|
ENFIELD TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
MAY 24, 2004
A Special Meeting of the Enfield Town Council was called to order at the Hazardville Fire Department, 385 Hazard Avenue, Enfield, Connecticut on Monday, May 24, 2004 at 6:30 p.m.
ROLL-CALL - Present were Councilmen Crowley, Dodd, Kaupin, Mangini, Tait, and Tallarita. Councilman Peruta entered at 6:45 p.m. Councilmen Edgar, Egan, Fiore, and Reveruzzi were absent. Also present were Town Manager, Scott Shanley; Director of Public Works, John Kazmarski; Town Clerk, Suzanne Olechnicki
DISCUSSION/PUBLIC INPUT RE: DESIGN OPTIONS - POWDER HOLLOW BRIDGE
Mr. Kazmarski introduced Glenn Jarvis and Gary Fontanella from Tektronics.
Mr. Fontanella used illustrations to show the location of the proposed project. He noted they looked at different roadway alignments and once the alignment is chosen, they can determine the type of bridge that should be built. He highlighted four different alternatives as follows:
Alternative #1 - maintain the existing alignment, replace the existing bridge with a 30' wide structure and a proposed sidewalk on the west side of the bridge. This alignment would result in a four-mile detour. This design would maintain the stop condition at the intersection.
Public question: If it's a two-lane road, do they need to have stop signs. Mr. Fontanella responded yes, because the curve is too sharp.
Alternative #2 - move the alignment a little more toward the east. During construction they would be able to maintain existing traffic over the bridge. This alternative also maintains the stop condition. This also has the same 30' wide bridge and sidewalk on the west side. The reconstruction would amount to 550' of roadway reconstruction.
Alignment #3 - a major realignment moving the bridge to the west side of the existing bridge providing more radius and eliminating the stop condition. The reconstruction length amounts to 670' with a 30' wide roadway and sidewalk on one side.
Alternative 3A - provides a flatter curve resulting in 1,080' of roadway reconstruction. This would open up the bridge into a two-lane roadway. Traffic calming could be incorporated into the design, i.e., island and mid-lock divider.
Glenn Jarvis then highlighted different types of bridges, i.e., steel truss bridge, standard steel beam and deck bridge (very common), concrete bridge, timber covered bridge. He reviewed the costs of the different types of bridges as follows. He pointed out all of these prices are based on a standard, steel and concrete deck bridge.
Alternatives 1 & 2 - $780,000
Alternative 3 - $1,165,000
Alternative 3A - $940,000
Alternate 3A - cost for a timbered covered bridge - $1,183,000
Mr. Fontanella referred to Alternative 3A and noted this alignment would result in excess area that could be a resource area that might be used as a recreational area. He noted at some point there could be a path from the bridge to access the riverbank area.
Questions were invited from the public.
Public: Are there any single-lane designs? Mr. Fontanella stated everything they looked at related to a two-lane road. He stated it's their belief a single lane is unsafe with the amount of traffic in this area.
Public: Is concerned a two-lane road will result in speeding problems. Mr. Fontanella stated they would incorporate traffic calming in Alternatives 3 and 3A.
Public: Believes the best way for people to appreciate the natural resources in this area is through a single-lane road. Also believes a single-lane road is more appropriate and prefers that the sharp curve be retained because it's the only way to get people to stop.
Mr. Fontanella stated his belief the existing situation isn't the best situation.
Public: Stated not everyone stops at the stop sign and believes a two-lane bridge would be better.
Public: Would the 25 mph be maintained?
Mr. Fontanella stated that would be up to the Town.
Public: What land takings are anticipated?
Mr. Fontanella pointed out these cost estimates do not include the right-of-way costs.
Public: Believes Alternate 2 is a good compromise. Believes extending the length of the bridge to be a good idea to allow people to pass under it so that pedestrians don't have to cross the roadway. Feels there should be two lanes.
Public: Under what conditions are stop signs installed?
Mr. Fontanella stated it's usually based on opposing traffic relating to a situation where vehicles can't get out of an intersection
Public: Noted emergency equipment would have an easier time getting over a two-lane bridge.
Public: Has the DEP offered any opinion as concerns their long range plans for the Scantic River State Park?
Mr. Shanley responded no.
Public: Would sidewalks be separate or along the roadway?
Mr. Fontanella stated sidewalks would be right next to the road. In the case of a covered bridge, sidewalks could actually be on the outside of the bridge.
Councilman Crowley questioned whether there would be any parking for the Scantic River. Mr. Fontanella responded with Alternative #3 there is some space.
Mr. Shanley questioned whether Mr. Fontanella knows of any single-lane roadway being built with federal money. He also questioned whether the vehicle count has anything to do with whether or not a roadway has to be single or two lanes. Mr. Fontanella responded the average daily traffic does play into the guidelines and standards.
Mr. Shanley questioned Mr. Fontanella's opinion as to whether or not federal monies could be used for single-lane roads. Mr. Fontanella stated his belief it would be difficult.
Public: Questioned the cost for a single-lane bridge. Mr. Jarvis stated the cost for a single lane bridge would be $450,000 vs $750,000 for a two-lane bridge.
