The Florida Department of Transportation reviewed the problems with the new Memorial Causeway bridge in Clearwater and delivered a tough, but appropriate, verdict: The contractor must tear down and rebuild the cracked columns and a footing supporting a portion of the bridge roadbed. It will be the largest forced rebuilding in DOT history.
PCL Civil Constructors, a Canadian firm, had argued that it could just repair the damaged support structures by strengthening them, then coating them with sealant and epoxy. DOT rejected that repair plan and ordered the cracked supports torn down. It also declared that the design used to build the $69.3-million span to Clearwater Beach does not meet the state's bridge design code. PCL will have to come up with a new design and get it approved by DOT before rebuilding the support structures.
The question is, will that design be any better?
The design used to build the crippled state bridge was reviewed by another engineering firm and DOT before construction began. Yet those reviews did not catch the design's shortcomings - did not even catch that the design failed to meet state code.
The original designer of the new bridge was HDR of Tampa. That design, with sleek, curved lines and a long span over the Intracoastal Waterway uninterrupted by columns, utilized a different construction technique and won awards for its beauty. But then in a process the construction industry calls "value engineering," PCL brought in another engineering firm to redesign the bridge so it could be built quicker and cheaper. DOT signed off on the redesign and construction began.
Then an 80-foot section sank and twisted and had to be demolished and rebuilt. Another section of roadbed sank 7 inches overnight. Cracks were found in six of the 16 columns supporting the bridge, and two columns were built in the wrong place because of a surveying error. Another state bridge built by PCL after a similar redesign, the John Ringling Causeway bridge in Sarasota, opened last year and already has severe cracking and other problems.
DOT has demonstrated in the Clearwater case that it can be tough on a contractor that has done a poor job. Can it be as tough on itself? The process by which DOT checks "value engineered" redesigns warrants review in light of the Clearwater and Sarasota projects.
The goal of value engineering is saving time and money on construction projects. However, some authority - in this case, DOT - must oversee the process on the public's behalf to ensure that safety trumps those goals. While it would be unrealistic to expect DOT to repeat the engineering done by every private company for every state road project, something more thorough than a mere checkoff surely is warranted on bridge projects, where the risks to the public from a shift or collapse are so great.
