STORM WATCH: Pier closed until further notice

[VentnorMod]

ACPress reports on storm preparations along coast. Click on link for photos and for special videos provided by the Press' storm coverage reporting.

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/1...ry/249700.html

Long Beach Island mayor says, 'If (Hanna) passes slowly during high tide, we're done.'
By DONNA WEAVER Staff Writer, 609-978-2015
Published: Saturday, September 06, 2008

A tropical storm watch was upgraded Friday afternoon to a tropical storm warning for the southern portion of the state as Hanna continued to stir up the Atlantic Ocean.
In addition to the storm warning, the National Weather Service issued a flood watch from this afternoon through tonight. Hanna is expected to bring 3 to 7 inches of rain, according to the National Weather Service.

On Friday, a mayor on Long Beach Island said he hoped Tropical Storm Hanna would pass quickly during low tide.

"If it passes slowly during high tide, we're done," Harvey Cedars Mayor Jonathan Oldham said.

Beaches in Harvey Cedars were ravaged during an unusual Mother's Day northeaster, and many have not recovered. Earlier this summer, Oldham had tons of sand trucked onto Long Beach Island in an attempt to fill in eroding beaches. And with Hanna on her way, he said, "I don't have time right now to get any more fill or do anything else."

Department of Public Works employees bulldozed sand over the past few days in preparation for the storm, he said.
In the Strathmere section of Upper Township, Cape May County, truckloads of sand moved into town Thursday after the Township Committee held an emergency meeting.

At least 4,000 cubic yards of sand will be placed on north-end beaches.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of bikers were heading to Wildwood for the Roar to the Shore. The only question was what will be louder - Hanna or the motorcycles?

As Wildwood declared a state of emergency, Clydesdale horses that were supposed to march in a parade were shipped north to higher ground because the facility where they were was not strong enough.

In Atlantic County, Ventnor locked up its municipal fishing pier Friday afternoon and won't reopen it until at least Sunday morning, City Commissioner Stephen Weintrob said. An engineer will examine the pier before the padlock comes off, he added.

The city usually closes the pier during major storms, but this is the first closing since the pier opened its gates in July after it was rebuilt in a project that started last fall. Weintrob said a main reason for closing the 1,000-foot-long pier is to keep surfers from using it as a shortcut to get to big waves breaking far offshore.

"We've had surfers go up there with their boards and throw them off the pier," he said.

Closing the fishing pier was one of a series of preparations Ventnor made Friday, such as pulling down banners and flags on the Boardwalk and taking portable toilets and trash cans off the beach.

Officials in Fairfield Township, Cumberland County, called Friday for a voluntary evacuation of the township's Sea Breeze section.

Sea Breeze sits along the Delaware Bay at the southwest tip of New Jersey, and often floods during storms. The lone road leading into Sea Breeze lays low in the marshes and often floods during storms. During a tropical storm, it could become impassable.

Mayor Marion Kennedy Jr. and three other township officials called homeowners and knocked on doors in the isolated waterfront community to ask people to leave the tiny community before the storm.

On the southern end of Long Beach Island, the Holgate Unit of the Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge was closed Friday until further notice to all public entries, including boat and personal watercraft landings. The closing was due to the possibility of beach erosion, a news release said.

Heavy rain coinciding with high tide could also increase the flood threat along the ocean and bay, according to Deputy Police Chief Leslie Houston of the Long Beach Township Department of Emergency Management. Houston said motorists should avoid driving through flooded areas of Long Beach Boulevard and use Ocean Boulevard and Beach Avenue.

High tide for the Manahawkin Bay Bridge is about 4 p.m. today.

Long Beach Township Beach Patrol Supervisor Donald Myers said the water was rough at township beaches.

"None of us really know what's going to happen, depending on which forecast you watch. The water is rough out there and there are plenty of rip currents," Myers said.

The Beach Patrol will have a response crew on duty at 9 a.m. today as well as available motorized boats, trucks and all-terrain vehicles, he said.

