Loading...
Los Gatos_Hwy17_Council_Mtg_Presentation_Final_20221115Bridge Type Selection Town Council Meeting - November 15, 2022 Presentation Agenda Project Team Project Overview Bridge Type Selection Process Stakeholder and Community Support Technical Considerations Conclusion Next Steps 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Project Team Town Staff Nicolle Burnham, Director of Parks and Public Works WooJae Kim, Town Engineer Michelle Quinney, Project Manager BKF Design Team Jaggi Bhandal, Project Manager - BKF Jorge Morales, Project Engineer - BKF Noé Noyola, Outreach Coordinator - MIG Project Overview Purpose and Need Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility across Highway 17 in the vicinity of the Blossom Hill Road Bridge Improve Safety for all Modes of Travel Provide a Safe Route to School Promote Active Transportation Reduce Traffic Congestion and Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Reducing Vehicular Traffic Demand Project Development Process to Date 2017 2019 2020 2021 Priority Project in Town’s Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP) Feasibility Study began Application to VTA Measure B Grant Program for Final Design Project Purpose & Need and Feasibility Study approved - bridge location selected – three bridge types to be considered Town awarded $2.75 million VTA Measure B Program for design Council Approved Community Engagement Plan Project Initiation and Community Outreach (Phase 1) 6 Bridge Type Selection Process Three Bridge Type Options for Consideration Option 1: Concrete Box Girder Option 2A: Steel Flat Truss Option 2B: Steel Arch Truss 9 Bridge Alternative Analysis Project Team Developed an Approach to Evaluate Three Bridge Alternatives: Overall Stakeholder and Community Support Critical Technical Criteria Stakeholder & Community Support 11 Community Outreach Activities October 5, 2021 Targeted Outreach to adjacent neighborhoods December 2, 2021 Community Workshop #1 (33 participants) March 25, 2022 Team meeting with Los Gatos Union School District March 28, 2022 Farmer’s Market Pop Up Event (62 participants) April 20, 2022 Los Gatos Creek Trail Pop Up Event (54 participants) April 24, 2022 Spring Into the Green Pop Up Event (100 participants) May 18, 2022 Fisher School Newsletter June 24, 2022 Project Site Signs Installed June 29, 2022 Community Workshop #2 (5 participants) Sept 16 – Oct 7, 2022 Online Survey (266 participants) Routine updates to Complete Streets and Transportation Commission 12 Stakeholders and Community Support Option 1: Concrete Box-Girder – 250 Points Option 2A: Steel Flat Truss – 175 Points Option 2B: Steel Arch Truss – 200 Points The Quantitative Analysis Resulted in the Concrete Box-Girder as the Preferred Option. For quantitative analysis, see Council Report Attachment 1 or visit the Project Page at www.LosGatosCA.gov/Hwy17BPOC to view the Bridge Type Selection Evaluation. Technical Considerations 14 Critical Technical Criteria Construction Cost Maintenance & Inspection Architectural Distinction Construction Schedule Impacts to Highway 17 Stage Construction Traffic Impacts Visual Impacts 15 Technical Criteria Summary Option 1: Concrete Box-Girder – 240 Points Option 2A: Steel Flat Truss – 155 Points Option 2B: Steel Arch Truss – 175 Points The Quantitative Analysis Resulted in the Concrete Box-Girder as the Preferred Option. For quantitative analysis, see Council Report Attachment 1 or visit the Project Page at www.LosGatosCA.gov/Hwy17BPOC to view the Bridge Type Selection Evaluation. Conclusion Recommended Bridge Type – Concrete Box Girder Examples of Existing Concrete Bridges Renderings of Potential Concrete Bridge Design Highway 17 BPOC – Arch-Shaped Haunched Concrete Box Girder Highway 101 BPOC (Ralston Avenue Overcrossing) City of Belmont, CA Highway 85 BPOC (Dale/Heatherstone Overcrossing) City of Mountain View, CA Highway 17 BPOC – Standard Concrete Box Girder Next Steps Project Development Process Schedule Next Steps Future Community Workshops TBD Potential Architectural Details Color/Textures/Materials Lighting/Landscaping/Amenities Wayfinding/Educational Signage Questions? Section Views Update Cross sections Section Views Update Cross sections Section Views Update Cross sections Bridge Alternative Analysis The steps identified for the bridge type selection process included: Raise project awareness within the community Strive to obtain input from stakeholders and wide range of community members Gauge level of stakeholder and community support for each bridge type Develop critical technical criteria by which to evaluate each bridge type Combine and summarize results Make recommendation regarding most supported bridge type 1 2 3 4 5 6 Gauging Stakeholder and Community Support Reactions to each bridge type was collected at each community outreach event. Community Meetings/On line Survey - on-line polling Pop Up Events – project boards/stickers The options for level of support were: - Not supportive at all - Not supportive - Neutral - Supportive - Strongly Supportive Pop Up Events - Project Boards Evaluating Feedback Quantitative Analysis – based on recorded level of support and assigned weight factor. Level of Support (1-3) Results tallied for each event A value of 1 indicates the lowest level of support A value of 3 indicates the highest degree of support Weight factors were assigned based on the level of interest and participation from each event. For the community activities, weight factors were proportioned based on the level of participation at each event and for the stakeholders group equal weight factors were assigned. Stakeholders and Community Comments Comments for high level of support for concrete box girder: Lowest cost Low profile design, simple, clean, sleek, minimalistic, least obtrusive Matches existing vehicle bridge, blends in, does not detract from the surrounding landscape Comments for high level of support for steel flat truss: Visually appealing design, compromise between concrete box and steel arch Not the most expensive option Design is simple, clean, and does not stand out too much No median island column is required (in Highway 17) Stakeholders and Community Comments Comments for high level of support for steel arch truss: Design and architecture is the most appealing of all options Highly visible design, strikingly beautiful, gorgeous, elegant, distinguished, unique Time to say “yes” to aspirational projects for bicycles and pedestrians Stakeholders and Community Comments Community Comments On-line comments both in support of and objecting to project: Support for the project, excitement for pedestrian and bicyclist safety improvements, and the importance of moving this project forward in a timely manner (Mentioned in 28 of 95 responses) Opposition to the project and concerns that this investment is not responsible (Mentioned in 13 of 95 responses) Additional Critical Technical Criteria The following additional criteria were also of significant importance to the Town, but were removed from further evaluation as each of these criteria were determined to be equally addressed by each bridge type. User Friendliness Safety/Security Environmental Impacts (Cultural, Biological, Tree Removal) Compliance with Caltrans Standards Utility Constraints Right of Way Constraints 33 Evaluating Technical Criteria Quantitative Analysis – based on recorded level of support and assigned weight factor. Level of Support (1-3) was assigned for each technical criteria and for each bridge type. The values were assigned by how well each bridge type satisfied or supported each technical criteria. A value of 3 indicates the most favorable bridge option to meet the criteria while a value of 1 represents the least favorable bridge type for that technical criteria. Weight factors were given to each technical consideration category based on the relative importance of each criteria. Considerations included up front project costs and impacts, as well as long term cost, operational and aesthetic impacts to the Town.