CR 97-91 Approve Lake Street Bridge Replacement
May 1, 1997
\ "'i '( 0
~
.y ~
o P K \ ~
Council Report 97- 91
Approve Lake Street Bridge Replacement Resolution
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move that Council
Adopt Resolution 97-57. Resolution identifying the Lake Street bridge as a
priority bridge re?lacement or rehabilitation proiect and of our intent to
consider proceeding with design and construction when State funds are
available.
Overview.
This local bridge is deteriorated, 92 years old and eligible for State bridge
funds for rehabilitation or replacement. In order to compete for available
funds, a Council Resolution must be submitted. Upon receipt of the
resolution, Mn/DOT will consider the project, prioritize it and inform us if
our project is above the funding line for a year 2000 project. We can then
decide if we'd like to pursue project design and construction. The City would
be required to pay for bridge demolition and project design only.
Primary Issues to Consider.
. What would be the project cost? City cost?
The estimated cost for total bridge replacement is $260,000. The City share
(demolition & design) is estimated at $75,000.
. Project timetable
The timetable depends on the availability of State Transportation Bond funds
and how high our project ranks in priority with other bridge projects. The
project is currently shown as a year 2000 project in the draft 1998-2002 CIP.
Supporting Information.
. Resolution 97-57
. MnDot Memo
· ~ Insp1ktvemmr-
--'1'
Steven J. Stadler, Public Works Director
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 97-57
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hopkins has determined that the following deficient
bridges on the City Street system are a high priority and require replacement or rehabilitation
within the next five (5) years, and
Estimated Local State Trans. Proposed
Bridge No. Road/Street Project Cost Funds Bond Funds Constr. Year
Needed
L9334 Lake Street $260,000 $75,000 $185,000 2,000
WHEREAS, local roads play an essential role in the overall state transportation network and local
bridges are the critical component of the local road systems, and
WHEREAS, State support for the replacement or rehabilitation of local bridges continues to be
crucial to maintaining the integrity of the local road systems and is necessary for the City to
proceed with the replacement or rehabilitation of the high priority deficient bridge described
above, and
WHEREAS, The City of Hopkins intends to proceed with replacement or rehabilitation of this
bridge as soon as possible when State Transportation Bond Funds are available,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Hopkins commits
that it will proceed with the design and contract documents for this bridge immediately after being
notified that funds are available in order to permit construction to take place within one year of
notification.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins this 6th Day of May, 1997.
By
Charles D. Redepenning, Mayor
ATTEST:
Teny Obermaier, City Clerk
,
II
~~,
,-
Minnesota Department of Transporfallon
Memo
Stale AId for Local Transportation DIvision
Mail stop 500
395 John Ireland Boulevard
st. Paul. MN 55155
Offlcetel: 612/296-3011
Fax: 612/282-2727
March 11, 1997
TO:
County Engineers
City Engineers
DSAE's
Consultant Engineers
Patrick B.Murphy ~i1P--'f'?:s
State Ai~ Engin~ -
FROM:
SUBJECT: Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Using State Transportation Bond Funds
As we have discussed with County and City representatives, we are revising the
process for advising our office of intent to use State Transportation Bonds (bridge
bonding) for replacement or rehabilitation of deficient bridges; and the process of
selecting projects for funding with Bond funds.
In order to identify the shon term needs for bridge bonds, and to document each local
government's intent to proceed promptly with a project, if bridge bonds are made
available, we are asking each County and City, proposing bridge
replacement/rehabilitation projects within the next five years, to adopt the attached
resolution and submit it to the State Aid Division.
We will consider the resolutions we receive as pre-application for bridge bonding and
will use them to develop the Capitol Budget Request for the 1998 legislative session.
We will also prioritize the bridges included in the resolutions and use that priority list
to select bridges to receive the designated amount of bridge bonding authorized by the
legislature:
We want to know the specific bridges which are candidates for bridge bonding and that
the local governments are committed to proceed with those bridges, if bond funds are
made available. We believe this information will make it easier to document the bridge
bonding need and will provide proof that the authorized funds will be utilized, as the
Capitol Budget Request is considered in the legislative process.