"We're either going to patrol along the beach or wait for that call that we don't want to come in," he said.

The Atlantic City Beach Patrol won't have guards outside today, but will still be on watch, patrol Chief Rod Aluise said Friday.

"We will have some crews on watch inside our buildings, just to make sure there are no problems," he said. "They won't be sitting on the beaches, but we will be keeping our eye on the beachfront just to make sure we don't have anyone doing anything foolish."

Aluise said they were expecting waves as high as 14 feet today, and 40 mph winds with gusts of as fast as 60 mph.

On Friday, Atlantic City bathers were allowed to enter the water only up to their waists at the 12 still-guarded beaches. Boogie boards were banned, but surfers were still allowed.

"The rip currents are moderate, but we're playing it safe," Aluise said before noon. "Right now, the surf's not very attractive to surfers."

But Aluise said lifeguards can pretty easily tell which surfers can handle the rougher waters and which can't.

Hanna could produce wind gusts similar to those of the Mother's Day northeaster earlier this year.

"Some people might be too overconfident," he said. "We'll blow them right in."

At about 4 p.m., guards began moving boat stands off the beach and securing them on the Boardwalk.

Both Myers and Aluise said they believe Sunday will be a pretty nice day.

Staff writers Martin DeAngelis, Lynda Cohen and Daniel Walsh contributed to this report.

E-mail Donna Weaver:
DWeaver@pressofac.com

Storm-related closings

Atlantic County

Saturday's Good Old Days Festival in Somers Point is postponed with no rain date scheduled yet. The "5K Walk/Run for Bud" that was scheduled for 9 a.m. today will now be held at 9 a.m. on Sunday at Kennedy Park.

The Atlantic City Fire Department has postponed its "Sand Pipers" Halfway to St. Patrick's Day Scholarship Golf & Ceilli Fundraiser at McCullough's Emerald Links in Egg Harbor Twp. The new date is Sun. Oct. 12. Golf starts at 9 a.m. Ceilli starts at 4pm. All entertainers have been rescheduled.

Pleasantville's South Main Street School picnic "Back to School South Main Street School Style," scheduled for today, has been rescheduled for Sept. 20.

Ventnor's municipal fishing pier is closed, and will reopen Sunday morning at the earliest, after an engineer's examination.

Cape May County
The Cape May-Lewes Ferry has called off many of its scheduled trips for today, Saturday and Sunday. Anyone planning to use the ferry this weekend should call the information center at 800-643-3779 or visit: www.cmlf.com

Sea Isle City: The City Commission meeting scheduled for 10 a.m. today is rescheduled for 10 a.m. Tuesday.

North Wildwood: Mummers String Band Weekend, scheduled for today and Sunday, is canceled. No rain date is scheduled.

Historic Cold Spring Village canceled this weekend's Revolutionary War Encampment Event.

Ocean County
Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge closed the Holgate Unit at the southern end of Long Beach Island to all public entry, including boat and personal watercraft landings until further notice. Call 609-652-1665 for more information.

The Ocean County College Foundation has moved its Beach Party Gala to The Poland Spring Arena at The Ritacco Center at 6 p.m. today The Poland Spring Arena is located at The Ritacco Center on the Toms River High School North campus, 1245 Old Freehold Road, Toms River. For information: www.ocean.edu. Call the OCC Foundation at 732.255.0492. Call The Poland Spring Arena at The Ritacco Center at 732-818-8536.

Barnegat's Pirate's Day on Saturday is rescheduled for 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Sept. 13 in the historic district at Route 9 and Bay Avenue with an evening boat parade at 6:30 p.m., followed by entertainment & fireworks at the public dock.

[TheEqualizer]

It wasn't even a hurricane. Did I see Made in China on the underside of the pier?

[I Can See Clearly Now]

Every pier shown on storm footage up and down the coast has cross braces.

I can see them clearly.

Is our pier a newfangled design that doesn't require any?

Did the old pier have them?

Should ours have them?

Can they be put on now?

Was there a little cost cutting for election time?

