HomeMy Public PortalAbout2018-10-11 packetRevised
Notice of Meeting & Tentative Agenda
City of Jefferson Public Works & Planning Committee
Thursday, October 11, 2018
7:30 a.m.
John G. Christy Municipal Building, 320 East McCarty Street
Boone/Bancroft Room (Upper Level)
TENTATIVE AGENDA
1) Introductions
2) Approval of the September 13, 2018 Committee meeting minutes
3) New Business
1. Schellridge Traffic Study (David Bange)
2. Ride the Bus Free Day on Election Days as Recommended by the Public Transit
Advisory Committee (Mark Mehmert)
3. Bike Pavement Striping and Signage on West Main and Miller Streets (David
Bange)
4. TAP Grant Applications (David Bange)
5. High Street Viaduct BEAP Study (Matt Morasch)
6. Pedestrian Crossing at Schools (Requested by Councilman Hussey)
7. 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Update (Alex Rotenberry)
8. CDBG 2019-2023 Consolidation Plan (Jayme Abbott)
4) Other Topics
5) Citizen opportunity to address Council/Staff on Stormwater and Other Public VVorks
Issues
6) Adjourn
NOTES
indivrduats should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as
required under the Americans with Disabilities Act Please allow three business days to process the request
Please calf (573) 634-6410 with questions regarding agenda items
Memorandum
320 East McCarty Street • Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 • P. 573.634.6410 • F: 573.634.6562 • wwwjettersoncitvmo.gov
Date: October 8, 2018
To: Public Works and Planning Committee
From: David Bange P.E., City Engineer -D-p-6
Subject: Intersection of Industrial and Jaycee Drives
The Committee will recall that during the July 2018 meeting Staff presented a traffic study for the
intersection of Industrial Drive and Jaycee Drive that indicated that the intersection did not meet any of
the warrants for a traffic signal and observations revealed that the intersection was operating efficiently
as a two way stop. After discussion Staff was instructed to collect additional traffic counts and look into
such things at lighting and truck traffic and to report back to the Committee.
Manual turning movement counts were collected during the morning and afternoon peak on Tuesday,
September 11, 2018. Counts were taken from 7:00 A.M. to 8:30 A.M. with the peak falling between 7:15
and 8:15 A.M. The evening counts were taken between the hours of 4:00 P.M. and 5:30 P.M. with the
peak falling in the hour between 4:30 and 5:30 P.M. Machine counts were taken from Friday,
September 21 through Thursday, September 27, 2018. Evaluation and comparison of these two sets of
data has led us to believe that some type of error is present within it, as some counts are more than 2.5
times removed from the expected values. Because of this it to will be necessary to reset the counters
and collect the data again.
In addressing the level of lighting at the intersection the City has worked with AmerenUE who will be
installing a brighter LED light in the place of the light that is currently located at the southeast corner of
the intersection. In addition a new light will be placed on the northwest corner of the intersection.
Staff has also made contact with Unilever regarding truck traffic at this intersection. They indicated that
about 50 percent of the time they use Jaycee Drive as their route to and from the warehouse located off
of Jaycee Drive. It was also stated that the removal of the signal has not affected the timing or
operation of their trucks. He did acknowledge that making a left turn from Jaycee Drive to Industrial
during peak times was more of a risk, but that their drivers were professionals. They did not mention
any needs or accommodations.
As was mentioned in the Staff memo from the July meeting the intersection could be served by a
roundabout. Among the benefits of roundabouts is the ability to handle varying volumes of traffic,
removal of the maintenance associated a traffic signals, greatly reduce stopped time and hard
accelerations, and reduce crashes. For these reasons if improvements were sought at this intersection
Staff would favor the construction of a roundabout.
U.1Public WorkslEngineeringldbangelPUBLIC WORKS & PLANNING12018110-20181Jaycee and Industrial Memo docx
Memorandum 2
If you have any questions I can be reached at 634-6433.
DB:db
U:1Public Works'Engineeringldbange\PUBLIC WORKS & PLANNING12018110-2018Waycee and Industrial Memo.docx
JEFI49ffRAN
connecting our community
Department of Public Works Memorandum
320 E. McCarty Street • Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 • P 573-634-6410 • F 573-634-6562 • www.ieffcitymo.orq
Date: October 8, 2018
To: Public Works Committee
Through: Matt Morasch, P.E., Public Works Director
From: Mark Mehmert, Transit Director Vi/Az`
Subject: Public Transit Advisory Committee proposal for free rides on election days
Public Works Staff request the committee provide input regarding providing a trial "ride the bus free
day" on election days.
In its September 25 meeting, the Public Transit Advisory Committee voted to recommend the Public
Works Committee consider directing JEFFTRAN to offer free rides on election days.
If endorsed by the Public Works Committee, staff recommends a trial for the November 6, 2018
election day.
Through the Missouri Public Transit Association (MPTA), staff contacted other Urban and Small
Urban properties to inquire about their policies regarding this concept.
Election Day Free Rides
Urban
Transit
System
Free?
Paratransit
included?
Columbia
Yes
Yes
Joplin
No
N/A
KCATA
Yes
unknown
Springfield
No
N/A
If the committee includes paratransit, staff estimates lost revenue of $2,000 to $2,500 each day
based on an analysis of fares collected on prior election days. If paratransit is not included, lost
revenue is estimated at $500 to $600.
Please feel free to contact me if you have questions.
MM:mm
City►
1111 11111
lef
11111
erson
X11 Public Works
Miller and West Main Striping
City Project Number 32158
1041.
11 111
Begin West
T Main Striping
End West
Main Striping
Begin Miller
Street Striping
Plans Accepted by. Daze:
Matthew Norasch. P.C.
Public Works tfhrector
O
End Miller
Street Striping
INDEX OF SHEETS
1 Cover Sheet
2 General Notes and Sued -Lana Marking Doted
3-7 Mifor Street Striping
8-13 West Main Street Striping
14 Sign Details
15 Miser Street Wayfinding Signs
18 Wast Main Wayfirtding Signs
17 Sign Schedule
a5
W
yllµtq'S
0.'1!
nrnntittErson
T�
_-r,-yrs
fiy�3�� F.� City of Jefferson, Missouri
�'-rryS'sis. ' tAl.rtnl nti`"`� Carrie Tergin, Mayor
'11rrut,,mobls° " tt a Nanta ammo
1
um East rrnw.51n4t
1C; ''�- latScrso Utr..ano.i 651111
mase an 6633.10.10 I. 6TA 674-1517 Ivo.".•mo�ny
.tion AowPst«4Hkncitt...7
t7svW P. Bator
PE -2O07020241
stir .
:1 of'. 7
I®®O®01 4®oj ®x4®■`lo`I
11 1 11 lirII -‹ I 1
N4
V
t+ ► f•t+;ff
0111111
FR: k
fity
I!
B a
1 I
P L c
f a
O
co
O 2 S r 7c � O A m D
�i i i b 3b 3�' 1,1
111!
�b Si S 8 gig{{ $ of 1i11e1 �€ g s
li!$sa T$ 41.11"
$ g € Re his ! $ Y�
$ !hiBtiD
I I thief
pp,<R die ` 1,$ jaj t ill
I
Yea 1aqg g !PI
iit
sri Y4161
I
I I I I II I I I I I I In 1
n e1e�n C aa�ljpoo
i I IIII I I I I I o I j
ai1!III t yef1111!oI i
IiIIII1 I!Iil�I*I i
l $$illi 0!!!eliri
1 1E 111
n
City of
efferson
a ►uaua W0K
DMMM Cr
OPS
General Nater
Sharron, Detail
11
I
a
+OG
ea
II
iatid
040
0000
u I I
ae
NO: DATE: REVISION AND DESCRIPTION
DAi
en. ro.t
Miller and West Main Striping
Project No.121 S8
Welt Main Step and Millar Street
z
+agIv 11DM 9 /19310 ,1301,7 00t -00I NVQ ihnUISNI 'M 000L•OOC
:uopdp)soo pup uoisInaa
:a1va
:0N
8s WO U+roid
eulduts uptiti Isom put aIIM
Iaa15 Ja1191
ucy au5
11
t.pp -,Ta IC
o,, rlStru,t
4wri IttnturtiMiQIg006-00tBOput uRW'MOOLL-OOL
:uop • N)sap • ut uoIslioa
NMI
IIMM
:arta
aS ILS• iwoid
(*oils upy, 1SOM Put JNIM
Pain +01191
taw BIS
N.
