Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-01-14 - Agendas • Committee Committee Members Tayve re, 1 le Members Matthew Petty ARKANSAS Adella Gray Rhonda Adams Justin Tennant Agenda City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Transportation Committee Meeting January 14, 2014 A meeting of the Fayetteville Transportation Committee will be held on January 14, 2014 at 6:15 pm or after the Equipment Committee in Room 326 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville Arkansas. AGENDA: 1. Election of a Committee Chairman 2. Call Meeting to Order by the Committee Chair. 3. VAC 13-4516 (Brenda Drive, Court and Walton Street/University of Arkansas): Presentation by the University of Arkansas related to their petition to vacate Brenda Drive, Court Street, Walton Street and a thirty foot wide alley all within property owned by the University of Arkansas. (Information to be provided at the meeting). 4. MAPLE AND LAFAYETTE STREET HISTORIC BRIDGES: Review of preliminary plans, public meeting comments, and Memorandum of Agreement between the City, State Historic Preservation Office, Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, and the Federal Highway Administration. (Staff requests a recommendation from the Committee on this item.) 5. VAN ASCHE DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS: Review of proposed contract with Source Gas for relocation of gas lines necessary to allow the construction and widening on Van Asche Drive. (Staff requests a recommendation from the Committee on this item.) 6. General Update of the Transportation Bond Program. 7. Other Business 8. Adjourn-Next Meeting February 11, 2014 following City Council Agenda Session/Equipment Committee Meeting THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS Taywe evl le ENGINEERINGDIVISION1 125 West Mountain Fayetteville,AR]2]0l Phone 19791994-3443 ARKANSAS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEMO TO: City of Fayetteville Transportation Committee CC: Mayor Jordan Don Marr, Chief of Staff Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director FROM: Chris Brown, City Engineer DATE: January 10, 2014 SUBJECT: Maple Street&Lafayette Street Historic Bridges PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY A Public Meeting was held on Tuesday, December 17, 2013 to encourage citizens to review the preliminary bridge restoration plans and give personal comments, either positive or negative, for this significant historic renovation project. Eighteen(18)citizen visitors recorded their attendance on the "sign-in" sheet. The restoration plans contained 3 items that could be potentially controversial: • Widen the existing sidewalks on both bridges while narrowing the vehicular travel lanes—Maple Street Bridge sidewalks widened from approximately 4 '/z feet to 10 feet each side; Lafayette Street Bridge sidewalks widened from approximately 4 feet to 6 feet each side. The travel lanes will be reduced to 9 feet or two 10 lanes from face of curb to face of curb. • Add supplementary pedestrian/bicyclist safety railing to each side of the existing bridge railing of each bridge. • Totally remove and replace the entire concrete deck, concrete railings and concrete spandrel beams due to the high chloride content, deck delaminations, and significant cracking & leaking of concrete members. Based on written comments left by citizens, four were in favor of the wider sidewalks while two were negative. It was the general feeling of staff from talking with attendees that the majority was in favor of the wider safety sidewalks because of the ever increasing student pedestrian volumes. The supplemental handrails received generally negative comments, but removal and replacement of the entire concrete deck on the Maple Street Bridge did not seem to be a concern to the meeting attendees. RECOMMENDATION Comments have been received on the draft plans and MOA from the AHTD, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and local public citizens. After receipt of these comments, and review of the proposed plans, staff presents the revised plans and MOA for consideration by the Committee. Of the three items mentioned above, staff recommends proceeding with plans to widen the sidewalks on both bridges (6 feet on Lafayette and 9.5 feet on Maple) and to replace the deck on the Maple Street Bridge. However, due to the negative public comments and concerns expressed by SHPO, the supplemental rail has been removed from the plans and MOA. Staff requests a recommendation from the Committee to the City Council for approval of the MOA and preliminary plans. Citizen comments, comment letter from SHPO, and a letter from the City's bridge consultant regarding replacement of the deck on the Maple Street bridge are attached as additional information. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf TDD14791521-1316 113 West Mountain-Fayetteville,AR 72701 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS, AND THE ARKANSAS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER REGARDING ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT JOB NUMBER 040618 MAPLE AND LAFAYETTE ST. BRIDGE REHABILITATION MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET, THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS AHTD BRIDGES NUMBERED 1940 & 1941 WHEREAS, the Maple Street and Lafayette Street Bridges located along Maple Street and Lafayette Street over the Arkansas-Missouri Railroad in The City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas is a property listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); and WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD), Arkansas State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO) and The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas (hereafter the City) all desire that the Maple Street and Lafayette Street bridges be preserved and protected for the benefit of present and future generations, retaining their historically and architecturally significant features; and WHEREAS, the FHWA, the AHTD, and the City have developed a project to rehabilitate the Maple Street and Lafayette Street Bridges for continued vehicular and pedestrian use; and WHEREAS, the FHWA and the SHPO have determined that the rehabilitation of the Maple Street and Lafayette Street bridges will have an effect on this historic property; and WHEREAS, the FHWA has determined that this undertaking will have an effect on a property listed in the National Register of Historic