HomeMy WebLinkAbout7B, CP Rail Bridge Improvement Options
~
~HIl,LS
Request for Council Action
Prepared By: Michelle Olson, Parks and Recreation
Manager and Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer
Council Meeting Date: May 11, 2009
CP Rail bridge improvement options
Budgeted Amount:
2009 - $37,000
Actual Amount:
Option #3: $30,000 additional
Funding Source:
Special Revenue Park Fund
Recommendation:
A. Provide direction regarding which option should be analyzed further.
B. If option number three is chosen: a motion to approve addendum number two to
the original Bolton and Menk contract, which includes an additional $30,000 in
engineering fees in order to design pedestrian improvements to the CP Rail on the
east side.
Supporting: Documents:
1. See the attached memo from City staff
2. PTRC Draft Minutes from 4/21/09 Meeting.
3. Proposal (Addendum no. 2) from Bolton and Menk for additional services related to the
CP Rail bridge.
4. Staff is asking the City Council to please bring your copy of the feasibility report to
the meeting, in case you want to refer to it during the discussion.
-
-
[ft.BILL~
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
May 7, 2009
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
Michelle Olson, Parks and Recreation Manager <((l~
Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer J!.Itr
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CP Rail bridge improvements
BACKGROUND
At the January 20, 2009 work session, the City Council directed staff to discuss the CP Rail
bridge (located on Old Snelling) with the Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee (PTRC) in
order to develop a recommendation for which side to build the proposed pedestrian bridge
improvements. The PTRC had this discussion on February 24, 2009 and made a motion to
recommend that Council construct the pedestrian improvements to the bridge on the west
side. At the March 9, 2009 regular Council Meeting; the Council concurred with the PTRC
and directed Bolton and Menk to proceed with design and specifications for pedestrian
improvements to the CP Rail Bridge on the west side. At that meeting, Council discussed
future trail options leading to and from the bridge. Council directed staff to speak with
Ramsey County regarding options for a bike lane and also bring the discussion back to the
PTRC for further analysis and recommendation.
DISCUSSION
Staff met with Ken Haider from Ramsey County Public Works in March to discuss two
options for a future bike/pedestrian facility on Old Snelling:
1. Would it be possible to restripe the road and shift more shoulder to the west
side in order to have more space to possibly avoid wetland impacts identified
on the west side, most notably the boardwalk?
2. Would the County be in favor of allowing the City to widen/pave the
shoulders to include a bike lane on one or both sides of Old Snelling?
Ramsey County Public Works is open to the possibility of either of the above options. However,
typically restriping and/or extension of shoulders would take place at the same time as a
\ \Metro-inet. us\ardenhills\PR&PW\Parks\Memos\Council Memos\0511 09 CPRail_ Trail options.doc
maintenance project. There is no maintenance scheduled for Old Snelling within the next ten to
fifteen years. Restriping or extension of shoulders done independently may not be cost effective.
Ramsey County has indicated that if either of these projects were done in conjunction with a
maintenance project on this road, they may be able to share in the cost at that time.
This item was discussed at the April 21, 2009 PTRC meeting. The Committee had a lengthy
discussion on the various options for this corridor. Minutes from that meeting are attached for
your review. Staff laid out the following options for the City Council to review and discuss:
OPTION 1: Continue with the current scope of the project: Engineering the proposed
improvements to the bridge on the west side and pursue an off road pathway in the future.
PROS
CONS
Improvements to the railroad crossing will be safer The cost of constructing an off road pathway is
for pedestrians. . over 2 million dollars and without funding, there is
no timetable.
An off road pathway is safer for pedestrians than an In the interim, until the off road pathway is
on road bike lane. constructed, pedestrians and bikers will be utilizing
the current limited shoulders, which is a safety
concern.
The improved pedestrian pathway under the bridge
will only occur on one side and therefore, bikers
wanting to ride with traffic will more than likely
remain on the roadway.
OPTION 2: Continue to move forward on the engineering and proposed improvements to
the bridge on the west side and pursue restriping and shifting additional shoulder on Old
Snelling to the west side to potentially avoid impacts, most notably the board walk.
PROS
CONS
Improvements to the railroad bridge will provide a The improved pedestrian pathway under the bridge
safe passage on one side for pedestrians. will only occur on one side and therefore, bikers
wanting to ride with traffic will more than likely
remain on the roadway.
The cost of some impacts may be avoided.
There is no timetable on maintenance for Old
Snelling and therefore, the County may not do
*restriping and shoulder work for 10-15 years.
*Restriping requires additional shoulder width in
some locations.