0
ld0td in /I4
MAY USE
FULL LANE
detrr11w ebpa Ydo . 4' We% 10 Ing, 30' gap {t»)
W. MRler Street (100 Mock)
v
0
Z
ISORE) E E
YIELD T08?i(ES
ye m
Mixed mane �eblpe. 8hllr. 4' •E... 7 tang,
e' ere (t7p)
furor motel (to)
1 t - 1
t
Reawre101i4610,101i4610,paIse t. Ir
a past net+ c.,t . .$il
amt o Ng p sign moss raiding Am. Ln.ert F-.'--,�
re peeking ogee to M 7 fort aoors aura s+a.ot
1 f'':1 1.1.1.1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 11.1 1'LJ....4:1J
Centerline ebbe. YMaor. 4' Bade, 10' long. 37 gar (tw) aHAREOcl+tEL'�_
uric l.""}T"'T c,sl i-�1 1S°S '`' `
YIELOT0SKS
E Hear Street (100 Mk.*
Peewee Iwo WI,
SHUT MAWR
5of17
Ll J° 9
YIP1,fIM lTinS
-- 1: , .d.,. iry.n .pd , OR 14.41 a 1.41.49. Wei r ;
'� � � � 11 ill) !.6 A 411u 'mwl ,Z 'arm. .Y ..mitt..mitt'.44. +,! !wl 01+m6�
jp
IR*
j
irD
1-11 =
11
irn
+�. w
2.....•.......
• InatoLoOtr,t:
-'?t< —'' r"..
fYtlt:vtl
��,+gy.:tturased at,,da..
ii491Wingia911
j Y
'1.1 .
rtILL
i '`•/¢
+
a_
.r 1 wx. w ae,..wo r -
sa>IK10101_ •
- , o.
{
A;<
.6Ea3a
—
. '•;� 1
_
_
_•
I '
—
{-'
Isl.
I
1
?tiV13)48t13#14hS
1 rd» w. 1 .11-au Wn• •ws 64w,'
of
t tuq .7. a a,.as.
r.•. ,z1 {
r .
I
11.
• ''- I
I
h` d l
' r
, ,
K
MI .dsn. N.s.... on. 64u,
: swn :..n. ae.. 1�n049 I
--�.os-�31.4 awn
_ -- '•.. /
_
ti if •
_ -
.
04l Lop,.
li
I
€
2.
-
$
i
... -- -_r-_. -- - - -- - - - e..
+' - .. M. ..., . e. .,. 1#! MM .. a4 I.r.on--
5ire Plan
Miller Street
Miller and met win StntHny
Protect •33156
wool liar 144.1 *Amp cep wen 1..d
.1.. OHM ided Fwe Am lowed mimatii
4
,- .. @co A x '64 i Mh ! .1411 .44..4.1 ,rag
C3 .7 1
m
" rte.
' ' � r
Q.
r
ppf
LL { I
.
Z
O
o
1 Revision and Description.
Pr sr
(at) 4.6 AC 4.r.1 ,01 'Mr .► +lea s4+1. •4wiW ..
..M. Mid...moi 040. - I r
— i� ��
..,d y..q! M .IF i,•,.lf OW 4.m _. •.,1W •WM 0.101
I
fluJot .......
. Jten .to:r1..• .,... ...µ, ' MD fir
g
mom
t -C.1
I-
*.14- t..••••
; -; .. •
,Puri $ M TIM IP P3c1Q OOt-COI ;NI Pur
uRYi'M WV
-001
:uOi1d asap pue uOt iA
:iI!a
ffS I lisp Inroad
5u,du1S U!» 11aM put Aim
yo»iS ugtI1 °M
uLlj PPS
Rat Wog
11
1a
001
"t r
1 Rr00 0 .slltbi No Pada" yipa ed pod
'nstal naw port ..d R4-11
.br1 R e11,d-.'I Ile Parking undo, R4--11.
Ur,Rom of lie Perk 7n0 1pn MAI M r
01000. rPd..a91.
Rma. Wrlmq Ho Parking lin Rind poit
kola no. pat and .eylhdvnq .q.
Rln.toll Ho Prektng ribs ander wop4&iq
Nps. Bo11rn el Ho Porldnq lqa lull M
r aka,. dd.wak.
•
Went Main Sired
3107" a.71
-k
0
a rr VI a
Oa-
ritigAtM
SAINT kt.,aF0
9 of 1 7
11
Noe 'M 6191
JAIL
N14149.. .._. _ i 0971
=t. Ir •O9 N 4191' `._.- -"_ •
eak
' '
1 . '
41,1,, . ', -
• air\ -," - .. • i ••
.
• - 4, - o 01 -.e
$; .a, II.I, ,•
••.- • -•, - IPIP
rte,CgrjlfAit:.i;f
Revision and Description:
L
-'4
447111,ID5E
FULLLNIE
- .
..•.I-._;
30
-- ' ,- - -i- -: _ ..._. :- ,..,.. _ _
- ,..•
.11
titrklkt,
at‘IgCCn.,!,<\
sva.
,
1' 1. •
v.
i"
Y 1 1l'' ,
, 1, . .. . IIIIP
. . - .... . -. .... - . -
.1
, j
°I.I.N.... ak. IOU
•
, \ ear -7 30'
• , West Main SOW
Sherrow *,mbol (t)9 , •
"N- -..
1
III
73
,,_..._,..
rillfi. .,
i v sv 47 Sri 1....1 t
cov
i 1.11_11./fE
e/14.J5
,
' • ,I, ,- r 1
"
.4
/III
•
.1',,,,„.
44'1' ' 11111111r- . 411/11111frt! ... , '';'.
,
t. 3
9
bl.
e
V
...
..'t
3
• • , .--:; . _
, . _
'•
• - e • _ .
--,- -"— - — 1 ir
, .. --,.--... .,... . ,
. • • • . ,...
.
. ... . . .
sac 74
. " ;
*lifiliii:
. - _... _ _ . _
. -__ r
.-,-,) -6.93
..• 'A , 0 '..
„ 4
' • ',,, \ I 't:' -:.""I
17' . •••• - , '.• o;-_ :,
1
7 V
. _.
E,....,,,,.
WeS1 Main SI t "
o ao•--j-1.
• . '"---t" • .: ,'
O;
a, opto(lo)
• t
1I1 • .
I
v filliss/*4
41
wt,-•
2ODUa-tB0onia'2-E,inV0%R. 2I.4O.1
:
..
19iit
.
1 l M -
I -
_ .
4 . _,,,,,......41Kirris:..,-•-•...,
•. , . , .. . __ - - • - --....
• ' 7
ck' ;11 4.1' • ; '
- • .
'...
r
of
(4.4"' Jeffersd ,
.
' •--' . ' Rorrnin• orlslIng No liorldrio o1on, snow rosle•
-' sign ond pool. Inololl new poll oncl R4-11
Collor ol Ito Perking otor. shod be 7' above
.- sign. RAnololl No PorkSig *Iv unclor R4-11.
finished wide. Rolnotal 5rins Robb. oIgn on
_.. :"`""""................,
peel blow No Poldnp Hon to lb* oast.