Places and in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800, regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended(16 U.S.C. 470f) must address this effect; and WHEREAS, the definitions set forth in 36 CFR Part 800 are applicable throughout this Memorandum of Agreement(MOA); and NOW THEREFORE, the FHWA and the SHPO agree that the proposed rehabilitation of the bridges shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations and treatment plan in order to reach a no adverse effect finding and take into account the effect of this undertaking on historic properties. STIPULATIONS I. TREATMENT PLAN A) The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas in coordination with the AHTD and the FHWA will repair and rehabilitate the Maple Street and Lafayette Street bridges for continued vehicular and pedestrian traffic utilizing design specifications as close to original specifications as possible, so that the appearance and historic integrity of the structure will not be impacted by the project. These design specifications have been reviewed by and concurred with by the SHPO (see Appendix A). The following list includes all design specifications to be used to rehabilitate the bridges: Maple Street Bridge(Bridge 1940): a) Clean Bridge name plates. b) Peeling substructure paint and graffiti will be removed. c) Install a graffiti protection system to the bridge. The graffiti protection system will be clear in appearance. d) Remove and replace the bridge deck and spandrel beam cantilevers. This includes the complete replacement of the sidewalks and barrier curbs in-kind. e) Replace abutment expansion joints with silicone expansion joints. f) A class 3 protective surface treatment will be applied to construction joints and longitudinal edges of overlay. g) Localized substructure repairs will be made. h) The drive lanes on the bridge will be reduced from 28 feet to 18 feet, resulting in the widening of the sidewalks on each side of the road from approximately 4.5 feet to approximately 9.5 feet. i) New lighting fixtures consistent with period appropriate fixtures will be installed, which will emulate the original design, to all extent possible. j) Abandon existing electrical conduit on the interior of the concrete structure and replace with conduit attached to the exterior to the structure. k) Install a 12 inch ductile iron water line on (attached by hangers) or thru spandrel beam cantilever. Lafayette Street Bridge(Bridge 1941): a) Two severely damaged wrought iron bridge railing panels will be replaced on the north side of the structure. b) Slightly bent wrought iron bridge rails will not be replaced. c) All wrought iron bridge rails will be repainted using aluminum paint. Lead based primers/paint will not be used as completed in the original design and construction. d) Clean Bridge name plates. e) Peeling substructure paint and graffiti will be removed. f) Install a graffiti protection system to the bridge. The graffiti protection system will be clear in appearance. g) Remove deteriorated concrete bridge deck and replace. Approximately 700 square feet or 18% of the bridge deck needs replaced. h) Remove 1.5 inches of bridge deck and replace with 1.5 inches of latex modified concrete overlay to match existing deck surface elevations. i) Replace abutment expansion joints with silicone expansion joints. j) A class 3 protective surface treatment will be applied to construction joints and longitudinal edges of overlay. k) Existing bearings will be replaced with elastomeric bearings at abutments. 1) Localized substructure repairs will be made. m) Utilizing a worst case scenario, approximately 73.34 linear feet of retaining wall, located on the south side of Lafayette Street and beginning at the east side of the bridge, will be replaced in kind. As much of the existing wall shall be retained, as possible. n) The drive lanes on the bridge will be reduced from 22 feet to 18 feet,resulting in the widening of the sidewalks on each side of the road from 4 feet to approximately 6 feet. o) New lighting fixtures consistent with period appropriate fixtures will be installed, which will emulate the original design, to all extent possible. p) Abandon existing electrical conduit on the interior of the concrete structure and replace with conduit attached to the exterior to the structure. B) All work conducted on the bridges shall be in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. All rehabilitation plans, as well as any changes to the plans, shall be submitted to the SHPO office for review prior to implementation. C) The FHWA has ensured that AHTD Bridges numbered 1940 & 1941 have been documented to Historic American Engineering Record standards, (written history and photo documentation) with the addition of a copy of the measured drawings created to design the current rehabilitation project. This documentation will be housed at the Arkansas State Archives in Little Rock, Arkansas, and at the University of Central Arkansas Archives and Special Collections at Conway, Arkansas, and that this documentation is in the possession of the Arkansas SHPO. D) Reports detailing work undertaken pursuant to the terms of this MOA shall be submitted monthly by the City of Fayetteville for review by the FHWA, AHTD, and SHPO. Such reports shall include any proposed changes and problems encountered in the efforts to carry out the terms of this MOA. The FHWA, AHTD, and SHPO also reserve the right to visit the project site at any time to ensure that work conducted on the bridges has not impacted their historic integrity. IL HUMAN REMAINS Human remains are not expected to be discovered on this undertaking. However, if they are encountered during implementation of the project, all activity in the vicinity of the discovery shall cease and the City of Fayetteville shall notify the FHWA and the AHTD. The FHWA shall immediately notify the SHPO. The treatment of human remains shall follow the guidelines developed for the Arkansas Burial Law (Act 753 of 1991, as amended) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's "Policy Statement Regarding Treatment of Burial Sites, Human Remains, and Funerary Objects" published February 23, 2007. III. DISCOVERY SITUATIONS Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.13, if cultural material is discovered during implementation of the project, the FHWA shall ensure that all construction activities cease in the area of the discovery and the consulting parties notified. The FHWA and the SHPO shall determine if the discovery is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. If so, the FHWA and the AHTD will develop a treatment plan for historic properties which shall be reviewed and approved by SHPO. Disputes arising from such review shall be resolved in accordance with Stipulation IV. IV. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Should the SHPO or any consulting party object within thirty (30) calendar days to any findings, proposed actions, or determinations made pursuant to this MOA, the FHWA shall consult with the objecting party to resolve the objection. If the FHWA determines that the objection cannot be resolved, it shall request further comments from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council)pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.6(b). Any Council comment provided in response to such a request shall be taken into account by the FHWA in accordance with 36 CFR 800.6(b)(2) with reference only to the subject of the dispute; the FHWA responsibility to carry out all actions under this MOA that are not subject to dispute shall remain unchanged. The consulting parties, or one or more parties in cooperation, may monitor effects carried out pursuant to this MOA. V. AMENDING THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT Should any of the signatories to this MOA believe that the terms of this MOA are not being met, or cannot be met, that party shall immediately notify the other signatories and request consultation to amend this MOA in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800.13. The process to amend this MOA shall be conducted in a manner similar to that leading to the execution of this MOA. VI. TERMINATING THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT Any signatory to this MOA may terminate it by providing thirty (30) calendar days notice to the other parties provided that the parties shall consult during the period prior to termination to seek agreement on amendments or other actions that would avoid termination. In the event of termination, the FHWA shall comply with 36 CFR Part 800.4 through 800.6 with regard to the undertaking covered by this MOA. VII. FAILURE TO CARRY OUT THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT In the event the FHWA does not carry out the terms of the MOA, the FHWA shall comply with 36 CFR Part 800.4 through Part 800.6 with regard to the undertaking covered by this MOA. VIII. FULFILLMENT OF SECTION 106 RESPONSIBILITIES Execution and implementation of this MOA evidences that FHWA has afforded the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.13 of the proposed rehabilitation of the Maple Street Bridge and Lafayette Street Bridge in Fayetteville, Arkansas, and its effect on the historic properties, and the FHWA has taken into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties. Signatories FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (Name): (Date) (Title): ARKANSAS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER (Name): (Date) (Title): THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS (Name): (Date) (Title): ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (Name): (Date) (Title): McCLELLAND DATE DATE DATE DATE FED.RD. STATE FED.AID PROJ.NO. SHEET TOTAL CONSULTING REVISED FILMED REVISED FILMED DIST.NO. NO. SHEETS O ENGINEERS,INC. 8/15/13 6 ARK. FayettevAte Little Rods tJOB N0. 040618 1 6 two N L'~ Yo IL IlsMsn FY132111 MAPLE AND LAFAYETTE BRIDGES FAYETTEVILLE, AR. CITY 1L • FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MA PLE AND LAFAYETTEST . BRIDGE RE IH B ..,',a • •••.... °-- 4-4 .* �M . COMM •Vw WASHINGTON COUNTY S INo 24' . 1,11111111101, Original Signature On File AHTD JOB N0 . 040618 GPJj ow �o FAP NO . BRN - 9142 ( 29 ) 30 % S ELM 11.06 �I 49 71 l78 INGOALE INGS 10.33 1.47 72.91 W.Pd 7.34 2 26 31 TONTITOWN 1 112 b 72.45 36 31 .OS ' ' 6.91 B O 412 5.55-5. 18.44 2 2 71.5010.P.1 EXCEPT OVER 18.45 2 5.09 8.46N,P.) U.S.412, 2 I 6 .60 412 8.4B(U.P.1 )XIPROJECT 449 5°n°ra 4.44 2Y Fulton Randolph Clay 0.0-022 I 412 Benton Corral Boone Baxter LOCAPTI ON 73 PREPARED B Y . Marian 3.49 BEAVER DIS RICT Izard Sharp Green `JUI1N Lawrence 46 11 6 68.66 Washington Madison TRICT 2 11651 823 z G{ Newton Searcy Independen Nflssissippi Stone Craighead 6 .45 IO.P.1 END McCLELLAND Inset 2 6.69(0' .1 9.48 Johnson Van Buren Cleburne Poinsett IO.P)20 ranklin 31 U-PJ66.°1 CONSULTING aDIS RI Pope DIS Jackson WEDINGTON 36 os4 71 Po e WOODS 4 IO.PJ INC. CCross PO 6 45 DESIGNED TO SERVE ENGINEERS' VSebastia L gan ,ICT.onwaFoulkne White 5 Crittenden oodruf V3.40 I tT rancisl 2 I6 N.P.153.7g 64 0.0 112 2.30 FAYE m e Yell Perry 10.P.113.35 3.17 rf1�LI �L��� r Scott 1.46 OS 0� Prairie z 0 IBD 4 oMoOp• O,O 5 Pulaski Lonoke Lee D RICT IU.PJ23.98-23.99 ry"h 0.1 O w Z Z LAKE DE R Z Saline onroe 6I I- p > Z J A Garland (EN01 0. 0.0 J W BER- 70 w � G J Z F � BAXTER L ❑ � Polk onfgomer Phillips w NW H W7HORN a a E JACKS oa ¢ E LEB7f N ARMINGTO z3.05 2 341 71 = o w o a z z E FRIsTZ CT ❑ ON pq V Arkansas Q-� .0 W EAGL E CLE URN a = a ❑ Pike of S nn Grant Jefferson Arkansas 2 20.81 i3~� 5' 6 Z J L W CLEBURN 3 N E WOODLt zDRz E IN RTI-€ owar p 9 �•�h 3 •0 68 156 5 Q 3 0 0.31 3 :® z z N L LLAR LN z E PR PECT w z o m I ` 5 0 z W PRO PECT a ¢ a Y o f Clark 516 �aQ� \ 2 0.0 LEVERETT w CLEVELAND ❑ 4 Z U ❑ ❑ Sevier Dallas Lincoln 4.31 ��Q• ^� SCCH > a WrLSGN A z ] ❑ w = E ROCK WOOD DI I T 3 Cleveland Desna ' 31 6 36 v 00 36 31 0.ss Q a W CARAWAY w E REB CCA J w Eo REBECCA U.P.)60.50 ¢ PARK w > > > 1924 - a W TAYLOR ¢ Z ¢ E TRENTON BLVD Z +i ¢ Z Z z O a ittle River empstea Duac ICT 7 Drew 6 O GREENLAND W J _ Nevada p 1 6 1 6 r � � > w z � E � TRUST o u x �� camoun 20.12 ELKkNS ? W D011GLAS = w LO ISE ❑ o E DAVIDSON ¢ a E JOH SON 07, vs u 'W ' 57.69 J O G1 ¢ V J J. t7 to Z O Bradley 16.39 0.0 012 _ ;p W ILA z W DA Ip50N a E GUN ER m e Z z 3 Miller 16 Z Z Gm Z w l °� Ashley Chicot 7 APLE :9 t T z Z z N FORE T AVE J oz Z �t �E CO PANY w vo Columbia Un1on PRAT E 54 9.06 O ;I6 W MAPLE w .. ....... ......... WASH! ON 16 IS A LE O Y GR VE 26 q 18.26 w : ELEuw z E M4 LE . .A ....-- ........... . > unfveRstrr a W MOON MORD ,y > Z 17.54 C ARKANSAS W REAGAN ¢ w SCtf a > Z N TANG © w W u, AF YETTE N M CK AVE a a E LAFAY TTE zUn A R H WY. DISTRICT N 0 . 4 55.43 z ' > un tY w Z W ❑ 4 � Vl j Q Z a ~ G b Q BOLES ¢ w O sT OSEP r > E DOGWO 2 Lo : a o N POWERHOUSE AVE W W T ON z w J J sc a OD L E aREX DR r a ¢ W o o W _ PROJECT 040618 'S�uR1 WAY w VICINITY MAP < = WeDICK SDNz ' °1 r a-< l z" z Q J S Z EVERGREEN w w > >� Z w �y LOCATIONS N SK INE DR Z N WESL J U Z ¢ CEM > > > ¢U wt O = U >w P ¢ g mW WlLLIAMuW iHIT iSIDE� z ola F �Z Ya .