7A, County Road E Pedestrian Improvements

Home Browse Search

5/22/2009 Page 3 The City Council also asked whether the existence of a standalone pathway bridge would negate Mn/DOT's requirement to accommodate pedestrians on a future bridge at County Road E. Mn/DOT's response to this question was that they still would accommodate pedestrians, even if a separate pathway bridge existed to the north of the County Road E bridge. Council also asked if a variance could be requested for the 5' sidewalk on the existing bridge (Alternative I) from Mn/DOT so that State Aid funds could be used. Attached is a justification checklist for the variance process as well as language from the State Rules regarding the variance process. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The City Council approved the 2009 Budget to include the County Road E Bridge Improvements Project. At that time, the project was estimated to be $450,000, with $50,000 to be funded by State Aid dollars, and $400,000 to come from grant revenue. However, each of the alternatives would have different funding sources. Alternative I may be eligible for State Aid funds if a variance is granted. If a variance is not granted, the City would need to allocate local funds to this project. If the City proceeds with Alternative 2, this project would be eligible for federal funding. The City, with the consultant's assistance, plans to submit the project for federal funding. If funding is obtained fhrough this process, funds would be available for construction in federal fiscal years 2013 and 2014. The federal funding requires a 20% local match; engineering fees are not an eligible cost. This project would be eligible for State Aid funds for the local match, as well as for engineering, up to 25% of construction costs. Ifthe City Council chose not to allocate State Aid fund to this project, then an alternative funding source would need to be identified for the local match and all engineering fees. CONCLUSION At this time, staff recommends contracting with Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. to work with the City on the County Road E Pedestrian Improvement Project. Since a decision has not been made on an alternative, staff recommends approving a contract for Alternative 2, as this alternative includes the application for federal funding. If the City decides to move forward with Alternative I, the contract can be amended to a reduced amotlllt. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION Authorize staff to contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide engineering services for the County Road E Pedestrian Improvement Project in an amount not to exceed $78,555.