.7"14% .• , . iv , ,
1. ..
2
. Rofecole Snow Stosita
• ..
41 I.4.
.
.....
..., 41
1• ' ,
%, t,,..,-,
, '
" g i
SIgn lo
. •
411.
,
eit
71.14iNiE
11.10 pool. ' .
...
: //
w f .1.
,,e•
. ..../
- . I
. 1 , li
. r i
a •
•44. ,
•=.-._.-..,_._ i Ift4 -II, 3.0'430. ; .....- le
) I -. • e- - .
. ..,,,••••'f' ` . ...: -1
......."440mos„...,-.."100.4..41111.C1:1131:11.::6 r -:"p 11--„,.6.---. :8
' k''' ' • .e.,,..,
"'-4 ..'..' .,
, ''. _.... ---1111kiiiii4, ' • II. , .1" laa. ._, Sharron ornbol (40 h-ssier , '
SlIttlf RINSER
1 2 of 1
e 11
fi7J"
W 01.111.11111 SACC;
kvnm+ Ile Trucks eland placard cad post.
MOO new poet and rruy ndra ran. rran.6al Nn
Mucks ran and placard anew Wo,dlall a .lad.
1 ."1 d,Dalin. of plo_erd la def NO aLore tap a curb
1
HSI 1
ra
Mount to street light pee u.rnd
eldnlose stew strops
, �sharrae .t.nhw
Menet la stip' Iloht pale under° -'^I' 1
Shan Cita 1611.1 alga wry- 1I
140001111 IWO.trop. i I{ ,rad
4 RI
°1rr
lllllll
•
#6).4 1,AV 111 PRESTON 6,4,
PIANO l •
HIMONIl e
P4-200701024
"`4H 1NAt,s',�`S\d~� 67,00070:—.
r.
0
0
z
0
'EL
4r
VI
$tIrfT NUMBER
13 of 17
END
WAYFINDING
SIGNAGE
r 9`
4-0.2
Downtown
Jefferson City
0.4
East Branch.
Greenway
+0.9 ..'
Community Park
Wayfinding Destination
BEGIN
Begin Placard
27
1'
Wayfinding Direction Wayfinding Direction
Wayfinding Sign Colors
Pantone 1815
Pantone 314
SHARED BIKE LANE
YIELD TO BIKES
Shared Bike Lane Sign
iv
End Wayfinding Signage*
CAD
MAY USE
FULL LANE
R4-11 30"x30"
W11-1 30"x30"
SHARE
THE
ROAD
W16P 18"x24'
70
Wayfinding Direction Wayfinding Direction
Mol.,
1. Paint
1.1. laryMva g land 0400 be 0.00' Itdcb 44(n48In m) aluminum MIN tetrar.lI.0M Min faces
dIWlady printed bah UV -cured Ink. 91140 Sop. Enablers Gad* Regally. Shoreline. °rena7.e
MI 10.n.p.r na Alm.
1.2. Shared Me Lanz son.. Beath p1.mrd. and *tendon/ Man. .haw mn..t the r.9 Pan'0Me Of
the .UTOO and /NWT.
2. Parte mal be da.eMa d U &emit (S b. pre foot) m. 2' advent/ea wore perforated (12
gouge) 00.1 per elph eched4.
7. Modena andel b0ndlnq art hardware M accordance 81th 0001701 standard 803 Mall b. Lend to
mount .lane la the 0adsdng II9ha pates.
4. The 19pe100a 1Thr the oeynndfn9 slpns mm be 0.0844...
0. sign 100900048 *huh 10081(1 fond map .000»9. for Theta..
0. 011181 ortsah nal be prmlded.
7. Sloes mall be located .0 than the lon..t point o, the .lad or group of sign. M 7' minimum
above the e.9so4./4arb.
* End 4ayllndhh0 San04e Mon may h. Mooed 0t 0' .above tha elkKent curt,.
0 Same Mone ea he mounted In point or sal be maunt.d .181 .sfstIng/rMocated M9ne. The
00110041.' mop Insure the proper post length to accommodate 00 Mone dated on the syn
«nodule one noted an the dans.
9. dhoti/1,411M of .0.4110, to be approved by the .mamma.
Revision and Descriptio
d
0
0
z
Fe
a, 011. en.a., •a
r940(01101e1
*MU 040040
14 of 17
_
0.7
DownMyer,
J4elln rdy.
+0.4
£13148rontrt
Green...my
27
+0.6
bownlown
lefersonCily
+1.1
nua &cosh
Greermoy
2
02 4
Downtown
InlInnon COY
CM
Wears Geld,
Greenwoy
41.3
Palk
6
44
30
8
45
(1.1 4
wouti Crock
Gtonnyeay
+0.3
OXd munichb440
33
niy
3
4: 3
+0 7
1 nil e106011
G.0 7
r.ommultly
+1.7
1nn14,.:
35
10
46
Downtown
jellenon 6217
+0.6
&mit Moen
Gmenway
+1.2
COrrIRROVY
Pak
11
4
Grc6nwoy
1.7
MO Zyry06&
PeclestfmnIkidge
38
16
04
Wont; Crook
GloOnwpy
0,0 4
Wo4k310111"
Park
IV) AlOr10
13
17
40.1
711.00/4 Cloak
Gtecomoy
+1.6
iMmtinglon
Ptak
+3.7
Ko.y Um,
49
18
0.4 4
Goymlavon
Jalknion Cry
OM- 4
Eotl IN cinch
Gartmwae
9
.1
Commaray
Poet
14
I • •
Fog Rdonch
• Grato.nuy .
1:1-5 4
C.009110(41Y
Pk
50
22
+119
Wcnnirmlnn
ram _
1.7
Knly hal
23
15
26
31
34
Revision and Descripvon:
.4 al
bo,
C
and the 1 C5-300 dkrek of fast 5 We‘t tamer
3
8
pea P. !WV....
7111y7 01.111040
1 5 of 1 7
__,: OCE -0_ _ _- OL
:uandunsaaa =small o
mm -m
__+.
sub!s
mm «Wa_
.Ica vas
((
U OSJQJJr
J 93
Miller Street Signs
Sinn He Son Nene Van nen Pint 117.. Nai..
1 wo9A7d119 desUnotlan 21'.40' r equate
.o7MA 9 dwthotIon 2r.40' r opera
3 •o7$h4hg dat1Alo7 21'.40 2' epior•
4 R4-11 30.30• 2• .pia.
5 .aynndt9 direction (s) 12'.28• U manna
6 .oy@odg drwUon (8) 12'.28' U cowed
7 194-11 30•.w U marmot
8 .oynndr0 drwlian (R) Ir.28'
9 44-11 30'.30' U monn11
IO woyM4h9 49.Abn (1) 12,29 U chorine
I1 .0)thdn9 01111nc1fan 21'3140 r sorsa
12 R4-11 30'40' U dialog
13 .asnna79 destballan 21'.40' r .quare
14 .oyM4hg destination 21'x40 r swot.
15 .414109 4esthoU81 21•.40' r ower.
t8 .27900109 49.0tran (R) 12128' U Mould
Ink R4 -Il 37%30'
17 .o)+hlhg dr«Uon (L) 12.29 U channel
18 .0)rr,dh9 oration (L) 12.26'
19 R4-11 30%30' U Monne
20 9ogIn proceed 10.6' 2• .9002.