+ �-1- z E NNER z N m z z ❑ L z = a u > I- Z) G 1 R ❑ w r " r w a z t W N GREGG AVE ^Wo SPRIZ z m a j E 5 ING LL z _ J �o W FAIRVIEW C 90 0� t t tZ Z zz 3 ¢ z ^ Ix � 5 SK wE DRY CO Z N W t � z M DOW E MEA OW I- L o P N HAPP a t z CO TY AVE Z w z ! w E ST CEN EH - N TRENT AVE �E TEXAS WAY `v 9v1 w w ® r E LIGHIQN TR o W W TREAD ELL z > a W MOON AIN PgRK L_ Q E MOUNTAIN z }vCONFEOERATE MOUNT CEM SEOuOYArr E SOU THORN HEIGHTS PL >> ® N L3 1 � w w , N w. �. z t t GARDENS DESIGN TRAFFIC DATA . ¢a y I > w 4> > w t WALKER E RODGERS DR a, A POND DR' a W W PLIT MANN rr , I¢ ¢ W y ROOK * w ¢ c t t 1 T t tCEM 5 WALKER RD E 14EA7H DR 0(i E a w IIII- S RCHI ALD= ELL BL 0 oz E ROCK W �, 1v, U W �, a Q DESIGN YEAR. .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . XXXX �c ¢ ¢ z j 13 t o +. j Q v S HILL AVE �5��� DN DR W Q sT NE ► t _ z �` w� s 2010 ADT. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . XXXX 1 .4 : 2�z In 1 1 U' of �W S llTH E SOU H ¢ N 4 c x ADT.. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. XXXX o FArETTEV/LLE r O 1 isc0LA In >< (wj �0 Fh OQ $ t7 W D�: xfGf; 5Cn U pAaK U W E 4 TH w w p G p �- ADT. XXXX . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. of mNOT TO SCALE 2031 DHV. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . XXXX DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . XX N TRUCKS. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . XX DESIGN SPEED. . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . XX MPH GROSS LENGTH OF PROJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ET. OR MILES ad BEGIN PROJECT MID-POINT PROJECT END PROJECT 71- NET LENGTH OF ROADWAY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ET. OR MILES LATITUDE N _-` -- __-- IN _-` -- ___-- IN LONGITUDE w w w • ----» NET LENGTH OF BRIDGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ET. OR MILES a ----- NET LENGTH OF PROJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ET. OR MILES N M ri M ti O N_ ]C DATE DATE DATE DATE FED.RD. STATE FEMAID PROJ.NO. SHEET TOTAL REVISED FILMED REVISED FILMED DIST.NO. NO. SHEETS 12/9/13 6 ARK.Fwttevole Little Rock M cowDOD K Makkm JOB NO. 040618 2 6 FY132111 MAPLE ST. & LAFAYETTE ST. BRIDGE REHAB. (FAYETTEVILLE)(S) co 10 0 10 20 30 o \o\ ' 7Z B & GUTTER \\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \ o cP #115 & RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK SCALE: 1 10= � \ WIDE \� � o\\ \ BsCONSTRUCT SIDEWALK \ o\\\\ C S CT PA PLAN ONCRETE CURB & GUTTER °\ #19?57olk � 5FT SIDEWALK , ° 9.5FT APPROX. ,\\ \� \\ \ s ° S ° cP 11 o ° ° a WIDENING ° SIDEWALK WIDTH �< a ° ° s 4. 1380— — a _ 1 aD — 1379— — _ < / -\S — IO M a° ° e ° e a STA. 9+43.50 \ \ \\\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ STA. 1 + " MILL T0j" BELOW EXISTING 20' FACE TO FACE - \ M 0 XISTING + 9 TRAVEL LANE \OVERLAYk�.3 9 TRAVEL LANE o SS C) ROADWAY CROWN. DW EXISTING \ \\\�\ \\ ���� 0 \ �\ \\\\ `\\\\\ \\\\ \ TO MATCH \�RLAY 8 82 9+00 S81'46'50"E \ GE DEC \\ 0+0 C- �I \LE\ST� \\\\\\\\ _ S81'47'23"E MAPLE ST. _ 'LE 3T+00 �C14 \ \\ \\ \\\\ S81'34'52"E 5� \ \ MAPLE ST. STA. 9+57.18 TO \ Ij DG 2" MILL AN 0 RL \Y\ 9' TRAVEL LANE 10+38.56 A\T \ 6C'�\\\\ \ \\ TRANSITIO T AT �y \NEW DECK 2" MILL A OVERLAY SEE BRIDGE SHEETS FOR \ O ` ECONSTRUCT PATH RAMPS NSI N TO MATCH NEW DECK \�\ \�\\\\ DETAILS 9 TRAVEL LANE — — —1379- - — 9.5FT APPROX. a " ° \ \ \\\\° \\� ° SIDEWALK WIDTH — — — � e` ` WIDENINGWALK \ \�\\�\\P� \\f�\� eP #ltaa a a° e °al oP _ OHD / ° --------------- /� \ \ \\\ � \ \�\ \\ R \ \ \ \ \\ \'\\\\� \\ \ S POR ERI LLY cP 111 f\ > \ \\\\ �WID \8� ��\ i1Gt�31DEW �� IDEYJ\\ C(OK�\ �OC °\{D\E\\A�o\ — \fR M B j CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER A# �� \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \\>�\\`\\\\\\ \\\� \ \ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\ \\ \' ��9 ' 7 TYPE A (1-6") \ \ s\ \ \ \ moo\\\\s\\\\�\�\� \ �� \\\\ 8>' L b cP #113 \ \ MAPLE STREET BRIDGE PLAN AND PROFILE PROFILE SCALES: HORIZONTAL: 1" = 10' VERTICAL: 1" = 5' o rn M Ln CO N O to + N + O O) r + + O � � O fA N Q N Q O Q 7 Q o , �^ � 'r0n c~n �t a � mn m 11)� YM Q " � Q Q 1385 M11 I To FIR QW FY ° 1385 ROADWAY CROWN. OVERLAY w II 0 w c�w MATCH BRIDGE DECK w TO MATCH EXISTING 11 w MATCH BRIDGE DECK a > caw � J c� w 1380 -0.57% 0.08 _ 1380 0 MILL TO 2" BELOW EXISTING PROPOSED PROFILE ROADWAY CROWN. OVERLAY -EXISTING PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING 1375 1375 1370 1370 .. m co m O O O V' m 00 r+ N m co rJ M m 00 r+ N MM NN NN m0) m0) mm MEO NM W 00 mT m6 moi m6 co W W W co W m6 moi m0) h h NN hN ttiN hN hN NN hN LtiN chM c+') M c+') M MM MM co co c'JM co co coNmM co co 8+81.83 9+00 10+00 11+00 a DATE DATE DATE DATE ID ST N0. STATE FED.AID PROINO. NOT SHEETS REVISED FILMED REVISED FILMED \ \ o \ \ \ \ \ 12/9/13 6 ARK. o ONCRETE CURB & GUTTER/ / / / / / / / f ` \ \ \ \ \ \ I \ \� i fs°I'4 ma W SW lK Rock JOB N0. T,YPF�A�(1—'s y / / / I \ \ CP #1 07 040618 3 6 / Mn[�EN^�t�RE�N�TRGGF j D i�VAICK l� /� /r/ i I \I \ \ \\ \ \ —R or Cl IDEWAL �\ / F 32111 PM/a 7�___M/a MAPLE ST. & LAFAYETTE ST. �00 \ \ �P #1 NCRE URB GUTTER BRIDGE REHAB. (FAYETTEVILLE)(S) STN+24.00 I I / I I I 1 \ A (1-6 ) ° CP 650 CP x#61 8 MILL 0 2" BELO IST ING a a Q RO DWAY CRO VERLAY a ,� a I a o 6FT APPROX. a t I ' 'a DEP ASPHALT REPAIR– TO MATH XISTING I r 1 v°la a 4 a 4 SIDEWALK WIDTH —� ,v Q 4 < d N oTr/ + I / 2FT SIDEWALK t I o l o — o ' + / WIDENING 20' FACET TO FACE– WIDENING I STA. 9+51.82 TO 10+70.56 \ \ I 1 \ 9 TRAVEL LANE 1�A. 11+56.07 MAT EHc xIs�INs_ �� 9' TRAVEL LANE I SEE BRIDGE SHEETS FOR \ N74'13'O6"E 9+00 20' FACE TO FACE DETAILS M_ N74'40'26"E 363 I I 20' FULL DEPTH LAFAYETTE ST. N75'02'31"E II 11 20' WIDTH FACE N75'10'07"E MATC C I I I I I \ / I I L. LkFAYE I XI ASPHALT REPAIR �I STA. 0 0.57 \ ro �Ac�\ 6� LAFAYETTE 9' TRAVEL LANE I I I 1 /2FT SIDEWALK I j 1�ATCH\I G DECK \ i 9' TRAVEL LANEWIDE ST II a I' < 6FT APPROX. i �° a o m m a 59 ' < I I I 1 `a I I SIDEWALK WIDTH 1 v I 0 0 a < O O i Q l�P ' ri Ll i \WIHEof I I I I \ / t° _v �— \ N N T�U T SIDE AL < 10+7057, ON¢RE) URB & GUTTER NMATO DGE DECK P 5 / RECONSTRUCTRETA'NI6A (1 vo v0 — ONCRETE CURB & GUTTER STA. I TYPE A (1-6-) WIDEN DEN & RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK --- – �I c RL1AY — 2" MI rA D- 0 I 1 � 1 1 V�D I + W � P.I.