Councilman Dodd questioned the width of a two-lane road and a walkway. Mr. Fontanella responded the roadway would be 30' wide curb to curb and there would be a 5' wide sidewalk.
Councilman Dodd questioned the possibility of initially building a single lane road that could be later widened to a two-lane road. He questioned if they'd be putting the parapet back far enough on this bridge to allow for walking on either side of the river. Mr. Fontanella stated that from a cost standpoint, they might end up spending a lot of money to build this flexibility into the plan.
Public: Noted the escarpment soil in this area is unstable and questioned whether anything has been included in these designs to address the escarpment. Mr. Fontanella stated there are erosion control mattings that could be used, and this would be part of the plan. He noted a geotechnical study would have to be done with this plan.
Public: Does not have faith in either Alternative #3 or #3A due to possible speeding problems.
Public: Voiced concern about the historic integrity of the historic canals in that area. Mr. Fontanella stated there will be additional refinements in their archaeological survey.
Public: Pointed out this area is listed on the National Historic Registry. Stated the most important thing to preserve is the scenic beauty of this area. The elevation of the bridge was questioned and whether it would block views of the river. Went on to suggest a brownstone arched bridge with a walkway underneath. Mr. Jarvis stated an arched bridge would be difficult, however, there are designs with open railings and the bridge could be faced with stone to make it more attractive.
Public: Questioned how they came up with costs.
Mr. Shanley pointed out this is all very preliminary and costs were requested so that they could get an idea on prices. He noted they need firmer figures in order to go after a federal grant.
Public: Expressed the desire for an open structure that would allow for better views of the river.
Chairman Tallarita stated his impression the major concern is that whatever is built in this area, speed has to be controlled. There was general agreement with Chairman Tallarita.
Public: Questioned whether the existing concrete can be reused. Mr. Jarvis responded that's a possibility.
Public: Pointed out a four-mile detour for Alternative #1 would cut down on response time for emergency vehicles. Chairman Tallarita pointed out the current bridge does not accommodate fire trucks or buses.
Public: Questioned whether a new bridge would be able to accommodate trucks coming from the sandpit, and Mr. Fontanella responded yes, and the new bridge would also accommodate fire trucks.
Public: Spoke about the many forms of beautiful wildlife in this area and voiced concern about animal safety if this project results in more speeding vehicles. Chairman Tallarita responded traffic calming techniques would help address that concern.
Public: Expressed a preference for a pedestrian bridge rather than traffic bridge. Several people agreed.
Public: Questioned whether these Alternatives can be placed on the Town's website. Chairman Tallarita responded that could be done.
Chairman Tallarita emphasized the need to learn whether there are any requirements if the Town is using federal monies for this project.
Chairman Tallarita polled the public as to which Alternative was preferred. The majority approved of Alternate #1.
Chairman Tallarita stated the Council previously raised questions about the maintenance of a covered bridge. Mr. Jarvis stated there are new covered bridges utilizing flame retardant materials. He noted most bridges are designed to last a minimum of 50 years, including covered bridges.
Public: Questioned whether there's an annual maintenance cost. Mr. Jarvis stated they could put some costs together.
Public: Questioned how structurally safe is the existing bridge at this time.
Mr. Shanley stated the current bridge is not structurally safe for over five tons. He noted they just had $30,000 worth of work done because some of the bolts were actually sheared off. He added the bridge is safe for regular vehicles.
Public: Questioned why they don't keep the weight limit to five tons.
Mr. Shanley stated according to the fire department, it changes the response time to the Presidential neighborhood.
Chairman Tallarita polled the public as to the type of bridge that should be built here. The general consensus was concrete and most people preferred the one-lane concept.
Chairman Tallarita stated perhaps they could improve the looks of the concrete design.
Mr. Shanley stated on a single-lane, it would be critical it passed every standard test that exists so as not to create a liability exposure.
Councilman Peruta pointed out removing the "S" curve on Weymouth Road did not make things worse in that area.
Mr. Fontanella concluded stating this is a preliminary engineering phase.
MOTION #7206 by Councilman Mangini, seconded by Councilman Dodd to go into Executive Session to discuss Personnel Matters, Pending Litigation, and Real Estate Negotiations.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #7206 adopted 7-0-0, and the meeting stood recessed at 8:30 p.m.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Executive Session of the Enfield Town Council was called to order by Chairman Tallarita at 8:32 p.m.
ROLL-CALL - Present were Councilmen Crowley, Dodd, Kaupin, Mangini, Peruta, Tait, and Tallarita. Also present was Town Manager, Scott Shanley.
Personnel Matters, Pending Litigation, and Real Estate Negotiations were discussed with no action or votes being taken.
Chairman Tallarita adjourned the Executive Session at 9:27 p.m. He reconvened the Special Meeting at 9:28 p.m. and stated during Executive Session they discussed Personnel Matters, Pending Litigation, and Real Estate Negotiations with no action or votes being taken.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION #7207 by Councilman Mangini, seconded by Councilman Dodd to adjourn.
Upon a SHOW-OF-HANDS vote being taken, the Chair declared MOTION #7207 adopted 7-0-0, and the meeting stood adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
|
|