21 Snored like Lan. 30.020• .es oboe.
22 .a)4,ong 4rw00n (R) 12.29 U dsonnol
23 wo"dh9 enation (S) 12.2r U Monne/
24 Snored BA. tan. 30.119
25 ad.d BA. tan. 38•%18'
28 .oy4dhg dredger (S) 12•.28' U drone
27 .o71rndkp 4eslha00. 21•1.40'
28 gored B2s4 Lan. 39.10
29 Shored Moe Lana 36'%19
30 .oyMdhg desthotlan 21'%10' r .9001.
31 .o)4nd,g 4roe0on (S) 12'.29 U channel
32 Shad 09. Lane 39,19
33 Shoed BA. Len. 39'.18•
34 *0)7Ndh9 ?Wootton (5) 1241• U channel
35 .ay6ndh9 4..100081 21•■49 r swore
30 B.g1n piword Iger r 19002.
37 Shored Me Lane 36'.19 .so mow
30 ••N10dhg deslh.tb. 21'x40 2. laud.
39 Sigh pl.odd Woe r •90•
40 shored Mos Lw. 30• l0 sou more
41 .971ndh9 direction (R) wear U axone/
42 50180 placard 19x6
43 snared 87s. Inn. 3V.15
44 .0y6ndp 4W.c0on (L) Ire25 U 2Inonnn2
45 .ay1ndo9 dooUon (L) 12.28' U dwa211
46 weslsndhg dr«tion (R) Ir.28'
47 R4-11 30'1130' U 090.44
48 84-11 39.30•
49 .ayMdig do21.00.0 21•x40 r .goon
80 .eytnding u/tr 01100 21'40' 2 swd.
Stan 10 he located across Oun711n Street ham ra1h.00
Co-I000to on nae pool wish .dsing Parking sign
Mount an .24.029 U monn.l post
co -Iowa ono nes pool .Bas wasting parkin sip
Mount on .roll Opt pol..Rn stalWn steel strops
Mount an .trw1 Opt pots .On stables. nod .raps
Mount lav gored 1991. lm' Non
Mount bolas Begin placard
Co-haate an now post .1112 ..10(5,9 SP3O dpi
Mount on .rte COW pol..n0, Cold.» stool *traps
Mount an .rest I19M pole Atte .1,9411, .rod strops
Co-boate an n.st post with existing Pok1n9 .lgo
Mount an .wet Apt pd. with denies. nod .raps
Mount an .trot fight pole .sin, .10110» .ts2 *raps
Mount an etre.t light pole with dakdos. ohne strops
Co -local. on nn post with .d.t5,9 Pmkh9 Non
Mean! an *root light pd. clow ..Ming p0180429 .ion .tth .1,84.ss .1411 Amp.
Mount an sired tight pee wilt skidoos 0(44* strops
Mount oboes Shoed Bits Lan* 019n
Mount bolo. 1.910 plowrd
Moans more Shared Bke tar,. sign
Mount holo. Birgit placard
9oun1 81 street right pee with stohl.ss stool strops oboe. Shared BAs lane alp
Mom( on strut 129f,1 pale with 'tondos. sed .trop. bobs Begin 91aoard
Mount an *rout tight pd. with .tutees..l.N strops
Mount an strut Ugh! polo 1902 elondoss .lad drops
West Main Street Signs
Moa No Stan Name S1gn Run Pmt Tone Notes
61 W11-1 30x30' r soya.
02 080-29 19924' 00• 0000.
w .o74hdr9g 499128, 12x20• u chard
93A End Wo71hdh9 S1gdrg• Ir.12' 8» ohm
54 .aylrWhq erection (9) 12'.29 U chanty
66 W11-1 30•,30 r sgaara
e0 W20-19 18'.44' .0 doers
57 R4-11 30•.30' U cho n,
as .oytrd109 Arwllen (5) Mate* u chane
69 .o7trW129 direction (s) 12'49 r epwr.
60 84-11 30o30' r pacts
61 .e7awh9 d.Uon (s) Mae' u mane
e2 wayr1dhg d*otran (5) It.29 r seen•
O3 R4-11 30.130' so. ribose
04 .gOn4109 dr.0tw, (s) 12130• U dialed
63 R4-11 30',37 r sgta.
09 R4 -I1 37.30• U channel
07 .2)140109 dredtw11 (5) 125530' U mans
06 .0)1,1419 db.olbn (5) 12.30 u droan11
09 .o7nwrg drwtwn (5) 12a3o' U chanted
70 coy ceng *action 12230' u mond
71 R4-11 30',30• U channel
72 .01.019 Week., (s) 12.30' U channel
73 04-11 37.37 U eland
74 .ayOrdhg drreatbn (5) 12,.70' U Mdn11
76 .0ythdh9 dr.0lbn (5) 12'037 U shown
76 84-11 37.37 U channel
77 W11-1 37137 r rem*
75 WI11-I9 19,24' .w mow
79 wgtheh9 direction (S) 12.29 r egad.
CO .aythdh9 direction (S) Ir,28'
51 84-11 37440
el wa7nnd,9 dr.ora, (U) 12.29
Mount chore 4026-19
Mount holo. 0111-1
s.. plan for olio. 4u79n
Mount Wo..0)n,dh9 drwtton 11^ sign mer h. goc.d 01 a• o1or. curb
Co -locate an now peat .21 wl.lhp No Parking .I90
Mount obese 915-19
Wont lido. 1111-1
Co-l000to on nes post .U, .,ddling No 902kh9 don
Co-boote on noe post with .11.1119 No Truk .295 and plop.
Co -boots an nes post with .dsUn9 No Pattie 1195
Co-fooAe on nn post AN .dsUf9 No Pasdt9 sign
Mount chow 94-11
Mont hen ..7mdhg dwlland
Co -haute on now post .WU, edo00g No Truck at9n and plague
S.e plan to anew d.slp2
Mout chose 009-19
Mount Odes 821-1
Co-IOOo*• on now post with M.tn9 No
Mount to 9010.! light pots nth Corer».
Mont to *Use light polo nth .beds.
Mount to .test tight pd. nth 020900es
Truck sign and plop,.
. 1.N .reps
h oe strops
d.d etrops
tlom*ntinB1llII
4'�pFM/Sss
y.pAVID PRESTON le,
NUMBmi
1.13-2007020241
Revision and Description:
4)
6
Z
3
s
20
1
1
o.•41 P. 14444 2'1.
M-2»2070141
1N0tT NUMMI
17 of 17
Memorandum
320 East McCarty Street • Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 • P: 573.634.6410 • F: 573.634.6562 • www.jeffersoncitymo.gov
Date: October 8, 2018
To: Public Works and Planning Committee
From: David Bange P.E., City Engineer[ J
Subject: Ranking of Transportation Alternative Program (TAP) Projects
City Staff would like the Committee to rank the two projects which are being prepared for submission
for possible TAP funding. Staff is recommending that the W. Main/Industrial project be ranked first and
the Missouri Boulevard project ranked second.
TAP grants support a number of types of projects with a focus is non -motorized transportation. This
grant opportunity is part of the federal highway bill and applications are accepted every two years. If
chosen the grant will pay for up to 80% of a project's cost with the remaining 20% coming from the
applicant.
The West Main/Industrial project entails the construction of sidewalk along parts of West Main, Jaycee
Drive, Industrial, and part of Truman Boulevard with a short stub projecting down Highway 179. The
sidewalk would begin on West Main Street at Belair Drive which is the current termination point of
sidewalks that connect into the residential areas along Belair, Boonville, and Hayselton Drive , among
others. From there it will pass through Jaycee Drive and westward along industrial Drive through
Highway 179 and down Truman Boulevard to the Range Nature center. This project will serve several
goals including the connection of a residential area to commercial establishments on Industrial Drive
including grocery and retail stores as well as connection to the extensive recreational opportunities
offered at the nature center. Secondly it would facilitate a transit connection point by providing a
signalized pedestrian crossing of Highway 179 at Truman Boulevard. This would allow transit riders
from what will be known as the Yellow Route (High Street West) to transfer to the Black Route (Capital
Mall) along an ADA accessible route while adding bus shelter facilities at these locations.