And what about how the pilings were stuck in the sand without a pile driver, just high pressure water?

Is it safe to go out there?

Will it stand up after a real hurricane?

Does anyone know the answers?

Can't see my way clearly. Help!

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

Originally Posted by TheEqualizer

It wasn't even a hurricane. Did I see Made in China on the underside of the pier?

ADMIN NOTE: It may be a newly developed safety protocol to inspect the pier after storms; or, an inspection might relate to questions and concerns which were raised in this post.

http://www.ventnorevoice.com/bulleti...read.php?t=598

The "rumor" posted by the poster named "HarvardAve" and an additional PrivateMessage sent by that still-anonymous poster prompted enough concern that WLV reviewed its large binder with OPRA-obtained public records relating to the pier.

Among these documents were 14 pages of blueprints developed by the engineer for the construction of the new pier, and at least some of the Specifications that had been put out to bid. WLV had no way of knowing if those documents constitute a comprehensive "set" of all that was developed for the pier construction project, or if there might be more documents which simply weren't turned over because of how the OPRA demands had been worded. (Two OPRA demands had been filed by private individuals in summer and fall 2007. They had then made the documents available to WLV for copying and "reporting" on the issues triggered by the pier project. WLV sought out some other documents about the pier through OPRA in its later direct filing at city hall.)

WLV's review of page 6 of the 14 pages of blueprints produced findings of at least "some" of the specifications intended to guide the contractor about installing the pilings. There might be more specifications in other documents which WLV does not have. If what WLV possesses is all that there is, then there appeared to be "missing instructions" which might have been appropriate for this project.

There were no directives telling the contractor to "jet" the pilings to a specified initial minimum embedment of the "piling tip" below the sand; nor were there any directives about "driving" the pilings using a pile driving hammer to a certain rated capacity expressed as a number of tons that each piling can support.

WLV sent an e-mail to all three Ventnor Commissioners reporting on what appeared to be a "gap" in the information available, and suggesting that the Commission should look into the matter.

1. It seemed possible that there were other Specifications and WLV simply didn't have copies.
2. It was possible that there were oral instructions -- running from the engineer charged with oversight (believed to be Mr. Carter, who prepared the blueprints) and to the contractor -- which "filled in gaps" as the project was underway.
3. It was possible that there is a Pile Driving Log and an overall engineering certification which was filed with the Building Inspector's office in order for the fishing pier to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy clearance.

As to the remaining item which might have been another "possibility" -- that the engineer intended the pier to rely upon calculations relative to capacity of the pilings as "friction piles" which would not need to be driven -- WLV inquired about that theory with another engineer in recent weeks. His opinion was that pile driving is the "best" way to establish a rated capacity for pilings and that a public pier, built with the intent that it would someday support structures (a clubhouse and piermaster's building), should have had pile driving occur.

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

Originally Posted by I Can See Clearly Now

Every pier shown on storm footage up and down the coast has cross braces.

I can see them clearly.

Is our pier a newfangled design that doesn't require any?

Did the old pier have them?

Should ours have them?

Can they be put on now?

Was there a little cost cutting for election time?

And what about how the pilings were stuck in the sand without a pile driver, just high pressure water?

Is it safe to go out there?

Will it stand up after a real hurricane?

Does anyone know the answers?

Can't see my way clearly. Help!

The response up above provides partial answers to some of your questions. The old Ventnor fishing pier had pilings which were inserted at an angle, rather than in a straight vertical alignment. The new pier copied that design concept. When piles are inserted at that kind of angle, it seems they are intended to be "self-battering" and guard against swaying in high waves and high winds. If piles are inserted in straight vertical alignment, then they definitely need either batter pilings or cross-bracing to prevent the phenomenon known as "sidesway" in high wind/wave conditions. The greater the "exposed length" and "unbraced height" of the piling as it runs from the beam (at the top) to the mudline below, the greater the potential for sidesway and the need for a bracing design plan. It's why one will often see telephone polls -- which aren't required to carry any real weight from above -- anchored by tension cables since embedment alone might be unable to handle lateral forces like wind.