=11+65.83 TRANSITION TO M TC H NEW / o=15'12'51"RT. / IN EXISTING ( I II AVEL LANE WIDTH M ♦r1 — — D=16'23'29" 2 / / I 12+00 0 112+24 LAFAYETTE ST. ' I II L=92.82' II P.C.=11+19.14 v ' / S SS — \ P.T.=12+11.96 J �a S89'37'02"E / S — \ e=N/A / -4j Q � TRAVEL LANE/' jl III \ \ ��'♦ rr I I I I III — — \ — LS—N/A J4 ' **AN= = � � � � too ♦ I I III i \ \ — U yT��13 ♦�l1I - - - a� ♦♦ III - - - � \ \ \ \ � � 348 ' ♦ III \ n r B ° °I ♦ III \ — 1349 — — S v�p JJ 14 y i tiVV ♦♦In \ � - - DEN & RR MP \ 3so 1 \ 10 0 10 20 30 REBUILD RAMP ; — '3s W ---------- ---- D �4 Q 11 SCALE: 1" = 10' _ ' CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER PLAN F TYPE A (1-6 ) a w LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE 3 / �', '' ' PLAN AND PROFILE PROFILE SCALES: HORIZONTAL: 1" = 10' VERTICAL: 1" = 5' o 6 PVI STA:10+11.20 N PVI ELEV: 1367.92 � K: 22.64 Q LVC: 118.50 rc rn � � oq 1375 ¢ °' U m Ln n (o 1375 W L0 0: 00 + M + � m pr) O) O W > fn ; � ; W-i mm jw 1370 0 w w 1370 3.55% 1.7 –3.48% –3.31% PROPOSED PROFILE 77 1365 1365 MATCH BRIDGE DECK —'— � MILL TO 2" BELOW EXISTING MATCH BRIDGE DECK –7.31% ROADWAY CROWN. OVERLAY TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING PROFILE 1360 r, o 1360 o- M MATCH EXISTING � M o – + � PVI STA: 11+13.32 (A cw) PVI ELEV: 1364.44 Gi 1355 U> fnf U 1355 ml LVC: 85.50 w co .. m co M .. co 00 co 00 co o 00 m co co h CD Co 00 0o m N c m d' d' h d' co — M c0 h co (6 co N co h co (6 co (6 m E6 d' d' M M •� .-� co (o co (o co (o co (o co (o co (o co (o co (o c0 (o M co M M M co M M co co co co co co co co co co 9+00 10+00 11+00 11+75 DATE DATE DATE DATE FED.RD. STATE FED.AID PROJ.NO. SHEET REVISED FILMED REVISED FILMED DISTNO. NO_ 8/15/2013 6 ARK. JOB NO. 040618 42'-10" RECONSTRUCT MAPLE ST. SECTIONS AND DETAILS EXISTING CONCRETE GENERAL NOTES: BARRIER CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR 6'-5" 5' 10' 10' 5' 6'-5" HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION, EDITION OF 2003. WITH I rilAPPLICABLE SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL 4 n III REPLACE APPLY CLASS 1 LANE LANE III n ro SPECIFICATIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IN THE 11 PLANS SECTION AND SUBSECTION REFER TO THE SIDEWALK WIDEN SIDEWALK TREATMEN AOTECTIV SURFACE 0 DECK APPLY CLASS 3 PROTECTIVE SURFACE WIDEN SIDEWALK 4 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. REPLACE CONCRETE DECK TREATMENT TO CONSTRUCTION JOINTS YP) DRAWING SHOWS DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING STRUCTURES BASED ON THE ORIGINAL . . 4 a n v BRIDGE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE CHECK MEASUREMENTS IN THE FIELD AND MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS NECESSARY TO MEET TECH REQUIRED CLEARANCES AND FIT THE NEW WORK TO THE EXISTING o STRUCTURE. NEW WATER MAIN THE OPERATION OF PLACEMENT OF VEHICLES, EQUIPMENT AND, OR MATERIALS ON THE SUBJECT BRIDGES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF — — - I-I SS- 105-2 "EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL STORAGE ON 1 '-2" 5'-7" 1 '-3" 1 '-3" 5'-7" 1 '-2" BRIDGE STRUCTURES". CERTIFICATIONS OF THE 8'-4" 8'-4 ADEQULOADSACY SHALOF ALL L ADDRESS TOHEEANTICIPATED CAPACITY OF HE EXISTING STRUCTURE AT ALL PHASES OF THIS WORK. REPLACE SPANDREL BEAM RAILROAD: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN XX'-X" CANTILEVER VETICAL ANRAILROAD ATDALL TIMES OANIDOSHALLXX'-X" HRZNTALCADHERECTOLEAANETALLHE REQUIREMENTS IN SP "RAILROAD REQUIREMENTS" I ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK: 1 . GRAFFITI REMOVAL 2. GRAFFITI PROTECTION SYSTEM — — — — — — 3. RE-USE BRIDGE NAME PLATES BRIDGE SECTION 4. INSTALL LIGHTING FIXTURES CONSISTENT WITH SCALE: 1/2"=1 '-O" ORIGINAL FIXTURES. PRELIMINARY SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR Q (UNFORMED) (FORMED) M 0 "STRUC���� N 2' a' 2' 4' � O b o SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" ON E� MAPLE ST SECTION AND DETAILS 11 0 M s 7 SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR BRIDGE AT MAPLE ST OVER � E Nemo SCALE: 1/2"=1 '—D" ARKANSAS — MISSOURI RAILWAY y C H J QOUd FAYETTEVI LLE AR Ln O C N o V SIM oIo N U 41 N C m �0 ZQ N o a ON `O D Lij N W Q YtrNp 3ww a¢ o a fn DATE DATE DATE DATE FED.RD. STATE FED.AID PROJ.NO. SHEET REVISED FILMED REVISED FILMED DISTNO. NO_ 8/15/2013 6 ARK. 34'-4" JOB NO 040618 5'-1 " 210' 10' 2' 5'- 1 " LAFAYETTE ST. SECTIONS AND DETAILS LANE LANE GENERAL NOTES: CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION, EDITION OF 2003, WITH APPLICABLE REPAIR AND HAND TOOLS SHALL BE USED AS APPLY CLASS 3 PROTECTIVE SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IN REUSE EXISTING REQUIRED TO REMOVE CONCRETE SURFACE TREATMENT TO THE PLANS SECTION AND SUBSECTION REFER TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. RAILING (TYP.) NEXT TO CURBS AND REMOVE 1S 1 /2" )OF 1 1 /2" LATEX CONSTRUCTION OLONGITUDINAL IO JOINTS DGESAOD SIDEWALK REPAIR III EXISTING CONCRETE MODIFIED CONCRETE OVERLAY (TYP) III DRAWING SHOWS DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING STRUCTURES BASED ON THE OVERLAY (REQ'D MIN. ORIGINAL BRIDGE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE CHECK MEASUREMENTS IN THE tmEN SIDEWALK REPLACE ABUTMENT THICKNESS) TO MATCH WIDEN SIDEWALK III ISI III FIELD AND MAKE ADJUSTMENTS NECESSARY TO MEET THE REQUIRED CLEARANCES AND EXPANSION JOINT WITH EXISTING DECK FIT THE NEW WORK TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. — SILICONE EXPANSION JOINT SURFACE ELEVATIONS — — THE OPERATION OF PLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT AND, OR MATERIALS ON THE SUBJECT BRIDGES NECESSARY FOR THE COMPLETION OF THIS WORK SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE APPLY CLASS 1 N / PROVISIONS OF SS-105-2 "EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL STORAGE ON BRIDGE \\ PROTECTIVE SURFACE STRUCTURES". CERTIFICATIONS OF THE ADEQUACY OF ALL COMPONENTS FOR THE O TREATMENT TO OVERLAYED O ANTICIPATED LOADS SHALL ADDRESS THE CAPACITY OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AT ALL ° RIDING SURFACE r PHASES OF THIS WORK. ° T T ZONED REPAIR: HYDRODEMOLTION AND BRIDGE DECK REPAIR SHALL BE COMPLETED IN 1 '-6" 4'-10 1 /2" 1 '-6" 4'- 10 1 /2" 1 '-6" 4'- 10 1 /2" 1 '-6" 4'- 10 1 /2" 1 '-6" ZONES. SEE SHEET XX. REPLACE BEARINGS WITH DECK REPAIR (TYP) HYDRODEMOLITION: THE DESIGNATED AREA OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE DECK SHALL RECEIVE ELASTOMERIC BEARINGS AT ROADWAY SECTION HYDRODEMOLITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JOB SPECIAL PROVISION ABUTMENTS (TYP) "HYDRODEMOLITION" TO