The subject of the other application is a continuation of the construction of sidewalks along Missouri
Boulevard beginning at Beck Street and extending to St. Mary's Boulevard. This project will connect
five existing bus stops and would create a continuous sidewalk along the northern side of Missouri
Boulevard from W. Main Street to Stadium. The project would include the addition of two signalized
pedestrian crossings, one crossing Dix Road at Missouri Boulevard and the other crossing Missouri
Boulevard at Stadium Boulevard. This project would be the culmination of a number to projects to
provide sidewalks along this important commercial corridor.
If you have any questions I can be reached at 634-6433.
DB:db
L1:\Public Works\EngineeringldbangelPUBLIC WORKS & PLANNING12018110-20181TAP Applications docx
lepoN-ueld a}iS .pA18 urlossIW
W. Main and Industrial Site Plan -Model
ART LETT
WEST
SERVICE. THE LDARTLETT & WEST WAY.
February 24, 2010
Mr. Matt viorasch, P.E.
Deputy Director for Public Works
City of Jefferson
320 E. McCarty Street
Jefferson City, M(7 65101
Re: BEAP Project 09LTAP-34
Bridge No. 2180003
High Street Viaduct in the City of Jefferson, MO
Dear Mr. Morasch:
We had opportunities to visit and view the bridge noted above and shown in the figures herein. The High Street viaduct
is located in the City of Jefferson approximately 0.5 mile south of the Missouri River bridges. This structure has been
open to traffic since 1950 when it (Bridge No. 1.148) was constructed as part of a project administered by the Missouri
State Highway Department on the behalf of the City and funded by city, state and federal governments.
Figure 1: The High Street viaduct constructed in 1949 and 1950 (at a cost of $783k) replaced the Thomas viaduct built
in 1913 (at a cost of $26k) to become what some reports called the City's new landmark.
The observations summarized in this Bridge Engineering Assistance Program (BEAP) report support the
conclusion that the bridge should be rehabilitated rather than widened or replaced. However, it is also
recommended that the City begin the long-range planning and budgeting process to replace the bridge by
including the project in the 2030 Metropolitan Plan for the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
(CAMPO). Specific repair strategies are described in greater detail on pages 10 and 11 of this report and are
similar in many ways to the repairs made in 1985 by contract (i.e., not by the City's forces) as a City project. In
summary, we recommend that the following bridge components be repaired:
Superstructure: Repair as needed the concrete overlay near the expansion joints, the curbs on each side of
the bridge and the bearing areas of the cast -in-place concrete tee beams. Treat and protect
concrete surfaces by applying a penetrating sealer to the concrete deck and an epoxy sealer
to the curbs. It is not recommended that span 11-12 on the west end of the bridge be
realigned to its original position as was recommended, but not done, during the 1985
rehabilitation work.
Expansion joints: Replace all 17 expansion joints at the intermediate and end bents. This work must be
done if repair work to the substructure units is to have any lasting value.
Substructure: Repair the deteriorating portions of 12 substructure units with many of the intermediate
bents on the bridge's east end needing the greatest amount of repair. Treat and protect
the concrete surfaces closest to the joints by applying an epoxy coating to the plan -defined
areas generally described here as the entire beam cap and a portion of the columns.
The full engineering and drafting services needed to provide contract -ready documents for these repairs are beyond the
scope of this BEAP study. Any major rehabilitation work done to the bridge makes the structure ineligible for federal
funding for 10 years even if it is funded locally; the repairs listed above do not constitute a major rehabilitation. Until
the time that the bridge is repaired or replaced by contract, it is recommended that the City: a.) monitor the concrete
deck, curb and substructure units for increased cracking, spalls and delaminations, b.) repair the existing deck overlay
with concrete or approved accelerated mortars when necessary, c.) consider protecting the deck with a penetrating sealer
such as Pavon® Indeck or Star Macro Deck to be applied every 3 to 5 years, d.) periodically clean and maintain the
expansion joints, and e.) continue to remove drift that may accumulate at the intermediate bents.
Existing Bridge Information
The High Street viaduct has a posted speed limit of 30 m.p.h. (20 m.p.h. in front of St. Peter's School), does not have a
posted weight limit and crosses Missouri Boulevard, Wears Creek and a spur line of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR).
High Street, classified as an "Urban Minor Arterial", currently carries approximately 5685 vehicles per day and is
projected to have an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count of 9380 in 2027 according to the National Bridge Inventory
(NBI) Structure Inventory and Appraisal (SI&A) Sheet. The two-lane roadway approaches lead to an 867'± long bridge
having a 26'-0" wide roadway and carrying two lanes for two-way vehicular traffic. Both the west and east approaches
have wider roadways (curb to curb) than the bridge, but the additional widths are utilized for parallel parking. The
bridge's substructure units consist of parallel retaining walls and a hollow abutment at the east end, a vertical wall
abutment at the west end, and 11 intermediate bents that are founded on pile footings. The superstructure consists of 6
lines of cast -in-place concrete tee beams with 5'-0" wide sidewalks, 18'/" tall concrete curbs and 3'-0"± tall galvanized
steel handrails on each side. Each of the 12 tee beam spans are simple spans with the first 10 being square (no skew)
and the two western -most spans varying in skew to accommodate the two sets of railroad tracks undemeath.
The bridge is inspected every two years; a general inspection was last done in January 2010 and an underwater inspection
was completed in July 2008. The NBI SI&A condition ratings for the deck, superstructure and substructure are 6, 6 and
6, respectively, on a scale of 0 (failed condition) to 9 (excellent condition) with a rating of 4 or less for any one of the
condition ratings making the bridge "structurally deficient". The condition ratings of 6 (satisfactory condition) are
consistent with if not better than other typical bridges of this vintage and can be attributed to some degree to the lower
traffic speeds and relatively little truck traffic. The horizontal alignment of the roadway approaches is good (rating of 7
for Approach Roadway Alignment) and the "Satisfactory Condition" rating of 6 for the Channel Protection evaluation
indicates that among other things, that there are minor issues with slumping banks, creek migration and drift. The Scour
Assessment's rating of 5 indicates that the bridge foundations, although they have been exposed by scour, are stable.
The Waterway Adequacy's rating of 8 signifies that the bridge is above high water and that the approach roadway has a
slight chance of being overtopped. The flooding evaluation is consistent with reports that the viaduct remained open
during the 1993 flood and served as a critical connection to the downtown area. The current Structural Evaluation
rating of 5 ("somewhat better than minimum adequacy") indicates that although there aren't any weight restrictions
currently, the bridge does not have the same structural capacity as newer structures.
The bridge's current rating of 3 for deck geometry is "basically intolerable requiring a high priority of corrective action"
and makes the bridge `functionally obsolete". The 2030 Metropolitan Transportation Plan for CAMPO indicates ADTs
of 4775 (count in 2005) and 6980 (projection for 2030). For both the 2001 to 5000 and >5000 ADT ranges, a 28'-0"
roadway would increase the deck geometry rating to a 4 and the bridge no longer would be considered "functionally
obsolete". MoDOT's intent regarding federally funded bridge projects is that they remove all deficiencies and that the
bridge be reasonably expected to last a minimum of 25 years before developing any significant deficiencies.
Consequently, federal funds can't be used to rehabilitate the viaduct unless it were to be widened by at least two feet to
the 28'-0" width that would remove its "functionally obsolete" deficiency.
