Alexandria Board of Selectmen
November 20, 2008
Work Session: Members Present: Cindy Williams, Don Gangemi and
Tom McGowan
The work session came to order at 5:00 in order to discuss the Washburn Road Bridge Project. The abutters of the project area have been invited to the meeting and some are present this evening.
Bob Durfee was present from the engineering firm of Dubois & King. The firm has prepared a draft study and report on the site with several options. They met with the selectmen approximately six weeks ago and prepared a plan based on the comments received at that meeting. The final report has been presented to the selectmen this evening. Dubois & King looked at several road alignment options and concluded that the road should remain on the same alignment, but should be widened to 24’ just before the bridge and for the length of the bridge. After that, it will taper to 20-22’ wide. The road reconstruction has been pushed to the limit that DOT will approve, which is to Patten Road. Some ditching and pavement that was planned on by the road agent could possibly be done by the same contractor at the time of the bridge construction. It would conceivably save some money, and is something the town might want to consider. They are proposing a 40’ long bridge, two lanes wide. They are recommending a pre-stressed, concrete slab bridge on concrete abutments. Don Gangemi asked why the road was not straightened out more. Bob explained that at the last meeting, the selectmen expressed that they did not want to have to incur permit rights of way. The temporary bridge would need right of way permits from Mr. Masi and Mr. Butler, both of whom are here this evening. Traffic options during the construction process were reviewed. It was determined that a detour going around through Danbury would cause undue hardship on the property owners. The second option was a new bridge on a new alignment, using the old bridge as traffic access. There were significant, permanent right of way impacts involved with that scenario. The third option was to build half of the new bridge downstream, route one lane of traffic on that, tear down the old bridge and then build the second half. Because the bridge is in such poor condition, the engineers feel that option would also incur significant right of way impacts. The fourth option was to build on somewhat the same alignment, and using a temporary Bailey Bridge as the traffic diversion for the period of construction. They are recommending an 18’ wide bridge, a single lane, which has been determined to be sufficient for the volume of traffic on Washburn Road. Mr. Butler said that there is a leach field on one of the pieces of property to be used as part of the temporary road. Bob said he would send Mr. Butler a drawing and asked him to sketch out where the leach field is on the drawing and return it to him. Fran (Butler) said he has photographs as well. Lance Masi said that he is willing to work with the town in regard to the alterations to be done to his property. Bob said that once the construction easement area has been determined, the NHDOT will calculate compensation to be paid to the property owners, including the loss of trees. They can include, as well, the cost of new trees to be planted in the disturbed areas. Don asked if it wouldn’t be cheaper just to get a Bailey Bridge as a permanent bridge. Bob said that renting a Bailey on a long-term basis would ultimately cost much more than the proposed bridge. The goal of the new bridge is a 75-year life on new abutments. Bailey Bridges are high maintenance. Cindy asked what the weight capacity is. Bob said you can order one to comply with NH Highway weight limits. Jeff asked if there is an alternative to the temporary bridge cost of $160,000. Bob said you could use a multiple pipe system if DES would permit it. The brook is 27’ wide, which would require more than one pipe. Bob will ask DES if they might consider permitting that. Cindy said that the original estimate came in substantially less than the final and wondered if that is simply an increase in the cost of materials. Bob asked which estimate; Cindy said the estimate that the state did on the cost of a new bridge. Bob said they may have estimate repairing the bridge rather than replacing it. He would have to review the letter from the state. If they estimated a replacement, it may not have included the cost of a temporary bridge. They may have thought that the road was going to be closed. Their estimates are not as detailed as the ones Dubois & King have done during the study phase. They are very conceptual and you are losing 5-6 years of inflation in materials costs. Fran Butler asked what timeline for construction is. Bob said one construction season; 4-6 months. The optimal plan would be to get a contractor to begin in April. Christie had left the room to find the original letter from NHDOT. Their estimate was prepared in 2006. During a discussion of costs, the landowners present stated that they would rather see the town do the project well now. Bob said that the bridge could be shortened to 33’. They are finding, however, that DES is requesting that towns not build abutments in the embankment of the river. A box culvert could be reviewed, but DES does not want to permit new structures in the river where none existed before. Don stated that he would still like to see alternative cost designs. Don asked how much traffic uses that road. Lance Masi said the traffic is 24/7, and the town needs to cure the problem of increased use. Christie reminded the selectmen they were presented with three options; all of which are not that far apart from each other in cost. Jeff asked if the town could oversee the construction observation, which is one of the figures included in the construction cost at a total of $115,000. Jeff stated that the overseeing and the temporary bridge are the only two areas he could see to review for cost savings. Mr. Durfee said the budget is high because the actual construction phase date is not known at this time; there had to be consideration for construction that might happen two years down the road or more. The report still has to be reviewed and approved by NHDOT and then the project can be moved to the design stage. The numbers are high in order to account for inflation. The budget includes worst case scenario figures. Cindy asked what the cost of a one lane bridge would be. Bob said you would probably save 10-15%. Cindy stated that it is not worth it. Jeff was asked if the bridge could survive for a while longer given the repairs that have been made to it over the past year. Jeff