Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/04/1972 MINUTES May 4, 1972 The one hundred and fifty-seventh regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge City Council was called to order by Mayor Albert E Anderson at 7 30 p.m at 7390 West 38 Avenue. Aldermen attending were Dr. Paul Abramson, Jack Bramble, Joseph Donaldson, Robert Howard, Calvin Hulsey and Ray Pepe. Also attending were Mayor Anderson, Clerk Louise Turner City Attorney Maurice Fox, staff members and interested citizens. Walter Grande, Finance Officer presented information and bids on an aerial basket device and brush chipper. Low Bids, both from Wrights Tree Service were aerial basket - $13,979.00 and brush chipper _ $4,549 00. Resolution No. 167,appropriation Resoltio~ was introduced by Alderman Donaldson and read. Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move the following be added after the listings 'Be It Further Resolved that the truck chassis, previously approved by Motion to be purchased from Account No. 490 be purchased instead from Account No. 453.14.'" Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 6-0 Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that Resolution No. 167 be approved as amended." Motion was seconded by Alderman Abramson and passed 5-1 with Alderman Howard voting "nay." Motion by Alderman Bramble "I move the Treasurer be authorized to purchase a 50 foot aerial basket device and a brush chipper from Wright Tree Service at a total cost not to exceed $18,528.00 from Account No. 453.14." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 5-1 with Alderman Howard voting "nay." Glen Taylor, Public Works Director, presented a written report to Council and spoke on the deterioration of Marshall Street bridge. Mr. Taylor stated present restrictions have not been obeyed, that it would qualify for Federal Aid but Federal Aid is on a state-wide basis and there is no assurance of getting it, that if the bridge were to be closed a week or ten days, notice should be given to the public, however, that he hesitiated to keep it open even that long. Also, that the bridge is 20 feet wide and is used by 7,000 cars per day and that AASHo standards are 30 foot width for that amount of traffic. The complete written report is attached to the Minutes and filed in the General File under Streets. The following comments were made Mayor Anderson who stated that this was one of 16 items sub- mitted to the County for consideration, none of which was directed on to the State. Alderman Bramble who stated that the bridge should be made one-way and a large obvious sign posted which would say "condemned - Cross at Your Own Risk" He also said that it might be possible to use culverts with a covering of cement as had been done on Sheridan. Alderman Abramson stated that if it is structurally unsound he favored having the Director of Public Works close it down. Alderman Pepe who stated that he was concerned that some businesses would suffer and that he was disappointed that Arvada from which much of the traffic comes had not shown more concern. ~ //~ /'.) J - L, t If _ f ! ":uc1r1 -2- Motion by Alderman Howard "I move that the Director of Public Works be instructed to barricade the existing Marshall Street Bridge at Clear Creek from all vehicular traffic at midnight on Friday, May the 12th, 1972 This time being adequate to notify the concerned governmental agencies (City of Arvada and the State of Colorado and County of Jefferson) and those people presently utilizing the structure Additionally, I move that we expend all the necessary effort to obtain that funding required for the structure's removal and replacement" Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-1 with Alderman Bramble voting "nay." Mr. Taylor stated that alternate routes would be Harlan Street and Sheridan and that Arvada would take care of the pre-closing signs Motion by Alderman Bramble "I move that the Mayor be authorized to execute the proxies for Consolidated Mutual Water Company." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-1 with Alderman Abramson voting "nay" because he felt the Motion should have specified "for this year." Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that Myron Nixon be reappointed to the Arborist Committee." The term is to be as specified in the Ordinance Motion was seconded by Alderman Bramble and passed 6-0. Motion by Alderman Pepe "I to the Personnel Committee." and passed 6-0. move that William Thornton be reappointed Motion was seconded by Alderman Bramble Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move the matter be continued for one week and the remaining appointment to the Personnel Committee be made next week." Motion was seconded by Alderman Bramble and passed 5-1 with Alderman Howard voting "nay." WF-72-o1 Flood Plain Request by William Blevins was brought up for consideration Alderman Abramson read a Finding of Fact prepared by him (relative to the request) and made the following Motion "I move that the Finding of Fact as presented and eXcluding Section I be accepted by Council " Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey. Alderman Pepe said he felt this Finding of Fact should be defeated because he was in favor of the original Finding of Fact prepared by the Planning Department. Question was called and Motion was defeated 3-2 with Alderman Bramble abstaining and Aldermen Howard, Pepe and Donaldson voting "nay." Alderman Abramson recommended that since it was early Council might discuss and reword the Finding of Fact Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move we adjourn" Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard and passed 3-2 with Alderman Bramble abstaining and Aldermen Abramson and Hulsey voting "nay." Meeting was adjourned at 9 30 p.m. , /-~""' -'-- I",," i- J,c~ Louise F Turner ~ City Clerk ~,//L, /-//-I5 // II II I, Ii 'I I, II II " ,I Ii II I I' .I II ,i I .1, -~. , .. .. 'S /"-// t/:? (,,) ..-....- - . 'It REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE May 4, 1972 " .. 1. Request City Council action as per attached motion, resolution, or ordinance. (Underline one) ~. Supporting Data: a. The Problem: ~ Marshall Street Bridge b. The Factors: (1) A visual inspection of the subject structure revealed the following: (a) Bridge and approach span decks have deteriorated to point approaching complete failure. This is particula~ly obvious on the bottom surface of the north approach span where a large area of re- inforcing steel is visible due to a loss in the concrete cover. (b) Concrete, with~tanding those loads (dead and live) applied by the ten 24" "I" beams (5 under the ---- north and south approach spans), is approaching complete failure beneath their respective bearing plates at the north abutment, north pier and south pier. ... (c) Spalling and fractures throughout the north abut_ ment, north pier and south pier, indicate a general deterioration and an unknown reduction of structural integrity. (2) An examination of the available documentation relative to the 8ubject structure revealed the following: (a) Bridge was removed from the State of Colorado's Transportation SYstem by Resolution. Number 1356.0 on February 7, 1966 at which time it was reported to be in need of repairs. ('0) On July 6, 1971 in responGe to a request by the City of Wheat Ridge, the State of Colorado's Division of Highways submitted an inspection report on the subject structure which ngrees sub- stantially with items 2.b. (1) (n), l.b. (1) (b) and 2.b. (1) (c). Additionally, it Bhould be noted, the Division of Highways reco~ended a ten ton limit be imposed immediately and take ~o8e I steps necessary to correct the structural deficien_ cies. 'I I ,! c. " .....- , ~ ....1 -- - " - ~ -- '::> '- j c:= -1:,.] ~ L'~ -: ~ GO u.... , . . . . . -. j' /' / / I i / r/ I / II " ; !/ II ,. " " " I , I I I , I \, r :, ., . ., (' :....... .' '} .