As part of its research effort in finding information to send to the newly elected Commission, WLV looked for other piers which might have adopted the angled piling design used by both the old and new Ventnor pier. Photos of piers in Florida, California and New England were located in which that design had been adopted. Nothing is known about the age of those structures or whether they have held up in storms -- only that there are photos showing the same kind of design concept employed elsewhere around the U.S.

Are there things that can be done "after-the-fact" ? Yes. If it turns out that there was no pile driving, and there is no Pile Driving Log filed at the Inspector's office. The actual capacity of the piles might be susceptible of determination by load-testing. It might require lifting the planks and beams to get access to the top of the pilings; the fact that the pilings are angled might make it more difficult than if they were straight up-and-down vertical pilings to place the weights used for load-testing. Only a competent engineer, with some forensic engineering experience, would be in a position to advise about that.

A minor "pointer" about jetted installation of pilings is this: The high-pressured water used for jetting away the soil needs to have the nozzle placed accurately alongside the piling and it is "preferred practice" to taper off that pressure as the targeted initial depth for the tip of the piling is reached. Why? Because if the nozzle is too far forward of the piling tip or if the water pressure is kept "too high" all the way down, it will blast away the sand that the tip of the piling should come to rest against. There will be some "filling in" of the space created by the jetted water -- through natural forces of sand under pressure at reasonable depths below mudline -- but this observation highlights the fact that a supervisory eye needs to be kept on a contractor's crew.

If the pilings had only minimal top-cuttings after they were installed, and if what was actually installed "stayed true" to the lengths specified in the blueprints, it would be easy to determine their embedments. This would be done by measuring the length of the exposed piling and then comparing it to the total length which was specified for each piling from #1 to #70. The difference between total length minus exposed length would be the embedment. It is preferred practice for a supervising / monitoring engineer or an independent party designated by the engineer to verify that the lengths delivered to a worksite are what was specified before they are installed, and that the proper lengths are installed at each piling position enumerated by blueprints.

Because the pier is located on the coast, and not in a back bay, it's likely that the presence of wave action means that sand density starts to be "decent-to-good" at fairly shallow depths as one might bore down into the sand/soil to test the soil. (In the quieter waters of a back bay, there is often a finding of substantial levels of "muck" and silt which can't offer piling support and, indeed, can contribute to "downdrag" which is yet another engineering buzzword.)

The apparent absence of any preliminary soil testing, which might have been undertaken from a barge, was another item of "potential" oversight noted by WLV in its communication to the Ventnor Commission. When such tests are done, the results showing the progressively denser layers as one goes from top-of-soil-line (a/k/a "mudline") down to about 50 feet of depth (or more) are typically dropped into blueprints, in the form of a chart. These would show SPT counts which are typically arrayed as four numbers appearing in a sequence such as 1-1-1-1 or 8-12-15-18 or the like. The higher the number, the greater the number of "blows" from a 250-pound weight which were needed to drive the soil collection tube down into the soil to collect a sample. What such a chart might look like is seen in this link.

It's possible that soil testing undertaken elsewhere, but deemed to be "typical" of the southern New Jersey coastline, was used as a proxy for engineering calculations and design plans in developing the Ventnor Pier blueprints.

A further item of information about cross-braces is this: They require bolts to affix them to the pilings. The drilling for bolts invades the interiors of pilings and allows for access by salty moist air and salt water, which can accelerate deterioration of the pilings. The new pier has Greenheart (South or Central American hard wood) pilings which might make this less of a problem than with softer wood pilings such as Southern Yellow Pine (SYP). Typically, SYP gets treated with creosote or CCA which can't penetrate to the very center of the piling and protect the interior from "rotting" due to the effects of salt air/water and so-called "marine borers" (organisms) which eat away at wood. However, moist salty air and salt water are still agents of deterioration for any wood. Therefore, the point at which any cross-bracing is affixed at its lower-most elevation deserves some careful consideration. There tend to be tradeoffs of stability (enhanced by a lower point of affixation) and long-term effects (rotting). If the point where bolts are affixed at the lower end of the braces will be "wetted" and "dried" daily during high/low tides, then they are in the so-called Intertidal Zone, which is where piling deterioration is usually most pronounced over time.