An equal opportunity employer
/
.. . Bridge Replacement Memo
Page 2
March, 1997
"
This new process means that eligible projects will no longer be ap.proved on essentially
a fIrst-come/fIrSt funded basis. Instead we will offer available funds to the Droiects
identified by County Board/City Council resolution on a priority basis and expect that
those local governments will proceed to deliver fmal plans and specifications in a
timely manner. Please read the attached resolutions and directions, since they explain
the new process in more detail.
If your county (including townships) or city intends to replace/rehabilitate deficient
bridges in the next five years, please complete the appropriate resolution and have it
adopted by your County Board or City Council. Under this new process, we will not
be offering bridge bonding for any bridge that has not been included in a resolution.
Adopted and certified resolutions should be submitted to the State Aid Division by May
15. 1997. since we must prepare the preliminary Capital Budget Request in June. If
you have any questions, call Julie SkalIman (612/296-9875), or myself (612/296-9872).
An equal opporb.mity employer
~.. Mn/DOT. OFFICE OF BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES
~,o;:~dge No. :L9334. Bridge Inspection Report Feb 13, 1997 Sheet 1 of 1
County:27 HENNEPIN Road System:~O MUN Crosses:LAKE ST OVER MINNEHAHA CR
Control Section:. Road Number:0~65 Location:O.~ MI E OF JCT CSAH 20
City:lS35. HOPKINS. Ref. Point :000+00.050 Load Posting (Tons) :LEGAL
Township:. Local Bridge Num.: Length: 59 Width: 26.2
Maint.. Area /" District: 5 Crew Number: Min. Vert. (Under):
Sec: Twp: Rge.: Inspection Class:A Min. Vert. (Over):
Bridge Type: ~06 _. Concrete Deck Girder Deck Area (s. f.) :
NEI: Deck 4 Super 7 Sub 4 Culv N Paint Area (s.f.):
CONDITIONS
NO ELEMENT/OTY EnvYrl 1 I 2 I 3 I 4
10lReinf Conc Girderl31951 1601_____/_____1
1 160 LFI 1971_____1 1601_____1
62 I ReinConc Abutmentl3J951 521_____1_____1
1 52 LFI 1971_____1 521_____1
71lAbutment wingwalll31951 41_____1_____1
1 4 EAI 1971_____1 41 I
991Bit Approach 131951 21_____1_____1
1 2 EAI 1971_____1 21_____1
1021Concrete Railing 131951 lIS 1_____1_____1
1 118 LFI /971_____1 1 1091
1131Conc Deck w/AC OLI3/95/ 11_____/_____1
I 1 EAJ 1971_____1 1/_____1
%Unsd:_
%Unsd: 0
COMMENTS
I
I
/
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
91
OTHER ITEMS: 95
ISO Channel. & Protection 6
lS1 Signing. N
182 Guardrail: N
lS30 Plowstraps. No
.184 Dr,,:inage. .0". N
lS5 Slope Protection N.
lS6 CUrb:&.Walk. N
187 Roadway Over.
~SS Miscellaneous.
I SMART FLAGS
1108 Scour
1109 Traffic. Impact
1156- Fatigue Cracking. .
1157 Pack Rust
115S'Deck. Cracking
1159 Under Deck
/160 Substruct Movmnt
1161 Section LOss
I
97
6
N.
N
N
N.
N
N
N
N.. N
INSPECTOR
INSP NAME'
L. R: LEHRKE
YEAR
1995
1997
REVIEWED BY
5 I
1*1996 .
I
1102. NORTHWEST.CORNER NEEDS REPAIR
/ - LOT OF SPALLING GOING ON.