A PLANNED DEPTH OF 1 �/h" BELOW THE EXISTING BRIDGE DECK SCALE: 1/2"=1 '-0" SURFACE. DETERIORATED CONCRETE BELOW THIS DEPTH SHALL BE REMOVED UP TO THE LIMITS DETAILED AND AT THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER. THESE AREAS SHALL BE MEASURED BY THE SQUARE YARD AND SHALL BE PAID FOR AT THE UNIT PRICE BID FOR O z _j w THE ITEM SP "HYDRODEMOLITION". O Q O ~ O < J LLJ Of cn PRIOR TO HYDRODEMOLITION, COLD MILLING OF THE CONCRETE DECK TO A MAXIMUM v � w w 1 1 /2" LMC OVERLAY 1 " MIN. LMC OVERLAY DEPTH OF 1 " WILL BE ALLOWED UNLESS THERE WILL BE A CONFLICT WITH EXISTING MAXIMUM REMOVAL z o N 3 1O o' � 3O REQ'D MIN. THICKNESS FINISHED SURFACED TO SURFACE OF SECURE REINFORCING STEEL. BY HYDRODEMOLITION o TOP OF EXISTING 1 1 /2" LMC OVERLAY ( ) OF LMC OVERLAY COARSE AGGREGATE (AS DIRECTED BY _ w DECK AND FINISHED (REQ'D MIN. THICKNESS) THE ENGINEER) SURFACE LMC BRIDGE DECK REPAIR: AFTER HYDRODEMOLITION, THE DECK SURFACE SHALL BE SOUNDED AND ANY AREAS OF UNSOUND, DELAMINATED OR OTHERWISE DETERIORATED CONCRETE VARIABLE DEPTH LMC 4 SHALL BE REMOVED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH SP (AS DIRECTED BY THE "BRIDGE DECK REPAIR". ENGINEER) BRIDGE DECK REPAIR O LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE OVERLAY: THE DESIGNATED AREA OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE (AS DIRECTED BY THE REINFORCING STEEL DECK SHALL RECEIVE A LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE (LMC) OVERLAY TOA PLANNED ENGINEER. DEPTH VARIABLE) PREPARED DECK SURFACE DEPTH OF 1 16" BELOW THE EXISTING BRIDGE DECK SURFACES. IN ACCORDANCE WITH DETAILS OF HYDRODEMOLITION AND LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE OVERLAY LMC OVERLAY TOLERANCE THE JOB SPECIAL PROVISION "LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE OVERLAY". THESE AREAS SHALL SCALE: 3/4"=1 '-0" SCALE: 3/4"=1 '-0" BE MEASURED BY THE SQUARE YARD AND SHALL BE PAID FOR AT THE UNIT PRICE BID 1O. REMOVAL OF UNSOUND CONCRETE 2O. AREAS REQUIRING ADDITIONAL REPAIR PRIOR 3O. FINISHED SURFACE OF LMC OVERLAY SHALL FOR THE ITEM SP "LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE OVERLAY (1 �6" THICK)". AREAS OF THE BEYOND 1 1 /2" BELOW THE ORIGINAL TO THE SUBSEQUENT OVERLAY, AS MATCH EXISTING CONCRETE DECK SURFACE EXISTING BRIDGE DECK REMOVED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER TO A DEPTH SURFACE SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER, SHALL BE UNLESS INCREASE IS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN GREATER THAN 1 �/" BELOW THE EXISTING BRIDGE SURFACE SHALL BE FILLED WITH LMC OF THE ENGINEER. IF THE BOND REPAIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JOB MINIMUM REQUIRED LMC OVERLAY THICKNESS CONCURRENT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE 1 �/" LMC OVERLAY. THIS AREA SHALL BE BETWEEN EXISTING CONCRETE AND THE SPECIAL PROVISION "BRIDGE DECK REPAIR". O4. DEPTH VARIES TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM CLEARANCE MEASURED AND PAID FOR AS SP "LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE (VARIABLE DEPTH)"AT THE TOP MAT OF REINFORCING STEEL IS IF THE BOTTOM MAT OF REINFORCING DESTROYED, THEN THE CONCRETE SHALL STEEL IS EXPOSED, THEN THE REPAIR BELOW TOP MAT OF REINFORCING STEEL UNIT PRICE BID FOR THE ITEM. o BE REMOVED TO A MINIMUM OF 3/4" SHALL BE MADE FULL DEPTH. CLEARANCE AROUND THE BAR. BRIDGE DECK: THE LMC OVERLAY SURFACE SHALL BE GIVEN A GROOVED FINISH AS Q SPECIFIED FOR FINAL FINISHING IN SUBSECTION 802. 19 FOR CLASS 7 GROOVED BRIDGE M $ ROADWAY SURFACE FINISH AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH JOB SPECIAL PROVISION "LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE OVERLAY". 0 n � a 2' 0' 2' 4' �. PROTECTIVE SURFACE TREATMENT: THE LONGITUDINAL JOINT BETWEEN THE LMC OVERLAY L, SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" AND THE ADJACENT EXISTING CONCRETE CURB OR RAIL SHALL BE GIVEN A CLASS 3 PROTECTIVE SURFACE TREATMENT AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 803 AND IN ACCORDANCE O U O �cO E'� ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK WITH JOB SPECIAL PROVISION "LATEX MODIFIED CONCRETE OVERLAY". O;r11 1 . CLEAN BRIDGE NAME PLATES 0i0W 2. INSTALL LIGHTING FIXTURES CONSISTENT . 0 Eo WITH ORIGINAL FIXTURES THE ROADWAY SURFACE OF THE COMPLETED LMC OVERLAY SHALL BE GIVEN A CLASS 1 cmo 3. REMOVE PAINT ON SUBSTRUCTURE PROTECTIVE SURFACE TREATMENT AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 803. 0 4. INSTALL GRAFFITI PROTECTION SYSTEM 5. REPLACE IN-KIND TWO SECTIONS OF EAST U) a APPROACH RETAINING WALL CLOSEST TO THE BRIDGE. U RAILROAD: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN XX'-X" VERTICAL AND XX'-X" HORIZONTAL N PRELIMINARY CLEARANCE TO THE RAILROAD AT ALL TIMES AND SHALL ADHERE TO ALL REQUIREMENTS oc M �� FO IN SP "RAILROAD REQUIREMENTS". LAFAYETTE ST SECTIONS AND DETAILS N U W N a" LAFAYETTE ST VIADUCT WW oOVER ARKANSAS-MISSOURI RAILWAY �STRUC�\� FAYETTEVI LLE, AR DATE DATE DATE DATE FED.RD. STATE FED.AID PROJ.NO. SHEET REVISED FILMED REVISED FILMED DIST.NO. NO. 8/15/2013 6 ARK. JOB NO. 040618 6 6 LAFAYETTE ST. SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR (FORMED) a SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR J �\ ORMED) PROTECTIVE COATING — CONCRETE BENTS AND PIERS (EPDXY) AT EACH I I INT. ABUTMENT I III III I III III I I I I I I I U U U U L L L TYPICAL SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR SCALE: 3�8"= 1 0 a w d O f Q ro N n 0 4' 0' 4' 8' aN U\ 3 w PRELIMINARYSCALE: 3/8" _ ,'-o' ° =10 �pS Fps, Tmo LAFAYETTE ST. SUBSTRUCTURE REPAIR U d LAFAYETTE ST VIADUCT 00 0 OVER ARKANSAS-MISSOURI RAILWAY � , a o�STRUC�\p FAYETTEVI LLE AR onLol — i N N M LJ\ O UZl ry O 'oa_w �D ritz U N m 3ww ¢¢ �d N SIGN IN SHEET MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR PUBLIC MEETING DECEMBER 17m, 2013 NAME- ORGANIZATION E-MAIL PHONE _ (&-"P LZA A41AVIVI, A y / c...�• lam'J /L[: fes.:n:/ j :My✓'.1 i l LtNom+J�gv< L• �':.9wac - nt - W.-.. �' %�� S71 - 6- 1111 Ghri,�rbne A. Mfeb Ni�ic �i�trict (,omnn. c resehb lobof.yu� 4�� - 225- �a7� C -tom c er: Dr 5M -X7 TE-A 6Ar w4s moo, 41%5r, C4drl 1`4 s b6o 5.ter si ,� C.X �:t •ws - �:�- n4 Q k l i L GOWI bjPrrTMy*Le�lrr.4r prYErrC✓Jc�E m a taw . l t l FFPH- G(s . CCM f poS2@r �1e AYary DAu A 7TO J S ' C 1 mgr qsl ua*.edu - ���.