The totality of the structural, functional and condition evaluations currently results in an NBI SI&A sufficiency rating of
66.5% and indicates that the bridge does qualify for partial federal bridge replacement funds (80% - 20% split) because
the bridge is "functionally obsolete". Consequently, the SI&A does provide a recommendation to repair the general
deterioration by rehabilitating the bridge with work done by contract (not by owner's forces). In the absence of City -
specific information, the SI&A's cost estimate was developed by using nation-wide averages for new, widened and
rehabilitated bridges. The SI&A's estimated total project cost of $1,884,000 (150% of bridge cost) is comprised of
bridge work ($1,256,000), roadway improvement work ($125,000, or 10% of bridge cost) and incidentals. Additionally,
the Non -State Structure Inspection Report prepared by MoDOT mentions the structural components (deck joints and
concrete overlay) having notable deterioration and recommends possible methods of repair.
2
Field Observations
Observations were made from on and around the bridge during the visual inspection opportunities. The descriptions
and documentation of specific conditions found are summarized as follows:
Figure 2: View from cast of the viaduct that carries rvo lanes of vehicular traffic, pedestrians on two 5' wide sidewalks,
and was part of the hike route for the 2008 Tour of Missouri.
Figure 3: 'West approach narrows from 36'-0" (curb to curb) in front of the fire station to 2G'-0" on the bridge.
3
Figure 4: Neoprene joint seals installed during previous repairs vary from good condition (left picture) to essentially
missing (right picture) with many in bad shape that allow salt, dirt and moisture to help accelerate deterioration below.
f iLrirc l ntprock concrete overlay applied in 1985 needs repair in man locations, most often at the joints,
4
Figure 6: Locations of spalled concrete and exposed rebar often found along the curbs are more of an aesthetic issue
than a structural or functional problem. Cracking of the 1985 overlay is worse in the eastern spans than to the west.
Figure 7: Sealing of overlay will slow the deterioration but saturation of the concrete tee beams can't be reversed easily.
5
Figure 8: Sealing of overlay will slow the deterioration but cracking and leaching of tee beams can't he reversed easily.
L
,}: 1 )1Thr,}i=ms and bc,inng areas of some deterini;
6
u�ct shutvs a hearing :u cast abuttnrnt.
Figure 10: Spoiling and cracking of beam caps and columns along with the efflorescence found at many bents.
Figure 11: Previous and future repairs to intermediate bents can only be expected to last 10 to 20 years±.
Figure 12: Intermediate bents along and over Wears Creek get much taller and will make repair work more difficult and
expensive. Drift and other debris restricting flow in the channel should be removed periodically.
Figure 13: Span 11-12 has shifted duce to temperature fluct rations and the change in bridge skew needed to better align
with the UPRR. The 1985 rehabilitation did not reset the span but did take measures to prevent future movement.
8
Figure 14: The inspection report indicates that the concrete tee beams have cracked and spalled near the steel brackets
added to intermediate bent no. 12 in 1985 to prevent continuing and accumulating movement of spans 11-12 and 12-13.
Figure 15: Remnants of an unreinforced concrete retaining wall intended to provide bank protection along Wears Creek.
9
Superstructure Repair
At an estimated construction cost of $187,000 shown below, the following construction activities will be required:
• Remove any existing asphalt patching material and all deteriorated concrete.
• Repair the existing 11/2" overlay with a qualified concrete or special mortar in accordance with the
specifications.
• Apply Protective Surface Treatment for Concrete — Penetrating Sealers to the concrete overlay in accordance
with the specifications. Penetrating sealers such as Pavony' Indeck or Star Macro Deck are often applied by
cities, counties and illoD( )T to their own structures rather than through contracted work.
• The curbs can be addressee) with either of two options — repair the curb to its as -built dimensions or build up
the curb to a slightly bigger area. The additional area of a "blockout" would be mechanically attached to the
curb with resin anchors — the repaired curb's concrete would rely on bond to the exposed rebar and may not
last as long.
• Clean and Epoxy Seal the concrete curbs and other surfaces around the drainage systems in accordance with
the specifications.
Quantities for concrete repairs commonly run over their estimates because of rhe inherent difficulty in determining
accurately the structural integrity of large areas of the structure. Areas of deterioration are often estimated by sight only
or with non-destructive methods when significant portions of the structure are accessible. For comparison purposes,
9875.3 ft2 of deck repair was done in 1985 (3300 ft2 had been estimated).
The sealing of the deck to address the cracking of the existing 11/2" overlay should be given a high priority because it is
relatively inexpensive and would serve to protect the $417k investment made with the 1985 rehabilitation project - $310k
of that investment was for deck repairs and the concrete overlay.
Significant changes to the overlay, either through an additional overlay or as a removal with a replacement of an equal
depth, are not recommended at this time. Consequently, there are no changes to the bridge's load ratings.
Repair Item
Estimated Quantity
Estimated Cost
Expected Life
Repairing Concrete Deck (Half -Soling)
200 Square Feet
$10,000
10-15 years#
Repair the Curb or Construct a Curb Blackout
850 Linear Feet
$102,000
Clean and Epoxy Seal the Curbs
7000 Square beet
$42,000
Superstructure Repair — Bearing Areas of Tee Beams
100 Square beet
$13,500
Penetrating Sealer Applied to the Roadway Surlacc
2420 Square Yards
$19,360
3 to 5 years
ZN
&
A
1:0‘../ /p.. tool \L e.1 xc%. R,...1..,,,,.06 /n /,.. ., , . . . .•
Y•c orVat/--i i ' ' 6`,.1...14..•• uenlr-
alletfs ,yrs ..e •
/Wal+ --,s: c,.,..., . ,, ,,rte .w,Jy or'.nJob
ICrINiR 1,,,11,11/C '....,44,10^�'
�� At''.:,.n ,;'-,,S1 •;<. ,rnu.
C�
HALF SECTION NEAR END SPAN
ht -1r 7r_E uEal"1 :;
I r-- t is..e.
0
Figure 16: Details of repairs to concrete overlay and curbs
Replace all 17 Expansion Joints
At an estimated construction cost of $150,000 shown below, the following construction activities will be required:
• Remove the entire length of each of the 17 existing neoprene joint seals that hacl been bonded to concrete with
epoxy.
• Install the new expansion joints using the manufacturer's recommended procedures (surface preparation, etc.)
and materials (two -component rapid curing liquid polymer and two -component silicone rubber sealant used for
l0
the X.J.S. option illustrated below). Expansion joints like the X.J.S. system have been installed by those
agencies owning and maintaining bridges, but it can be done under contract as well.
Repair Item
Estimated Quantity
Estimated Cost
Expected Life
Removal of Concrete Overlay and Existing Joint
410 Ft2 and 17 Each
$10,000
10-20 years±
X.J.S. Expansion Joint System
700 Linear Feet
$140,000
•
:6vf
Typ .tcw i Irapra;:
N/ear,ng 3u, ,1.-2,-<7
.• 1
1...(a.,ea
Neopcerne_ •)01.-/A SeL\t
(_arei,ng ?ono,e!c
deco and end
drophrogr'n
- 5o.vcu l Z` ope n, nye
and eoo,y neoprend
•1o,nt xoi Ira p'ace
Po., 09991 90: R(. S ketol Scalam
Say.. 900 PNS
) (39atm•99mm1
C'wrcra,c
X.AS. Ek'nsld., si'e.w
Figure 17: Details for the existing neoprene joint seal (left) and for a new expansion joint like the X.J.S. system (right).
Repair of End Bent No. 1 and all 11 Intermediate Bents
At an estimated construction cost of $273,000 shown below, the following construction activities will be required:
• Remove the delaminated concrete in accordance with Section 704 of the Missouri Standard Specifications for
Highway Construction. Per Section 704, the type of repair for the specifically defined areas will be outlined by
the engineer during construction.
• Use formed and unformed concrete repair of the delaminated and spalled areas.
