equity and Civil Rights (OECR), the City’s ADA committee, and a public survey completed in April of 2023.

Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) provided guidance on meeting accessibility (ADA) requirements:

• Federal ADA regulations require projects to remove barriers and to bring systems into compliance.

• City requested clarification on alternatives that leave one side unimproved, which currently does not meet ADA requirements.

• WSDOT Office of Equity and Civil Rights would not be supportive of a design that did not remove ADA barriers when there are other viable options being considered that do meet ADA requirements.

City ADA Committee met on March 20 and provided the recommendations:

• Unanimously opposed to options that only built improvements on one side.

• Unanimously opposed to a 5’ wide improvement on the west side of the bridge with a wider shared use path on the east side of the bridge

• Unanimously supported alternatives (2 and 3) which proposed at least a 10’ wide path on each side of the bridge

The public survey provided valuable input, including the following key preferences:

• Widening for pedestrian and bicycle use on both sides – 68% Preferred

• Equal width walkways on both sides accommodating pedestrians and bicycles – 65% Preferred

• Minimum walkway width of 10 feet or greater – 70% Preferred

By combining the WSDOT guidance, City’s ADA committee input, and survey results, the following preferences were developed:

PREFERENCE 1 – Widening for pedestrian and bicycle use on both sides

PREFERENCE 2 – Equal width walkways on both sides accommodating pedestrians and bicycles

PREFERENCE 3 – Minimum walkway width of 10 feet or greater

After filtering out alternatives that did not address the established preferences, the following two alternatives remained.

Click on the image to display full-screen.

Recommended Alternative(Level 3)

The final step in the feasibility and alternatives analysis is to eliminate alternatives that exceed the project’s budget:

• The current available budget for design and construction is $26.5M

• Keeping the project within the available budget is critical

• Alternative 3 exceeds the available budget

• Alternative 2 is within budget and is the recommended alternative

The City will maintain Alternative 3 as an additive bid item, should the cost estimations change as the design progresses, or if the construction bids are lower than estimated. Additive bid items are additional items of work that may be awarded as part of the contract if the bids in come within the budget specified in the contract

The Recommended Alternative will be presented to the City Council in the form of a Council Resolution. This resolution will formally adopt the preferred alternative and allow the project to proceed with permitting and design.