The Commissioners might be getting a laymen's "crash course" in geotechnical engineering and marine engineering concepts at this time. In its communication about the anonymous post, and passing along information from document review, WLV made the suggestion that construction of a clubhouse might need to await answers to questions. Adding any further weight of "structure" would seem to be in need of firm knowledge about just how much weight the pier can handle.

Structures are supposed to be evaluated using a variety of "loading factors" in both live weight and dead weight conditions. These are spelled out in the IBC (International Building Code) which NJ adopted a few years ago to replace BOCA building code standards. The load of inanimate objects and of "live people" walking around -- all in good weather -- tend to be the lighter loads, when taken in isolation. It's other things, such as snow loads, wind loads, water loads, icing loads, and for any piling-supported structure placed out in water a loading factor that looks at water-born debris-- and their various permutations when taken in combination -- for which engineers are supposed to perform calculations, make judgment calls, and then create blueprints and specifications.

The new Commission has shown itself to be willing to put out explanatory statements as it gets to the bottom of different issues and questions. Once it has investigated the rumors about the pier -- by pursuing the documents and oral reports by those having first-hand knowledge -- more is expected to become known.

[Bayliner]

Suppose its safe if nobody goes onto it in a hurricane or storm, right?

[harvardave]

Harvardave is back. What I am looking for are anyone that has photographs of the pier under construction particularly when the loader is on the pier doing demolition. I have seen a photo taken by someone at the Sands on the boardwalk but I am looking for a closer shot so I can get the number off the loader. Can anyone tell me what model loader that was? Any help is greatly appreciated.

[Death and Taxes]

There were no directives telling the contractor to "jet" the pilings to a specified initial minimum embedment of the "piling tip" below the sand

If they install the pilings in the water how can they even tell what they're doing? The sand slopes into the water.

water-born debris

If it floats on the water, debris can't be very heavy. Are they supposed to plan for a boat to go crashing into the pier?

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

Originally Posted by harvardave

Harvardave is back. What I am looking for are anyone that has photographs of the pier under construction particularly when the loader is on the pier doing demolition. I have seen a photo taken by someone at the Sands on the boardwalk but I am looking for a closer shot so I can get the number off the loader. Can anyone tell me what model loader that was? Any help is greatly appreciated.

harvardave:

Someone who was out at the work site a lot during construction was shown this photo, and reports it was the only loader of any kind he saw at the work site. He doesn't recall seeing it up on the pier, however.

[VENTNOR eVOICE ADMIN]

Originally Posted by I Can See Clearly Now

Every pier shown on storm footage up and down the coast has cross braces.

I can see them clearly.

Is our pier a newfangled design that doesn't require any?

Did the old pier have them?

Should ours have them?

Can they be put on now?

Was there a little cost cutting for election time?

And what about how the pilings were stuck in the sand without a pile driver, just high pressure water?

Is it safe to go out there?

Will it stand up after a real hurricane?

Does anyone know the answers?

Can't see my way clearly. Help!

Clearly:

There was a round-up of photos showing comparable piling designs from around the USA, using piles placed at an angle for piers. Informal inquiry with someone experienced in this field produced the comment that, generally speaking, it's a good design. (Assumption: verified embedment for lateral loading. Preference: pile driving to assure a documented axial loading. Caveat: design engineering for up to 5 feet of "scour" -- or sand loss -- during a strong storm is something a cautious engineer might have done.)

The photos from "out there" around the USA, however, all seemed to have some kind of cross-bracing scheme. Some representative photos are shown below; they were sent to Commission some weeks ago for educational purposes on this topic.





Most of the piers examined used braces placed at a diagonal, like the two above. The pier below used horizontal bracing which didn't seem to follow a visually-apparent uniform scheme.