• Use Protective Coating — Concrete Bents and Piers (Epoxy) on the plan -defined areas of the beam caps,
columns and diaphragms in accordance with Section 711 as protection against future deterioration.
Quantities for concrete repairs commonly run over their estimates because of the inherent difficulty in determining
accurately the structural integrity of large areas of the structure. Areas of deterioration are often estimated by sight only
or with non-destructive methods when significant portions of the structure are accessible. For comparison purposes,
267.7 ft2 of similar type repairs were done to bents 2, 3, 4, 5 and 12 in 1985 (200 ft'- had been estimated).
Concrete repairs in vertical or overhead applications have a much better chance to retain their integrity if a sufficient
amount of clean reinforcement or other means of mechanical anchorage is available. If it is not, the newly applied
concrete will have a shorter duration of effectiveness before it delaminates like the concrete that has fallen or been
knocked down to the ground.
Repair Item
Estimated Quantity
Estimated Cost
Expected Life
Substructure Repair — Formed and Unformed
1100 Square Feet
$250,000
10-20 years±
Protective Coating — Conc. Bents and Piers (Epoxy)
7500 Square Feet
$22,500
•
4
Ei_(vA,117N 0( (XI',(ING INI(R40()l All F1 •t, CN0'„ ::1t. 11(:h 0(
IV((Ru( IOAT( NEN1
Figure 18: Example details for substructure repair.
11
Bridge Replacment (Future Work)
.1 (oral replacement of the bridge is not warranted at this time but will become a more and rune cost-effective option as
the frequency of rehabilitation projects continue, to increase. For comparison purposes, the estimated cost of a new
bridge (W-8" wide out -to -out by 867'! long) that could be expected to last 50 w 75± years would be about S3,500,000.
The 41'-8" width would provide a 28'-0" roadway with 16" concrete barrier curbs, 5'-0" sidewalks and a pedestrian fence
on each side. The following arc among the items that should be considered during the planning for and design of a new
bridge::
• Wears Creek hydraulics: 1 Flood insurance Study has been done for this area-
• 'i'Itc roadway width (curb to curb) needed for the desired level of service fur the traffic on West Fligh Street
and the impact of a potentially wider bridge on High Street's connections to Missouri Boulevard.
• The roadway width needed for the desired level of service fur Missouri Boulevard traffic and its impact on the
span over Missouri Boulevard and on the adjacent bridge (no. 2180(104) over Wears Creek built at the same
time as the viaduct.
• The necessity of replacing the bridge given many alternative routes. Both McCarty Street and Main Street have
at -grade intersections with the railroad and likely are more susceptible to flooding.
• The proximity of the fire station to the t-iaducr.
• Need for, number of, width tf,and east .end connectivity o(sidcwalk(s).
• list. ylechanically Stabilized 1 .artlt {AI 1•.) walls at each end of the bridge. Ilse a II -shaped wall at the cast end
with one portion moved closer to Missouri Boulevard and with two parallel walls along each side of High
Street that end close ro where the existing cast -in-place retaining wails end.
• Length :and grade of bridge: The lilt'.± existing length could be reduced by ntuvtng ilte east abutment closer to
Missouri Boulevard. The 4.5'!"0 grade would have to be maintained although a long, relatively steep bridge is
not ideal for pedestrian purposes. The Thomas viaduct had terminated at Walnut Street (now Illissouri
Boulevard) and its steep grade (90/4.) reportedly caused problems.
• Clearances (vertical and horizontal) to the railroad and Missouri Boulevard: the current vertical clearance to the
F11'ltli is about 22' ro the tee beam superstructure (4'± depth) the railroads typically want ;t minimum of 23'.
The vertical clearance to Missouri Boulevard is not shown on the plans or the Sl&.1 -- it is estimated to be 15'
to 17' to the 4.5'± deep tee beam superstructure.
• Coordination efforts with the railroad.
• Location and ts'pcs of expansion joints.
• Type(s) of superstructure: a series of shorter, shallower concrete spans at each end (over the UPRR and
Missouri Boulevard) with a series of longer, deeper spans (concrete or steel) over Wears Creek is a possible
scenario,
• The need for and cost of lighting.
• The need for and cost of architectural enhancements like form liners and ornamental fencing.
• Tall intermediate bents requiring larger diameter columns and bigger footings will be more expensive than a
typical crossing's substructure.
The repair and replacement costs described and shown in the tables above are bridge construction costs only.
Costs associated with engineering services, desired roadway and/or sidewalk improvements, traffic handling,
utility relocation efforts, temporary construction easements, railroad protective liability, insurance and
contractor mobilization are not included.
1\'e appreciate this opportunity- ro he of service to the City of Jefferson under the Bridge Engineering Assistance
Program. Please call should you have any questions.
irtcppperely
IdA
IC`
Chris J. Criswell, P.F:.
Cc: Mr. Dion Knipp, Moll( - District 5
Mr Icff .\holt:, ltilol)f)T - Bridge Division
I2
' CHRISTOPHER
J. CRISWELL
NUMBER
E-28605
.
Memorandum
320 East McCarty Street • Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 • P: 573.634.6410 • F: 573.634.6562 • www.jeffersoncitymo.gov
Date: October 8, 2018
To: Public Works and Planning Committee
From: David Bange P.E., City Engineer goJJ
Subject: Pedestrian Crosswalks at Thorpe Gordon and South Elementary Schools
Staff has been asked by the Committee to provide information regarding the pedestrian crosswalks at
Thorpe Gordon and South Elementary Schools.
The crosswalk at Thorpe Gordon is located across Jackson Street at a point where the street
transitions from two way traffic to one way traffic. The crossing is currently 48 feet wide and parking is
restricted within 125 feet of the crossing. The crossing is located just below the crest of the hill in the
direction from which the traffic is coming and sight distance to the crossing is in excess of 400 feet. The
posted speed limit is 30 mph and is reduced to 20 mph with a flashing speed limit sign during school
arrival and dismissal times.
Staff have not had the opportunity to observe this crossing and thus do not have full knowledge of the
issues particular to this pedestrian crossing. However, given that at the location of the crosswalk the
street carries traffic only in the northbound direction the width of the street far exceeds what is
necessary for the traffic.
The crosswalk at South School is located across Linden Drive. The street is approximately 31 feet wide
and parking is prohibited on the south side and within 70 feet of the crosswalk on the northern side of
the street. Like Jackson Street the speed limit is posted at 30 mph but is reduced to 20 mph during
school arrival and dismissal times. Sight distance from both directions is approximately 300 feet.
During the planning of the construction of a sidewalk in the 900 block of Broadway Street Staff spent
time observing this crossing. At that time it was observed that during dismissal time cars from both
directions would begin to line up along the curb line of both approaches to the school driveway. This
creates a very congested area around the school and while it creates visual impairments it
correspondingly reduces speed through the area. At the time of the observations students gathered in a
group at the crosswalk and with the direction of a school staff member would cross the street in a
group. The procedure appeared to be very safe and efficient.
Given e-mail exchanges with representatives from the school district it appears that they are seeking
improvements to these crosswalks. In the past, such as with the crosswalk that was installed on
Dunklin Street at the Employment Security building, the City has provided the design and project
U:\Public Works\Engineering\dbange\PUBLIC WORKS & PLANNING\2018\10-2018\School Crosswalks.docx
Memorandum 2
oversite for the improvements while the costs were covered by the requestor. In that case the cost of
the improvements which included bump outs, signage, and flashing lights was a bit over $40,000.
If you have any questions I can be reached at 634-6433.