�� awli ; o dq c&So — 2- • McCLELLAND 7a � 11 I e REFCONSULTING '" '`'`' � ENGINEERS, INC. COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them in the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarification, if needed. JS eYKCAJIYF APWIP,11� k P 'C44' des l Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. &EFCONSULTINGMcCLELLAND ENGINEERS, INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. r COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them in the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarification, if needed. I(3 % 77 1z z Lal-d1i J f_. � � s l / f, i 1 ' Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. McCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them in the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarification, if needed. rho, {?� E�s�tye -la Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. Tat' �� 1 1 le KrECONSUMNGMcCLELLAND t I ENGINEERS, INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them In the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarification, If needed. Jk..P o-dk C 400"kU116w C'C';kn,gS = _ �� tia 9ar�— un khv. �u �t;ae ' �� ick ae re�la��i�� htal� hiarr� �Cl � ScuC�wb� rd��?tib oa�'vr� Ifi eleva{-a'+ �.�f�. a �6 N��d Of JM1 a(I V1 A6� ,,j naL - �ite u� 06A\C'A 511.00o cli,len PnL(g - i-C L'4'ds are h�5�yc� caU.� c� ccc.rc��e Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. ,cl�r�� 1CM111V REX McCLELLaND CONSULTING NGINEERS, INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them in the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarification, if needed. S ex C4J 4-1z 41-"'t C, J-k, kzx v,jo(JA 4--)�� `�I1S 17- !Le lr' ��� ! t! �.�1C lhg�r f• / S up VOILA "11,t.. 1.3Z A14 w►nl qy g 4f"� -6A C- Z alh 04 CohlVWcel 4�Q� , s [?l-�v2 W-Ces5ae::!� ovt VU , oLn, ii -kA� Ias 30 YZitt CL"s No S u4-qee.J Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. tCLELIAND INSULTING ffly"ErFmc / ENGINEERS, INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them in the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarification, if needed. d Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. c1�r�1 ��� l mCE McCLELAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them in the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarificationn,pIf needed. ��jZ i Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. b � AND EEMcCLELL CONSULTING ENGINEERSr INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. COMMENT FORM MAPLE STREET AND LAFAYETTE STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR Do you have comments about this project? Please let us know what you think by writing them in the space provided below. Please provide your Name, Address, and Email along with your comment, so that we may contact you for clarification, If needed. T-N [:Ut ,( L t NI v r (�k 1 PLZ�u U kivl G�- i - LNJ Please return this form to a project representative, once complete. CEMCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Thank you for your interest and concerns regarding this project. From: Brown, Chris Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 9:14 AM To: Libertini, Paul; Dbarnes@mcclelland-engrs.com; Aaron Smith Subject: FW: bridge reconstruction Guys, Please add this to the file of bridge comments. CB From: Harriet H.Jansma [mailto:hjansmaPuark.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 6:54 AM To: Brown, Chris Subject: bridge reconstruction Chris, just a note about the bridge reconstructions. Jerry and I came to grad school at the U of A in 1963 and 1964, and walked across those bridges every weekday for years. (We still do walk over them, though less often.) It was always disappointing to see their bad condition, even then; and so it is a thrill to see the plans for reconstruction. I declined a chance to comment to the NWA Times reporter yesterday because I don't want to be the person quoted time after time (though my comment would have been positive, in contrast to the leading comment on the story). But one of the main things we like about the plans are the wide sidewalks. It is always intimidating to walk those narrow walks now when vehicles are crossing, and impossible for two to walk together. So one of the aspects of the design that we like best -- though we were pleased with everything we saw -- is the 10-foot sidewalk width planned on the Maple bridge, and the 6' width of the walks over the Lafayette bridge. We were dismayed when the changes on Lafayette years ago led to the narrow walks there, almost impossible to walk, with slopes of driveways making the walk uncomfortable on the lower side and utility poles intruding on the upper side. We hope the wider walks on the bridges will lead to rethinking all the sidewalks there. These main pedestrian routes deserve attention. The more generous they are, the more traffic they will attract. Today, the message of these older walks is that walking isn't worth designing for. Please pass these comments along to the engineering consultants on the design team. Thanks. Harriet Jansma file:///Kl/...20Wilson°%20VrW°/2OTrans%2OImpts/Historic°/2OBridges%20040618/Correspondance/F W%20bridge°/20reconstmction.htm[12/18/2013 9:35:35 AM] ` November 15, 20 The Department of Mr. Aaron Smith, P.E. Arkansas Project Manager McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. Heritage 1810 N. College Avenue Fayetteville, Arkansas 73703 RE: Washington County—Fayetteville Mike Beebe Request for Technical Assistance—FHWA Governor State Project Number 040628 Federal Aid Project Number BRN-9142(29) Manby Miller e Rehabilitation Maple Street and Lafayette Street Bridge Director p Y g AHPP Tracking Number 85189 Arkansas Arts Council Dear Mr. Smith: Arkansas Natural Heritage This letter is written in response to your inquiry regarding properties of Commission architectural or historical significance in the area of the proposed referenced project. The staff of the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program has reviewed Delta Cultural Center the documents that pertain to this undertaking and has determined that the Maple Street and Lafayette Street Bridges (WA0795 and WA0239), discussed in the Historic Arkansas Museum documentation provided with your October 11, 2013, letter are listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Mosaic Templars Cultural Center As currently designed, the proposed plan would have an adverse effect on these properties. We recommend an alternate solution to raising the height of the Old State House Museum railings. A metal railing attached to the top of the existing concrete railing could achieve the desired result while preserving the historic integrity of the structures