~
Ramsey County is open to working with the City There are a few segments of the roadway that may
on this option. not be able to be shifted to allow for a bike lane/off
road pathway.
-2-
OPTION 3: Consider constructing pedestrian improvements to both the east and the west
sides of the bridge and pursue with Ramsey County the possibility of utilizing/paving the
available additional shoulder of the roadway to provide bike lanes on both sides.
PROS
. CONS
Ramsey County is open to working with the City . There is no timetable on maintenance for Old
on this option. Snelling. The most cost effective way to do this
type of project would be in conjunction with the
maintenance on this roadway. Therefore, it could
be 10-15 years before these bike lanes happen.
The off road pathway costs of over 2 million The bridge enhancement costs are nearly doubled
dollars will be reduced. by doing both sides of the bridge.
The pedestrian crossings underneath the railroad There are segments of the roadway that do not have
bridge will greatly enhance safety for pedestrians sufficient shoulder available for paving to allow for
on both sides of the road. bike lanes on both sides.
Bikers wanting to ride with traffic will have a safe Does not provide for a separated trail for
passage under the railroad bridge on both sides and pedestrians and novice or recreational bike riders,
will be more apt to utilize the pathway versus although it does not preclude a separated trail.
remaining on the roadway.
BUDGET
The additional engineering costs to add the east side bridge improvements into the current scope
of the project are listed at $30,000. The construction cost for improvements to both sides of the
bridge is estimated at $368,800, double the con~truction cost for improvements to one side of the
bridge. A proposal for additional engineering services from Bolton and Menk is included for
Council review. Preliminary discussions with the railroad indicate that they are in favor of
improvements to either side of the bridge. They have indicated they have no preference on
which side the improvements take place. However, they continue to indicate that until they see
specific plans and specifications, approval i~ pending. Bolton and Menk has been in touch with
the railroad to verify that they would be open to improvements to both sides of the bridge. Staff
will have an update on this at the Council meeting.
If the third option is chosen, a motion to approve a second addendum to the original contract
with Bolton and Menk is needed to expand the scope of the current plans and specifications.
Again, as stated earlier, there are sections of the roadway that do not have the capability of
sustaining bike lanes on both sides due to existing curbs, turn lanes and steep slopes. Option
three has safety advantages even if a bike lane on both sides of the road is not possible.
Providing a safe passage under the railroad bridge on both sides will meet the needs of all users,
including bikers, runners, and walkers.
PTRC RECOMMENDATION
The Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee recommends that Council, in order to increase
safety, consider the possibility of constructing pedestrian improvements on both the east and
west sides of the CP Rail bridge on Old Snelling and research the possibility with Ramsey
County of paving/widening the roadway shoulders to provide a bike lane on both the east and
west side in the most cost effective manner.
- 3 -
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
A. Provide direction regarding which option should be analyzed further.
B. If option number three is chosen: a motion to approve addendum number two to the
original Bolton and Menk contract, which includes an additional $30,000 in
engineering fees in order to design pedestrian improvements to the CP Rail bridge on
the east side.
- 4-
PARKS, TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
April 21, 2009
Page 4 of9
B. CePe Rail Bridl!e and Trail Discussion
Ms. Olson explained the PTRC recommended to Council they pursue the trail on the west side
and that Council was in agreement. She noted further discussions have brought up the possibility
ofa bike lane on both sides of the road versus an off road trail on one side.
Ms. Olson indicated that the Council also questioned if the County would be willing to restripe
the road to utilize the shoulder on the west to reduce the need for a boardwalk. Ms. Olson stated
that she did meet with Ken Haider from Ramsey County Public Works to discuss options. The
County stated that they are willing to consider restriping and also seem open to the possibility of
widening the shoulder for a bike lane. Ms. Olson stated this roadway is not scheduled for
maintenance any time soon and a shoulder widening project or restriping project minus a road
project may not be cost effective for the City to complete.
Ms. Olson asked if the PTRC was in favor of a bike lane or off road trail. She indicated the
railroad was waiting on the design plans from Bolton & Menk.
Chair Peck questioned when the design work was expected from Bolton & Menk. Ms. Olson
stated this work has started and was anticipated to be completed in August. She noted the
surveys have already been completed.
Chair Peck indicated he was anxious to see if an underpass could be created on the west side
removing the pillars to allow for greater passage while maintaining the bridges integrity. Ms.
Olson explained that Bolten and Menk have a preliminary design that will be expanded and will
utilize the survey and grading plans. She stated the design will be similar to the underpass in
New Brighton.
