Cr 90-225 Mainstreet Reconstruction
-.
~
. .
. October 31t 1990 Council Report~ 90-225
MAINSTREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
gropqsed Action.
staff" recommends adoption of the following mot.ion: "Move. to ad om;.
Re$QJ,.utiQ.n No: 90-.1.12 ordering the improyement _~s outlined _ i.IL the
f~as.tbility report ootion j:~rev;k6ed ~n.9 agofi.1: Resat-ution No: 90-12f}.
1:eau~st.inq, ijennepin Coun.t:Lto j).pprove the insta,llation of a t~W.vorary
tni.fi.9 ,ignal at Spady Oak -BQaa-,-~LC..t.Y- Rd t5ll.........?nd, Ma:i.n.s,treet png
~9Ve ~~~o.1:K.~ to ~Q.m:w.en~._immed..i.at.eu_on 1!D~
subject to negQ.tiat1-ons .Q,f a qesi.gn engin~.m;..i.ns......gontract with West.wood
.FJ;c~e~onal Se;cyices. It
Qy~Jejt{ t..
On October 161 1990 the city Council acted on each seglM.mt of the
Mainstreet reconstruction feasibility. segment one (Rali\p) ltl8 S
deleted~ Segment two (Washington - 5th AVe) was deleted from major
reconstruction but repair of curb and sidewalk was directed. Seg1IlE:m.t
three (5th Ave - 11th Ave) was approved fer t'sconstruction vii tl'l
intermediate infrastructure replacement. Segment four (11th Ave -
. Shady Oak Read) was approved for full reconstruction. Segment five
(:Hainst.reet & Shady Oak intersection) was approved for temporary
improvements, including a signal light. street condition and sanitary
sewer services wars directed to be reviewed for suitability of
construction of option five raviaed.
St.aff has further reviewed the constrnction method proposed in option
five revised and has generally determined that this method will ~ork.
Staff is recommending that the project mOve forward with additional
review of sani tary main and services dur inq the design phase~ The
time available to complste the design of this project for early bid I
lettinq is reaching critical timing fer weather constraints and must
move forward if 1991 construction is contemplated.
f~ima~,Xp~qe~,tQ~qo~Bi~~
0 Is option five revised a viable option?
0 What is staff's recommendation?
0 Should Westwood be appointed as the design engineer?
SUPP-2;-t.inq ..1nf~
0 Primary Issues to Consider
0 Altarnatives
0 Resolut.ion No. 90-112
0 Resolution No. 90-128
0 Council Report: 90-70
0 Proposed inatre t Project Schedule
: ;.;'~-:-
-- W-~ ..._~--- 1liNIIlf"..a.1I"'..a: ;,~ ~-.... ' - --- ~-'l ~ -
Council Rpt: 90-225
Page 2
. fI. imau....I..f?B U~$ .to...J;.2Mi.~
0 Is option five revised a viable optiOl?
This option appears to be viable for the most part as it has been
discussed. The road rating and borings by Braun 'l'es,ting indicate a
stable road condition of 10 ton capacity from 6th Ave to 11th Ave and
some minor sub-base problems from 5th Ave to 6th Ave which can be
corrected in a one-half at a time const.ruction approach.
However 8 the sanitary sewer servi.ces inspec.;ced by Root-c-Matic
indicate that 50 percent or more of the services may re~~ire
replacementft Root-o-Matic inspects the services from the building
side with a mini-camera. Many buildings on Mainstreet do not have
access from the bui Iding side due to lack of cleanw'outs. visu-Sewer
will be contacted and directed to televise the sewer service from the
sewer main side that were not able to be inspect3d. We f(~el that
repair of these services can be acoomplished by requiring work on the
second shift or weekend without changing the general intent of keeping
the street open to one-half street tr.affic between 5th Ave ahd 11th
Ave.
The sanitary sewer main tapes are also being reviewed by RCM engineers
to ensure that slip lininq the pipe is viab~e. There may be a short
. section or two of main that may need replacement vice slip lining, but
aqaln this could be required on the 2nd shift or weekends which will
maintain the int.egrity of the one-half street com;\tructiol'l techniqtle.