and would be reversible in the future. Also,because these structures are listed in the NRHP any rehabilitation work should follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, which Arkansas Historic can be found at the National Park website at Preservation Program http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/rehab/rehab_standards.htm. All rehabilitation plans should be submitted to this office for review prior to 323 Center Street,Suite 1500 implementation. Little Rock,AR 72201 (501)324-9880 Please refer to the AHPP Tracking Number listed above in all correspondence. fax: (501)324-9184 If you have any questions, please call Theresa Russell of my staff at(501) 324- tdd: (501)324-9811 9880. e-mail: infop_arkansasnreservation.org Sincerely, website: www.arkansasnreservation.or ` g • � An Equal Opportunity Employer Frances McSwain Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Mr. Lynn P. Malbrough, Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department Mr. Randal Looney, Federal Highway Administration Dr. Ann Early, Arkansas Archeological Survey RNEST � A��r�TS41M LOUIS,MISSOURI 6311Q1490 YHO,U' ,SNC. 314531-0321•FAX Hw)er hifnn.966 vw,�.l-brr�erShifnn.can E N G I N E E R S December 5, 2013 Mr. Daniel Barnes McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. 1810 North College Avenue Fayetteville,AR 72703 Subject: Maple St. & Lafayette St. Bridges Response to 30%Submittal Comments Dear Mr. Barnes Below is our response to comments received from the City of Fayetteville and AHTD for our 30%submittal for the MapleStreet and Lafayette Street Bridge projects. Maple St. Deck Removal The current proposal is to replace the deck, barriers and cantilever portions of the spandrel beams. Our inspection of the structure revealed several areas of deterioration in the barrier, 10%delamination of the deck, cracks with efflorescence in the deck mostly seen under the gutterline. Chloride testing was completed on the deck and showed level of chloride just less than 2 pounds per cubic yard in some locations. It is generally accepted that 2 pounds per cubic yards is the upper threshold prior to significant deterioration of the rebar. While the deck does not quite have 2 pounds per cy of chloride,given the cracks in the deck and spandrel beam showing efflorescence and the condition of the railing it was decided that the best course of action would be to replace the slab now rather than wait until the slab further deteriorates. Concrete repairs are notorious for not lasting long, and we think a better value approach is to proceed with deck replacement today. Photos showing typical deterioration follow. The HAER report notes that the structure is significant "for its association with the development of Fayetteville and noteworthy for its Art Deco ornamentation." Our proposed scope of work upholds both of those historically signficiant attributes. i 7 i �m �ro w�' { w Maple St. Typicalr Deterioration F rt Y Maple Beam and Slab Deterioration 4 Maple St. Spandrel Beam and Slab Deterioration Below is a summary of pros and cons for replacement of the deck versus strictly repairing the deck. Pros • Longer lasting repair • Less unknowns in construction • Less risk of pay item overruns • Uniform final appearance—uniform concrete appearance throughout the structure, no mix and match of existing concrete and repair concrete • Better longterm value • Replicating existing spandrel beam cantilevers and barriers maintains the historic Art Deco look Cons • Removal of a large part of the original construction • Probably more costly • Longer construction time • Replacement of spandrel cantilevers may be difficult Railing Height We understand that it is desired to maintain or re-create the existing railings to their current height on both bridges. A railing can be added to provide more protection to pedestrians. Attached are plans demonstrating how this may be achieved. Lafayette St. Wall The current proposal is to replace the sections of the retaining wall along the east bridge approach that are leaning several inches near the bridge. The magnitude of the deflection appears to be unchanged over the past few years. We are concerned with the failure mode that caused the leaning—is it a foundation failure or a failure in the wall?A structural failure or serviceability failure? The cause would not be known until the wall is uncovered and the wall or soil would need to be retrofitted based on found conditions to prevent further movement. Moving the wall back could prove very costly and there are a lot of unknowns that may be uncovered during construction that results in cost over runs. In fact, it is likely that the wall may need to be replaced anyway. These thoughts were confirmed through informal discussions had with a former employee of a specialty geotechnical contractor,who said pushing the wall back "might' work, but there is a lot of risk. He also stressed that some retrofit would be required to keep the wall from moving in the future. Consideration was made to using soil nails to retrofit the walls to prevent further leaning and ensure that the wall remains stable, but site constraints and cost made this option less attractive. This soil nail retrofit approach has been successfully used on two projects in the St. Louis area for similar situations where replacing the leaning wall was too difficult due to adjacent properties and high volume of traffic. A retrofit of this nature would not pull the wall back but only keep it from moving further, ensuring its stability. For more cost certainty and easier constructability we recommend that these sections of the wall be replaced. Light Fixture Renderings of the light fixtures for Maple St. are attached. Lafayette street would be similar. Maple St. Load Rating We understand that it is desired to re-visit the load rating for the Maple St. Bridge. The previous load rating showed no need for load posting, however it is not clear if temperature effects were included, which can have a very significant impact on concrete arch bridges. AASHTO states that it is not necessary to load rate reinforced concrete structures that are time-tested, however it is not clear if that philosophy should be applied to non-redundant arch bridges. This will be re-evaluated as part of the final design work. If you have any further questions regarding these issues, please contact me at 314-531-4321. Very Truly Yours, Tom Lohman, PE, SE Project Manager, Structural Engineering Attachment TPL/tpl