Ms. Olson asked for comments from the PTRC on the bike lane versus an off-road path. She
stated both have pros and cons for this area while mixing with traffic and pedestrians.
Ms. Olson indicated the County was open to the idea of paving the additional shoulder to provide
a bike lane and could do this within their regular maintenance plan. However, there is no
scheduled maintenance identified for this road. Chair Peck felt this was a great solution and
would save the City a great deal of money.
Chair Peck questioned if additional plans would come before the PTRC on this roadway. Ms.
Olson stated that if the widening of the shoulders took place with a County maintenance project,
it could be ten or more years before that takes place. However, it is possible that the County
would be able to cost share for this project.
Chair Peck indicated the underpass of the bridge caused much concern for bikers and was
extremely dangerous at this time. Ms. Hilgers stated she would be in favor of a bike lane with
extended shoulders. The Committee was in agreement to recommend extending the shoulders
P ARKS, TRAILS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
April 21, 2009
Page 5 of9
for a bike lane on both sides of the roadway. Chair Peck felt this was a wise and safe alternative
to the off road bike path.
MOTION: Committee Member Hilgers motioned to recommend that Council, in order to
increase safety, consider the possibility of constructing pedestrian improvements
on both the east and west sides of the CP Rail bridge on Old Snelling and research
the possibility with Ramsey County of paving/widening the roadway shoulders to
provide a bike lane on both the east and west side in the most cost effective
manner, seconded by Committee Member Garretson. The motion carried
unanimously.
c. Park Capital Improvement Proeram (CIP) Discussion
Ms. Olson indicated the Council held a work session to review the CIP. She reviewed how the
PTRC items were shifted around explaining that the City trail signage received $15,000 for 2009
and $10,000 for 2010.
Ms. Olson noted that the Lexington Avenue Trail was being worked on by the Community
Development Director and herself. At this time it was in the budget with hopes of finding 50%
of the expenses covered by the neighboring businesses. Chair Peck suggested this be presented
as an opportunity to increase their sales.
Discussion ensued legarding a trail on County Road F and if a partnership could be worked out
between the businesses and the City. Ms. Olson indicated that this segment became a lower
priority due to the uncertainty of the Hamline/694 interchange future.
Ms. Olson reported that West Round Lake Trail is in poor condition at this time with weeds and
tree roots. She indicated there is a .46 mile gap in the trail due to the inability to negotiate an
easement with Scholl Co. Deluxe Corporation bought out Scholl's and therefore, Ms. Olson
stated she would be contacting them to pursue an easement and once she has more information,
will report back to the Committee.
Mr. Messerly questioned if a trail was being designed from Old Highway 10 through the pasture.
Ms. Olson stated the City did have a portion of land near the townhomes on Park Shore Drive
stating the only concern was Vaughn owns the property and would require an easement.
Ms. Olson reported that the City of New Brighton has a parks subcommittee and asked if the
PTRC would like to have a joint meeting in the next few months to talk about the connections to
Long Lake and the Elmer L. Andersen extensions. The Committee was in favor of this meeting.
D. Proiect Updates
1. Safe Routes to School
ADDENDUM NO.2
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
FEASffiILITY REPORT FOR TRAILICP RAIL BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
This Addendum shall become a part of the original Agreement for Professional Services, dated September 15,
2008. This addendum is in regards to the design of a second trail underpass across the CP Rail.
I. Scope of Work
For the purposes of this Addendum, Basic Services to be provided by the CONSULTANT for the
reconstruction of Babcock Trail include:
Consistent with the Scope of Work detailed in Addendum #1, Bolton & Menk will complete a topographic
survey, design, and engineering required to prepare final plans and specifications for a second trail
underpass along the east side of Old Highway 10, under the existing CP Rail bridge. Those meetings and
common design details that are detailed in Addendum #1 for the underpass on the west side of Old
Highway 10 will be completed in concert with the east side design in order to minimize project
redundancies. The final set of construction documents for the east and west side designs will be packaged
and bid together.
II. Compensation for Services
Fees for the scope of work as described above will be a lump sum amount of $30,000, and will be added
with the contract amount for Addendum #1.
III. Signatures
This instrument is subject to the terms of the original agreement referenced above. This Agreement may
only be amended, supplemented, modified or canceled by a duly executed written instrument signed by
both parties.
In witness whereof, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed in their behalf:
CLIENT: City of Arden Hills
CONSULTANT: Bolton & Menk~ Inc.
Mark D. Kasma, BMI Office Manager
Marcus A. Thomas, Associate Engineer
Date
Date
1