- / <./ / /' J ('/ j /' Pages 2 of 4 (c) The Federal Aid System Plan prepared by the Division of Highways, dated March 8, 1972 identifies Marshall Street as Federal Aid Primary Type II Roadway. This designation qualifies the City of Wheat Ridge for obtaining funds from the TOPIC's program for the repair or removal and replacement of the existing structure. (Note This project would be subject to those priorities established by the Division of Highways on a state wide basis.) " (3) The following is a list of those actions which have been effected to date, relative to the subject structure. (a) On july 9, 1971 a load limit (10 ton gross) and a maximum speed limit (15 MPH) was imposed. (b) Due to driver disregard of the preceding load limit and the associated problems of enforcement an additional restrictive load limit (3/4 ton trucks or less) was imposed on December 15, 1971. (Note Speed and load limit enforcement remains a problem.) . , . . ! - . ) i. (c) At the request of the Department of Public Works, a local Consulting Engineer submitted a proposal on March 28, 1972 outlining those investigative steps necessary to analyze the present adequacy and structural integrity of the subject structure. The cost of this study would necessitate an ex- penditure of some $4,000 (~). '. (4) Coordination with those interested Governmental Agencies (The City of Arvada and the State of Colorado) relative to the possible closing of the subject structure disclole~ the fOllowing: " (a) The City of Arvada expressed a concern for those citizens residing within their city li~its which would be inconvenienced by the ClOSing, but in- dicated there were sufficient alternate routes available and capable of absorbing that traffic presently carried upon Marshall Street between 52nd and Harlan Avenues. (5) (b) The State of Colorado's Division of Highways indicated that the closing would not impact the present design of Interstate 80 South. Additional coordination with officials of the Division of Highways provided new avenues to research in order to raise the priority of this project relative to future TOPICS funding. The present vehicular traffic count of 7000 ADT would require a 30 foot width between the curb ~ faces as determined by that criteria within the AASHO Geometric Design Standards. The' existing structure has a 20 foot Width, substantially lesl than that required. , . . ' '\ \ . I) .l ,t .' ,>'. ,/: " " " , ;/ , " I I " I I. I I I I 'I II I 'I Ii I' ,I I I I " I I .r- ,I 'I'" I I , I I , I ' , I I i' It I I 1 J I ,I , I i . 3. I ) , . , , " '1 d. t, ;1 - --_......_-_.~.. ( , :~ Page 3 of 4 (6) The repair or removal and replacement of this structure wit~ funds generated totally by the ~iti7.ens of Wheat Ridge would be inequitable if based upon those benefits derived from the im. provement. (7) Last, but necessarily the least, some local businesses between 52nd and Harlan Avenues would be adversely affected by the closing of the structure. . C. Possible Solutions: (1) Leave the subject structure open to the present restricted traffic and explore financial avenues for its repair or removal and replacement while pursuing one of the following: (a) Provide stringent enforcement of the ~xisting speed snd load limits as well as frequent visual structural inspections observing the effect of that traffic upon the structure. (b) Initiate an investigation in order to determine its present structural adequacy. This study would include a cost estimate of that effor~ necessary to restore the structure to its original configuration. Note This would necessitate a $4,000 (~) expenditure in a structure which is presently classified as inadequate relative to minimum AASHO require- ments. Additionally, an expenditure of this magnitude (4,000 ~) would give titular approval to the implementation of a design package and subsequent construction repairs.) (2) Close the subject structure. to all vehicular traffic and expend no effort on its repair or removal and replacement. (3) Close the subject structure to all vehicul~r tr~ffic and expend all the effort necessary to obtain funds for its removal and replacement. Conclusion - Recommended Action .... In the opinion of the Director of Public Works the subject structure has an unknown structural sufficiency and represents a real danger to those persons utilizing its services. There- fore, it is recommended that the structure be closed inmediately and expend that effort necessa~y to arrange for f~nds for its removal and replacement. Additionally, it is recommended that no funds be expended in its repair due to its present obsolescence. . Attachments (check one) o None 8 Additional information on 2 abovQ attached. I ~ , <.i- /' / " /' ,('\ - . . ,(,I . . . - / ,::>- <-6:;:' J FLOOD PLAI~ DISCUSSION The above referenced U S Army Eng~ncer Report lndicates that an Intermediate Regional F .Lood in L2,la GU.Lcn \Ji.Ll. yield approximately 3800 CFS just below ..