replied that he does not think the bridge is going anywhere soon, but the project is only going to cost more the further out it goes. Cindy asked Bob about getting the date moved up, which was something he felt he could do, and it was one of the reasons, Cindy stated, that Dubois & King was chosen. The second question was what the total cost of the study phase is. Bob said he thought it was 42-44,000. Don Gangemi said that he feels that the only things that should be done now are those that are critically necessary. Cindy said the project could be bonded; the bonding rates are pretty low. She added that costs do need to be reviewed, however. Jeff stated that it is, as Cindy previously stated, up to the people at town meeting whether it is funded or not. Cindy asked what the weight limit of the present Washburn Bridge is. Christie looked at the bridge inspection report. It states that the bridge is posted: Gross Weight Limit 15 tons or 90% of legal load. That inspection was done in January of 2008. Cindy asked what 15 tons would be as far as a vehicle. Bob Durfee said your basic UPS or FEDEX panel truck. Bob said that the existing bridge is not salvageable. The repairs made are temporary repairs designed to keep the bridge open until 2013. Will the repairs keep the bridge longer than 2014, yes. How many years? I don’t know, but not many. The timber deck is going to wear out before 2014, and you are going to have to spend some maintenance money to repair it before then. Bob recommends that the town still focus on the year 2014 as the outside replacement time. A one lane bridge, curb to curb, is 18 feet. A two lane is 24’. You can build a one lane bridge here, save some money and still get reimbursed by DOT. You are saving ¼ of the bridge width, but not ¼ of the project cost. You still have the full contractor’s mobilization cost, the full cost of the approach work, the full cost of the detour. You will not save 25%; perhaps 10-15%. Bob said if you decide on a one lane bridge and find out later on that a two-lane is needed, the state is not going to help you pay for it. Bridge Aid is a one-shot deal to do it right; to do it completely. July 2013 is the date that the state is guaranteeing their 80% of the construction costs for the project will be available, not the design costs. The schedule could be design and permitting, with permitting being the longer time frame. Bob recommends bidding the project in the winter of 2010 when contractors are more likely to give better pricing. April of 2010 could be the start of construction. If the town decides to go ahead with the project sooner, there is still the possibility that funding could be moved up. Cindy asked what year dollars were used to determine the cost of the project as stated. Bob said the dollars were their best guess at 2009-2010 figures. Don asked how much the town has to raise before the state reimburses. Christie explained that the town has to raise and appropriate the entire amount. She suggested that the town bond the project and as money is received from the state, pay down the bond. Cindy asked if there was any construction planned for 2009; Bob said probably not because it would include getting bids in the middle of the summer, which does not result in very competitive pricing. Bob said that final design cannot be done in time to bid the project in February of 2009; the permitting phase takes much longer than that. The DOT gives advance money or reimbursements in four different phases. First is the study phase. Once the report that Dubois & King submitted is approved by DOT, the town is eligible to receive 80% of the study phase cost. Then, you move into design and bid, which is thought to be budgeted at $80,000. As soon as that is completed, the town is eligible for the 80% of that portion. Now you move toward construction. The bid is awarded; the state will advance you 40% of that construction cost. At the completion of the project, the remaining 40% of the construction cost will be reimbursed, plus 80% of any approved additions. The reimbursement for design and study phase is available now. The construction cost must wait until July 2013 for reimbursement.
Christie suggested that the interim bridge inspection report is necessary before the selectmen can make a decision. That report should be available before town meeting; perhaps just after the first of the year. Bob said that the DOT would not estimate the life of the bridge. Christie explained she understood that, but that the inspection report would indicate whether or not the repairs undertaken have removed the bridge from the red list or whether or not the repairs have increased the load capacity of the bridge. Don’s big question is: Is it a need to do or a want to do? Don asked if Mr. Masi’s problem needs to be addressed immediately. Christie said that Lance’s problem would be taken care of with the Hazard Mitigation Grant, if it is approved at town meeting. Christie asked what Bob needs from the town at this moment. He needs approval from the selectmen to send the report to the state. Don Gangemi made a motion to accept the Washburn Bridge report and request that it go to NHDOT for review and comment. Tom seconded and the motion was approved by a vote of 3-0. Christie should send one copy to NHDOT and ask for review.
Deliberative Session: Brought to order at 6:00 p.m.
No distribution or approval of minutes.
Department Heads: Neither George Whittaker or Dennis Manchester
were present for their meetings.
Signature Items: The tax warrant for the second issue was signed in the
amount of $1,924,787.02.
The selectmen sign an acknowledgement of the completion of the equalization report that Christie released to the state.
Old Business:
Financial Policies: Review during work session on December 4
CERT-Donna Quinn needs to be contacted
Dump Hours: Remove from list
Christie is to get all remaining costs related to the building together,
including the cost of moving the cabinets in the police department.
New Business:
The selectmen voted to affirm the name of the road off of Eastman Hill Road
as Newfound Hill Road. A measurement will be taken to determine the
footage of each road to determine where they intersect.
A meeting of election officials will be held at 5:30 on December 4 at the
request of the moderator.
Budget Meeting: At 7:00 p.m. the selectmen met with the budget committee and
the police chief regarding his 2009 budget request. No votes were taken.
Members of the budget committee that were present were Ginny Duggan
and Skip Reilly.
The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Christie Phelps,
Town Administrator