The option five revised method therefore still appears to be a viablg i
option with the cond.iticn that: some sanitary and water service and I
I
I
main repai:t's will be necessary which may disrupt traif 10 for limited I
periods.
0 What is staff's recommendation?
Staff recQTdmends moving forward with the general concept of Option
fi:ve revised. This must be done immediately if construction is to I
begin in 1991.
Surveying, road rating and sanitary sewer service televising must
De9in immediately while weather allows accur3t~ work. If aggressive
c~natruction is allowedt such as double shifting and weekend
construction I and weather cooperates, we feel oo,nfident t.hat
Mainstreet from 5th Ave to 17th Ave could be cmnplated in 1991.
Additional blocks from 17th Ave to Shady Oak Road coul~ ~lao be
completed if a bonus clause per block is in the contract. The faster
this project is completed the lesser negative impact on busineasQs
will be felt~ The temporary signal and street improvement at Shady
O~k Read and Mainstreat could als~ be completed in 1991.
. A proposed schedula prepared by Westwood is attached which indicates a
April 16, 1991 bid openin<j t\r1d a May 21, 1991 assessment hearinq. The
bid could be awarded on June 25~ 1991 and construction started July 8,
1991 or earlier.
~w - .-~ ..... ..________'~~__~ __~_r__"~_ __,_
,
council Rpt: 90-225
Page 3
. Consideration of the MTC bus route on Mainstreet should begin
immediately. This will require meeti.ngs with MTC, public hearings and
eventually council action. This can be conducted ~imultan9ously with
the project design and Mainstr~et can be designed for a with or
without bus option to allow ultimate flexibility.
0 Should Westwood Professional Services be appointed as the design
engineer'?
Attached is Council Report; 90-70 which recommended westwood for the
feasibility study. The RFP attached to the report asked for estimated
percentage of construction design engineering and construction
engineering costs and specified that negotiations would be required at
the desiqn and construction phase of the ~roject~ Westwood gave
estimates that were toward the lower median of all RFP respondents~
Staff recommends that Council direct negotiations with Westwood on the
design phase of the project. We f~el that a fair design percent fee
can be negotiated and retaining Westwood will allow an efficient and
cost effective transition from feasibility to dasign. The westwood
design engineering contract would be presented for approval at t.h~
November 20 council meeting.
The construction engineering or ~anaqement if that approach ie d~si~ed
will be negotiated at the end of the design phase. At this time a
. change of consultant could be made if desired.
Alt~rnatives "
The Council has the following alternati.ves:
1. Approve the action as recommended by staff. This would allow
pursuit of Option rive revised, and negotiations with Westwood
for design engineering of 'the project.
2. Modify the action by use of alternAte options which the council
may devlttlopo
3. Table matter for further information.
BecQ~tion.
Staff reco~ends alternative number one. '. ':. J
." '>
- ;",c~c
;1
'-.""
. T.'-.~~~
.~t~~~
i~;
CC~D
........ J~- A1 _. .' .-.. ~.d~~:I_I..i1l..JIl.:sl .dL_UlillTi:IllHI!lIillJ ' IUflllIlIIl'ItIlIIII\II ' J A IJlELt ~l!tlIt~1k~ii;,:iL/~,~r;.~.
w- n..._-- - -- rrlllll'li~--, .....- - ~.~J
. CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 90-112
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS~
MAINSTREET FROM 5TH AVENUE '1'0 SHADY OAF. ROAD
WHEREAS, a resolution of the city Council adopted th.9 21st
day of August, 1990, fixed a date for a Council
hearing on tho proposod improvement of Mainstreet
from Washington Avenue to Shady Oak Road by way of
street and utility reconstruction, and
installation of lighting and landscape amenities
and
WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published
notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing
was held thereon on the ?9th d~y of September,
1990. at which all pe.rsons desiring to be heard
were given an opportunity to be heard thereon;
NOW THEREFORE I BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA:
.. L Such improvement as proposed in the council
. resolution adopted the 21st day of August,
1990, and said improvement hereafter amended
in scope to include Mainstreet from 5th
Avenue to shady Oak Road, better knotm as
option 5 Revised, is hereby ordered.
