Laserfiche WebLink
�� '��j <br />�I�r "�' <br />� �; <br />�:. �'°. <br />`�: '' �` <br />`,::�:;;: �; <br />� .:::; <br />��>:::.: ::.. ��: <br />`�`�;�:�:: � <br />� � ����� <br />� ��1 � �� � �� I <br />��� ���� � �� �� �� � �� <br />'�2224 �icca�te� Aver�u� • �urnsuEl�es [�[� �5337 <br />P�o�e (9�2) 894-05Q9 • �ax �9�2} 8�Q-806� <br />�nrww. �c� t�a r�- rr� e R k. co m <br />� �� ���� � <br />��MpRANDUM <br />Date: May 19, 20 � 0 <br />To: Kristine Giga, P.E., Civi� Engineer <br />M�ehe�Ie Olsan, Parks and Recrea�ion Manager <br />From: Travis V�ir�ter, P.E., LE�DO AP <br />Sub�ect: �P Rail Bridge Trail Project Update <br />City of Arden Hi�is <br />Project No.: TI6.100325 <br />20�9 the tr�il crossing �roj�ct underneath the CP Railroad has progressed <br />��nce our updat� on October �, , . <br />' � n variar�ce rocess, �na� design, CP Ra�l�oad's rev�ew process, as well as <br />thrQugh M�lDOT s des g � ' s a reca af �he ro ect's progress. <br />Mn/DOT's State Aic� revlew process. Th�s memo p�ov�de p P J <br />es the necess retaining walls, and the narrQw conditions present at the <br />G�ve� the proposed trari grad , `� vide for the 2-foot shoulders on each <br />ra osed trail underpass, the ava�labie co�dor w�dth d2d not pro e re uest <br />p P q <br />il that is re uirec� b 1V�n/D4T• Consequent�y, Bolton & Menk prepared a var�anc <br />sl de of the tra q Y . <br />' uation to M�/DaT's �arianee camrn��tee on December � 7, 20Q9, at whlch tlme a <br />and presented th� s s�t .. <br />var�ance w�s gran�e <br />d to allow a no sho�ider condition a�ong the reta�ning wal� under the bridge. <br />com leted the �inal design of the tra11 and vva�Is, and an initial submittal <br />Wl�h the vanance obta�nedT we p <br />for their review and for�nal approval on January 27, 2414. The railroad <br />was �nade to CP Ra�lroad . . <br />responded on February <br />� Oth to the submittaj and rec�uested that the reta�n�ng wall deslgn a�d constructron <br />he number of ro ased embedded sai� anc�ors and, �nstead, use sheet pi�e <br />be r�od�f�ed to reduce t p p <br />ra�lroad's ex lanation for the change was to reduce �he�r poten�ial confl�ets <br />reten�.�on where poss�ble. The p the ma erform �n the future. While <br />with saii anchors relat�ve to any of the�r own work or ma�ntenance y y p <br />'l�n is sti�l feasib�e, it is not as ecanomical as �he soil anchors. �ur �nal <br />the al�ernat�ve use of sheet p� g . <br />35Q 044 ref�ects the combinat�on soil anchor/sheet p��ing wal� designs that <br />construct�an cost estimate of $ ? <br />he desi n chan es made, CP Railroad provided their approval on April 8, <br />are eurrent�y proposed. Wlth t g g <br />2010. <br />' roval the Ians were then submitted to Mn/DaT's State Aid Offiee for <br />Upor� recelvrng the ra�Iroad s app , P <br />received naminal comments back from Mn/DOT. As of the date of this memo, <br />re�lew and comment. We . . . <br />�n�nts in�o the Ians and are ant�c�pating a resubm�ttal for final approval <br />we are �ncorporat�ng these com p <br />during the vveek of May 24, 2010. <br />��������� ��� � ������ �������� <br />R�1to� & M�n�: �s an ec�ual op�ortunity em�loye�- <br />