~ple Grove Reservolr, a00ut 2 5 miles upstream from ~ne lots being considered, and 1300 CFS at its mouth, about 750 feet downstream from tne lots being considered Further, the Report, by Plates 26 a;d 32, shows that the flood spreads out to the north of Lena Gulch ~nto a secondary channel. Inasmuch as only 1::;00 CFS of flow lS indi- cated at the mouth of the Lena Gu:ch, and inasmucn as the distance from the mouth to the lots being considered ~s rela- tively short, it appears that Lena Gulch at the line of Hoyt Court would be called upon to carry about 1300 CFS T~e pro- file of Independence Court, showing the south bank of Clear Creek to be about 1 3 feet below the roadway at Lena GL.lch, would tend to support this conclusion Further, the c~annel cross-section area t the line of Hoyt Court at reasonable rate of flow would also support this conclusion The attached prints do not snow the profile of Lena Gulch, however, field determination indicates a grade of apprOXL~ate.LY o 5% from Independence Court eastward to the east limit of Fernwood Subdivision II CHP~GE IN CHANNEL SECTION ~ In order to provide a building pad with an elevation 2 feet above the flood crests, in compliance with ORJn~A...\JCE No 68, Series of 1970, approximately 50% of the channel area at the line of Hoyt Court will be eliminated This condition pro- vides for building space on Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Fernwood S~b- division II 4 The prints attached hereto do not show the limits of fill if only Lots 4 and 7 are 0uilt upon and Lots 5 and 6 remain un- improved It should be noted that under this condition of lot improvement, only about 10% of the channel area at the line of Hoyt Court would be eliminated FLOOD-PROOFING MEASURES Inasmuch as the structure will be located anove flood e~e- vation and, inasmuch as no basement is contempiated, additional flOOd-prOOfing measures as defined in said Ordinance are deemed to be unnecessary Respectfully SUbmi~ted, ~ANE ENGINEERING SE~VICE By Registered PrOfessional Engineer Decemner 6, 1971 -, l LANE: EI\:GINEERING SERVICE: HeWARD AI-AN C R.giJe.,.d Prof.,IIO".1 E"-;,,,.., R~"Jt.,.d urwi Su"",yO' CIVIl.. E1'OGI1'.EERS AND I..AND ?I..AN1'OEi'lS &DOO W FOURTEENTH ....VE. . LAKEWOOD. eOl-o. 60215 C::MMETT L. LANE R.w;JI",.J Prol..uiOf'1.1 En;in.., R.~I'~," L.rwI Sw,.....)"Ol" T&LEPHONE :l33-404:l DRA.I~lJ...GE RSPORT FERM100D SU3DIVISION II AT LENA GULCH W-rlEAT RIDGE, COLORADO PURPOSE This Drainage ReDor~ h&s Deen prepared for ~he purpose of requesting a Specio~ .;:..:emption Permit c.S proviced for ~r. O:::OI- NlU~CE No 68, Series of 1970, City of Wheat Ridge, Colorodo, allowing construction of double rcsi.c-tial units on Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Fernwood Subdivision II at Hoyt Court, north of West 39th Avenue FLOOD PLAIN INFO~'~TION The magnitude of the design flood, the e~evation of the flood crest, and the limits of the flood within the flood pLain have been obtained from "FLOOD PI.,.'\IN INFOR.1.:l.TION, VOLU:;Z V, DE~~ER ~illTROPOLITAN AREA", prepared by the U S Army Engineer District, Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, Nove~er 1970. Specific data used in this Report is found at the following specific parts of the U. S. Engineer document: 1 Table 7, Flood Disctarges 2 Plate 26, Lena Gulch Flood Areas 3 Plate 30, Lena Gulch Profiles 4 Plate 32, Lena Gulch Cross Sections ATTi\CHED PRINTS The following prints are attached for information purposes and for ease in showing existing and proposed features S113-2-1 Aerial photo, taken in 1970, with acd~d flood pla~n data, lot location, stree~ names, waterways, and extent of fil~ re- quired to meet the City of Wheat Ridge Ordinance requirements S113-2-2 A print showing the profiles of Indepen- dence Court and Hoyt Court, the f~ood crest eleva~io~s, t~e extent' of fill into the flood plain, and other pertinent data.