2. Westwood Prof~ssional Services, Inc. is
hereby designated as thiS: design engineer fOl:'
this improvement and shall prepare plans and
specifications for the making of such
improvement. Oesignation of th~ design
engineer is subject to contract negotiations.
Adopted by the council this 5th day of November 1990.
--- Nelson W :-Berg, Mayor
ATTEST~
..
James A. Genellie, cIty Clerk
"
..,
C',>,!:': ,
. CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: SO-128
RESOLUTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO ~_K~ T~~ORARY
IMPROV~-::MENTS - MAIN STREET A.."'{D SHADY OAK ROAD INTERSECTION
WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 6th
day of November, 1990, ordered an improvement
project on Mainstreet from Shady Oak Road to 5th
Avenuef and
WHEREAS, the cOlli~cil deems it appropriate and expedient to
install temporary traffic l.igbts and to make
temporary street: improvements at, the intersection
of Shady Oak Road with Mainstreet,
NOW THEREFORE, BE I'll RHSOLVEO BY TtiE CCUNCIL OF THE CITY OF'
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA:
1. The City of Hopkins makes a formal request of
Hennepin County to ins~all the temporary
traffic lights and to make the tempor~ry
street improvements on Hennepin County ReO.W.
. 2. The city of Hopkins wi.ll make the aforesa.id
improvements solely at its own expense and
requests to e~ter int~ an agreement with
Hennepin County.
Adopted by the City Council of 'the City of Hop'Jcirls,
Minnesota, this 6th d.ay of' November, 1990.
ildz~ '-
-~-z:.....--
"'---
Nelsen l1'. Ma""ior
1/
ATTEST:/'7 .- Iff::
/"- ~ // .
. /,"-
.;....._____ LA _/ ,-t--l:-t..- ~
;/ ' James A. Gerrelllei C:tty-clerk ..
/' ..' -
C /
,/
."- .- .
-'.-;:*-ir:
,...../~~
":":::~f
.:; ':.\:;::
','~;r
.':::i'.;;'
:' ...;.~,':;,
, '<,
.. .1,'.
~, '~',~'
~ ',:-::...!
..'~"~~'
. ~'ic",,~
"-.,,',:: , :.' :~\-,i~~~
'.~'" '. .
A-~;" --,',.-'..';,:',:i"-
:~.':::',~>?
..,' ~ J"-~
;e
.. ' "..."'-;
c''':: :.,~~:'~
~'; '.
",'. . ......~~~~~...-..........___----......._--.....'-"-~_...-..___.:.....:,.:~ J ~'<,,{;'- ~:~
'~;.'J;_i '.'
..:;, ~ . ._-_.......'~--~~
~-.- -,
_ ~___ffMit ~iillMNI1 -~ ----.-.-w _.--' - - ~_ ~____-. lUftl'lL "E
. IJ.
..-
4IIt Schedule for Processing Mainstreet Project
* Receive Feasibility study and set Public Hearings August 21, 1990
* Chapter 429 Plililic hearing Septewber - October
11: Ci.ty Council authorizes commencement of det.ailed
design activities November 6, 1990
* City Council received final design plans.
specifications, and cost estimate and orders
advertisement for bids March 5, 1991
* Bids tabulation returned to the City Council and
Assessment Hearing is set April 16, 1991
* Chapter 429 Assessment Hearing is held May 21, 1991
* Project is awarded to the lowest res~n5ible bidde~s J~~e 25, 1991
* Construction corr~encement July 8, 1991
* Construction completion of Segments Three ~ovember 15, 1991
. * Construction completion of Segment Four October, 1992
\J
~
;~
-;1
;"
i
.'~
~!
"
.'Jj
,~
.,
"
}
, ,'.;;~
"
" ~
..., ~
~, ~
~ 4
J.:~ .
" :~~
'~
::':,'~ :~~ ,'~:;: H~
~:)?~g
~~_ ~YIIBf ...J'lII'1WI!~~- i~19!II.lii1ilIl_ - JJ~ ____l1M/l1-- ., ::..:...::.:....:.:...:",': .'.-,c~