I RAILING HAS 6' SHEAR CRACK IN
I. NORTHWEST CORNER WITH S S.F.
/ SPALL AND REBAR EXPOSED-TIPPED
I. NORTH. NORTH RAIL EAST END HAS
I' 3 S.F. OF SPALL AND 100 S.F. OF
I HEAVY SCALE ALL OVER.
1 I
1_____lls2. GUARDRAIL ATTACHMENT TO
1 BRIDGE VERY FLIMSY.
1
162. WEST ABUTMENT 7' DOWN FROM
1 BOTTOM OF DECK, ENTIRE FACE OF
1 ABUTMENT IS SPALLING OFF WITH
I HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL REBAR
I TOTALLY EXPOSED uP TO 9" DEEP
1 ENTIRE LENGTH.
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
95 971
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
/
I
1
I
I
1
"
./
s...-
"; ~ ~~: ' .. ;;;>>;;->~ -"~ f - ~
....< (/)"'", ';{.~'~,~.~~,~.:.t.':;.
..~ .:::!~~'~';~ ~.. ..2.',:,':.;~~.lF;.S';<
-.~>-' .O::::>-~. _..~ ." ',0' _",," '., ,-~.
: t;;~.':~b:; :>,.-, ;i; ! .:.\t-~~~1Y'~' ..
,.;,<. :;';(~;:'>",. ~g,J\;;;?;;. ...
...:f.-.t~..l;~...~,f,~..::.}..~.t ~~~J~: ~ - ~.;'.:: ~!7..~~!~~.;;.:1. '.
_.....-;'i~:,.,...;.,_:-".... .. ..,~<.:~"F~~:. _ '. ,>. '._~.
' .;.~(}*,%j':::~ ,- ~,~ ^ ">' .
.~ .~J~~.~~t;.- Y~., W '. ~;
<< ~.:.'~'...'..~,:-.' 1-llJOZ~,~ .... ...-';.; ;wf-:;~.t.'..::.'.~u.~.'..llJ""~: 'i.. ~.:. . .'," ~.!:.~:.:,,:,".~,..;~~.(..,~-:~.,; ". .
f':~'2 "'~ ~;;. - -- J :.-ii.1...i,'. ..:.'.,::...._'..~..._....:~_..c.~:.:..'..:~_'...,:_.:.._~.:
~~~~~~~):'~ ~....:.-:,~~~:~&~:~~ : . -i..,',:.;v;,;:,2L. 'T'.' < _ ~ '- ....
.~";.-~<.._ UJ<;~'">.;>'~'N .
~.~.,-ti~,~I'r .'_ ~li)c' ,;,,!t;;~
.......,...~>.._.,: . llJ .:'.:....:;:~..,~..?..;,Jt:W,:.._.....:.':-.: " -, ,.-
-- "" .'. .o;~' l~
,-'..~ -',~:"-.;'~
-:., ~."
~~i.~2~~:~
..~;~'.~~::.-.,: .
. ,: . . ~ UJ'~ ~ 0 0 .. *ft~r~;.:::
-Ln~~;~_: . .t>tc
~':~:il";~:il}: > ~--'~-;t2i;~:" ~~jI
\~f~#}':
;Y:#~~:..-:
.....-:".,.'-,..
~~t~:;
3~~~::-:.:-.:_
- -" ,.,.
~;,~f~:~'i;;:">\~i6~.~~~~"'..
~,;~':;~
""-
~:'~$~
:~~~
.:.'~.L'
" ,-'
"","
...'.'
'.;-~'
~.~~~
;; :~./~~~~~~~
.-.
-
-;>:..
..
,
.'
.c
"
:;"~;.
':i\(,.:;'~
~~li.
~~\f:.'" .,;:~",i:'". -
> ' .~
. q ..,.+ ~."
~~~,~~,t :.
.if<,?,,;; ,~~ "
':_--.:
.,~;
,
,'''". ~
..
'"
%-
,.::....
!-.tAf~~~-'
'''v_',"
",.,.....-._~-
.;:;:;" :-~,
";.>.
'.
"',