Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.01.2002 (2)• • COUNCIL WORK SESSION July 1, 2002 4:00 p.m. Council Chambers Members present: Berry, Welper, Greenwood, Clark, Jordan, Hurley, Getty. Moved by Jordan, seconded by Berry that the Agenda, as proposed, be approved. Ayes: Seven. Motion carried. A report on the Evaluation of Design Alternatives for the Replacement of the 18t Street Bridge Over the Cedar River as prepared by Earth Tech, Inc. was given. Over the past ten months, several alternatives have been investigated for the type of bridge, location of the bridge, design features of the approach streets, and management of traffic during construction. The purpose of the report is to summarize the various alternatives and provide a comparison of the design features, impacts and cost for each alternative. A Public Input and Information Meeting was held on December 5, 2001, and a Citizens Advisory Committee was formed that included 17 citizens representing businesses and neighborhoods around the 18th Street/Vinton Street area. The Advisory Committee also consisted of two council members, city staff and design team members. Three Advisory Committee meeting were held. At each meeting, the current status of the project was presented and feedback was obtained from committee members. At the April 25, 2002 meeting, the committee arrived at a consensus to a recommended alternative. The tentative project schedule includes a council resolution to approve an alternative, which would enable the start of final design in August 2002 and target a project letting for August/September, 2003 with construction completed in 2004. Don Johnston, a member of the Citizens Advisory Committee, reviewed the evaluation process used to evaluate the various alternatives. The future traffic volume on 18t Street is the primary factor in determining the required number of lanes for the new bridge and the approach roadways. The determination of traffic forecast for the project included: traffic counts from previous years, new traffic counts were obtained, existing truck traffic volumes were obtained, and new traffic would be generated by future economic development in the Rath/Brownfield area. Additional traffic growth was estimated to be approximately one percent per year. Based on the analysis, it is estimated that a total of 14,100 vehicles per day would use the new bridge by the year 2025. Alternative No. 1 (construct new bridge upstream of existing bridge) considers the construction of a new bridge just upstream of the existing bridge. The bridge would be a 5-span bulb-T concrete beam bridge with two traffic lanes and a 10-foot wide recreational trail on the downstream side. The bridge would be built while traffic remained on the existing 18th Street Bridge. Alternative No. 1 also includes a new 3-lane roadway from Sycamore Street to Commercial Street, with one traffic lane in each direction and a center lane for left -turns from either direction. The roadway would transition to two lanes immediately adjacent to the bridge. Alternative No. 1 also includes a 10-foot wide recreational trail from U.S. 218 to Sycamore Street. The trail would be located on the east side of 18`h Street, except for the block between U.S. 218 and Jefferson Street where the trail would be on the west side. Although the bridge will remain open to traffic with the exception of a short -period of time to connect the roadway to the new bridge, 1-block detours will be required for staging immediate street construction. Alternative No. 2 (remove existing bridge and construct new bridge on the same alignment). The type of bridge, lane configuration and recreational trail design for Alternative 2 are the same as described in Alternative No. 1. Alternative No. 2 would require that the existing bridge be closed and removed prior to construction of the new bridge. The duration of this closure is estimated to be 9 to 12 months. Alternative No. 1 would require a total acquisition of the Phillips 66 Station near the bridge. Alternative No. 2 would increase the impacts to Gray Transportation, requiring a steeper driveway and eliminating the parking on the west side of the building. Council Work Session July 1, 2002 Page 2 Costs for road users during bridge closure if Alternative No. 2 is approved were discussed. Road users would experience an economic impact if the bridge is closed, since a detour would result in additional travel distance for many vehicles. The road -user costs evaluation showed that the added out -of -distance travel would be approximately one mile for each detoured vehicle, resulting in a total cost to road users of approximately $2,700.00 per day while the bridge is closed. This results in a total added cost to the road users of approximately $750,000.00 to $1 million based on a 9 to 12 month bridge closure. Most of the business owners on 18th Street have expressed a concern that their business would be adversely affected by a bridge closure. The total estimated project cost for Alternative No. 1 is $6,062,000.00 and the total estimated cost for Alternative No. 2 is $5,539,000.00. The Citizens Advisory Committee is recommending that Alternative No. 1 be approved. The 18`'' Street bridge and approach roadway is being funded by a combination of funding sources. The Iowa Department of Transportation has approved RISE funding in the amount of $2,121,700.00. Other funding sources include: $1,000,000.00 in Bridge Replacement Funds, $1,718,600.00 in STP Funding and $1,221,700 local match from the City of Waterloo. Jeff Scarbrough, owner of a business located on Lafayette and 18th Streets, stated that 90 percent of the business along 18th Street is drive -by business. If the city closes the bridge for one year, it will be tough for the business, and that is why the Citizens Advisory Committee chose Alternative No. 1. Councilperson Welper stated that there are programs that would help the businesses if the city decides on Alternative No. 2. Councilperson Welper stated he likes Alternative No. 2, but understands the concerns of the merchants. Councilperson Welper stated we need to look at joint options before spending the taxpayers money. Councilperson Welper asked that the city hold off making a decision. Councilperson Jordan stated he would like to move along on the project, and he supports Alternative No. 1 as he does not want to shut the businesses down for one year. It was the consensus of the council to accept Alternative No. 1 and to place this item on the July 8, 2002 council agenda. With no further business before the council, it was moved by Jordan, seconded by Hurley that the meeting be adjourned at 4:28 p.m. Ayes: Seven. Motion carried. Nancy Eckert City Clerk