DB:db
U:IPublic WorkslEngineeringldbangelPUBLIC WORKS & PLANNINGI2018110-20181School Crosswalks.docx
WE NEED YOUR INPUT
CAMPO
2045&
CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
OPEN HOUSF
Jefferson City
October 10th
3pm to 6pm
City Hall
320 E. McCarty St.
Jefferson City, MO
Holts Summit
October le
4pm to 7pm
City Hall
245 S. Summit Dr.
Holts Summit, MO
WWW.CAMPO2O45.COM
The Metropolitan Transportation Plan is a regional long-range plan that sets goals and defines
strategies to meet the transportation needs of the Capital Area. The Capital Area Metropolitan
Planning Organization (CAMPO) includes Holts Summit, Jefferson City, St. Martins, Taos,
Wardsville, & portions of Cole and Callaway Counties.
CAMPO
campo@jeffcitymo.org
(573)634-6410
CAMPO does not discriminate based on rate, color, sex, age, disability or national origin, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, and the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987. Please contact CAMPO for the Title VI Complaint Procedure and a Title VI Complaint Form,
also available at www ieffersoncitymo.govicampo. Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573)634-6570 to request accommodations
or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow 72 business hours to process the request.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
TO: Public Works and Planning Committee
THROUGH: Sonny Sanders, Director of Planning and Protective Services
FROM: Jayne Abbott, Neighborhood Services Manager
DATE October 5, 2018
RE: CDBG 2019-2023 Consolidated Plan
The City of Jefferson annually receives federal funding from U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD), Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. As a
result, the City is required to prepare a five year strategic and an annual action plan identified as a
Consolidated Plan. The 2019-2023 Consolidated Plan is designed to help the City of Jefferson to
assess their affordable housing and community development needs and market conditions, and to
make data -driven, place -based investment decisions. The Consolidated Plan serves as the
framework to identify housing and community development priorities that align and focus
funding from the CDBG program.
The Citizen Participation and consultation process for the 2019 -- 2023 Consolidated Action Plan
was achieved through a variety of strategies, including an interactive budget -based public
meeting, survey, direct correspondence, and outreach to community organizations. All efforts
were made to contact appropriate parties and obtain thorough input. These consultations with
participation from citizens provided the plan direction and scope. A survey was made available
and sent to members of the local Unmet Needs Committee, churches and other organizations
with encouragement to pass the survey on to their clients and others who may be interested. A
residential survey was also made available. The survey was open from July 20, 2018 until
August 21, 2018. The survey requested input to assess the needs of the community by utilizing
CDBG funds.
The first public meeting was held on August 16, 2018, at City Hall Boone/Bancroft Conference
Room. Participants were asked to rate categories including housing, infrastructure, public
facilities, public services, by placing stars by the needs of the community. On August 17, 2018,
a Stakeholders meeting was held at City Hall Boone/Bancroft. Conference Room. Local
organizations discussed effective and meaningful ways to utilize CDBG funds without
duplicating services in the community. An emphasis was placed on making the most impact
with the estimated annual allotment of $250,000.
Through survey and meetings, the following items were identified as priority needs which are
activities that may be undertaken in program years 2019-2023:
• Down Payment Assistance;
• Minor Home Repair;
• Public Infrastructure Improvement;
• Demolition of Dilapidated Structures; and
• Public Services.
For the 2019 program year, the following activities will be funded through CDBG:
Program
Priority Needs
Addressed
Outcome (# Assisted)
Budget
Down Payment
Assistance
Affordable Housing
11 Households
$56,078
Minor Home Repair
Sustainable Housing
6 Households
$15,198 (PI $15,000)
Infrastructure
Improvements
Preserve & Improve
Area Neighborhoods;
Economic
Opportunities
3,000 Individuals
$112,541
Demolition
Removal of Slum &
Blight; Economic
Opportunities
2-3 Buildings
$45,000
Administration
(20% Cap)
$57,204
Total:
8286,021
A public hearing was held on September 4, 2018 to present the draft copy of the 2019 — 2023
Consolidated Action Plan. Notice was published in the News Tribune on August 27, 2018. The
draft copy of the 2019 — 2023 Consolidated Action Plan was made available on
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/government/redevelopment and grants/plans.php. Comments
regarding the draft plan were accepted through October 5, 2018. One comment was received
asking to add lighting as an eligible activity. The Plan was adjusted accordingly to the
comment.
Staff is recommending to Public Works and Planning Committee to move the 2019-2023
Consolidated Plan onto Council to be considered for approval via Resolution during the
November 5, 2018, Council meeting. It is anticipated to submit the 2019-2023 Consolidated
Plan to HUD on or before November 16, 2018.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
TO: Public Works & Planning Committee
THROUGH. Sonny Sanders, Director of Planning and Protective Services
FROM: David Grellner, Environmental Health Manager "'7%
DATic? October 2, 2018
RE: Cemetery Maintenance Agreement
A Cemetery Maintenance Review Committee conducted an interview of the sole bidder for the
City of Jefferson Cemetery Maintenance Agreement for maintenance services of Long -view
Cemetery, Woodland Cemetery, and Old City Cemetery. The bidder was evaluated on cost, past
experience, reliability, and expertise of personnel. Based on the evaluations, AJ. Lawn Care LLC
from Centertown, Missouri is recommended to be awarded the Cemetery Maintenance
Agreement at a bid of $99,300.00 for the three-year agreement.
AJ. Lawn Care Company was chosen because the company has over ten years of experience in
lawn care services, has the required number of personnel and equipment to complete the job,
and has previous experience in maintaining cemetery grounds at other locations.
The first year of the maintenance agreement will cost $31,500.00, the second year $33,072.00,
and the third year $34,728.00. Funds have been allocated in cemetery maintenance account (10-
532-540060) in budget year 2019 to cover the cost of the maintenance agreement for year one.
City of Jefferson, Missouri
Tabulation of Bids
Bid No. 3005
Subjuct Cemetery Maintenance
Dept: Planning & Protective Services
AJ Lawncare LLC
Centertown, MO
Date: September 18, 2018
ITEM
QTY
unit
Unit Price
Total Price
Unit Price
Total Price
Unit Price
Total Price
Year One
Care and Maintenance of Fairview, Woodland
and Longview Cemeteries as specified
12
mo
$2,625.00
$31,500.00
t
Year Two
Care and Maintenance of Fairview, Woodland
_
and Longview Cemeteries as specified
12
mo
$2,756.00
$33,072.00
Year Three
Care and Maintenance of Fairview, Woodland
and Longview Cemeteries as specified
12
mo
$2,894.00
$34,728.00
Total Cost Three Years
$99,300.00
Discount for prompt payment
none
Prices in this bid firm for
90 days
Represent Disadvantaged Bus.
no
Represent Woman-Owned•Bus.
no
Coop. Procure. Cole Co.
yes
Housing Authority
yes•
Vendors sent RFB with no response:
Pro Lawn Care, Jefferson City, MO
Westco Grounds Maintenance, Jefferson City, MO
Enhanced Lawn Care, Jefferson City, MO
Schultes Lawn Care & Landscape, Lohman, MO
All Seasons Landscaping, Jefferson City, MO
Suess Grounds Maintenance, Jefferson City, MO
Schrimpf Landscaping, Jefferson City, MO
Pro Landscape Maintenance, Jefferson City, MO )
Smoke N Green Lawn & Landscape, Jefferson City, MO
Lamberson Lawn Care, Centertown, MO
r---
Capital City Lawn Care, Jefferson City, MO
Gaines Landscaping, Jefferson City, MO
Atkins Building Services, Jefferson City, MO
Superior Choice Lawncare, Russellevllle, MO
Martin's Lawn & Landscaping, Jefferson City, MO
Dans A+ Lawn Care, Jefferson City, MO
Forever Green Lawn Care, Jefferson City, MO
Advantage Lawn Care, Jefferson City, MO
Troesser Lawn Care, Jefferson City, MO
1