Ann Arbor officials considering $22.1 million reconstruction of East Stadium Boulevard bridge spans
Ann Arbor officials laid out plans tonight for a $22.1 million reconstruction of two East Stadium Boulevard bridge spans over the next three years, using a combination of state, federal and local dollars.
Homayoon Pirooz, the city's project management unit manager, told the City Council the conceptual designs are almost complete and will be finished later this month. Public feedback on the plans will be sought between now and November.
"The bridges are safe, but how much longer we can keep them open, that's a big question," Pirooz said.
Pirooz said 13 bridges in Ann Arbor need to be inspected every other year. The city sends its reports to the state, which comes up with federal ratings ranging from 1 to 100, with 100 being the best.
Pirooz said the 92-year-old bridge span over State Street has rating of 2, while the 81-year-old span nearby over the Ann Arbor Railroad has a rating of 61.5. Both are functionally obsolete, he said.
"I hope that the stars align for us and that we can move forward," said City Councilman Mike Anglin, D-5th Ward, expressing hope that the city will be successful seeking state and federal grants.
Pirooz said the city has developed a schedule that takes into assumption federal funding for the project, which calls for bridges with four lanes of traffic, bike lanes and sidewalks. The city would begin advertising for bids in July 2010, with construction lasting from November 2010 to July 2012.
In a best-case scenario, Pirooz said, the city will use about $2 million from its street reconstruction millage, and $20 million from state and federal grants. In a worst-case scenario, the city would pay the entire $22 million cost from its street millage.
Pirooz said if the city doesn't receive state and federal assistance and depletes its millage fund, it would have to eliminate 29 planned street resurfacing and reconstruction projects between 2010 through 2012. That would result in further degradation of city streets and increase maintenance costs, Pirooz said.
"It can seriously impact the condition of our streets, and that, for sure, will increase the cost of the maintenance," he said. "There will be more potholes."
Ann Arbor resident Libby Hunter sang an original song during tonight's public comment period, criticizing city officials for deciding to spend more than $50 million on an underground parking structure downtown while letting the Stadium bridge spans fall into disrepair.
"Glory, glory, hallelujah, mayor high-rise wants to sock it to you," Hunter sang, criticizing Mayor John Hieftje before concluding: "Another $50 million down a big hole in the ground, but he'll let the bridge fall down."
Pirooz said inspections this year have revealed further degradation of the bridge spans. The city has had to reduce lanes of traffic, increase inspections and put a plan in place in case of emergency bridge closures.
The city hired Northwest Consultants Inc. three years ago for $1.2 million to complete preliminary designs for the project. In March, with federal stimulus dollars being announced for shovel-ready projects, the city asked the consultant to expedite design of the bridges.
“We did allocate money for the bridge in 2006 but, in the process of planning, the project was so big that we couldn't come to consensus,” Anglin said. “Now we're on a different design to get the two bridges built and move forward because of safety reasons.”
Pirooz said the city spent about $31 million on reconstruction of the Broadway bridges about eight years ago. He said the city was able to get $18 million in state and federal grants for that project, which is similar in many ways to the Stadium bridge project.
Ryan Stanton covers government for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at 734-623-2529 or ryanstanton@annarbor.com.
Comments
Alice Ralph
Thu, Sep 3, 2009 : 9:33 a.m.
Because I live in the area directly affected, I just had a fairly thorough look at the East Stadium Blvd bridges site at a2gov.org. (I used the link in the article.) Since dysfunctional meetings of two years ago, the online information is the closest thing we have had to public involvement in conceptual bridge design. There's been a lot of football traffic in the meantime. Ill make a few brief points about some of my concerns. The project schedule indicates public involvement from September into December. No further word on that yet. September football is already here. (Elections are in November.) I have avoided the bridges since the lane closures. I dont use the emergency detours that are posted for the possible closure, but they are food for thought and should be part of the discussion of alternatives for football traffic. Football traffic has always backed up more than a mile from the Stadium on East Stadium Blvd, right through my neighborhood. Whats the thinking about dead weight on the weight-limited bridges? And being under all that weight on State Street? Ive lived in three University football towns. The other ones still use temporary one-day one-way street designations for a few hours before and after the games. (Just last year, I discovered that Ann Arbor closes freeway ramps?!? How does that work?) Not just the temporary lanes, but conceptually proposed lane widths on the bridges are still narrower than recommended. That is hazardous to all users. I would prefer two good sized (slowed) motored vehicular lanes over four inadequate ones next to bicyclers and walkers, which include school childrenand football fans. Go Blue.
johnp
Sat, Aug 22, 2009 : 11:15 p.m.
Bobsi is right, a known problem pushed aside for someone elses agenda. Looks like we'll be paying for this (yes it's the city's problem) so that they can continue to claim there will be a sortfall. It will lead to the City tax that they are drooling over.
mojomagic
Fri, Aug 21, 2009 : 2:53 p.m.
That's why they aren't closing it on a football saturday, more than likely the rebuilding will start right after that last home football game
AnnArborGal
Thu, Aug 20, 2009 : 11:04 a.m.
I do not think it's absurd to ask the University of chip in for part of the cost to the bridge. Try closing down the bridge on a football Saturday - then you will see just how important it is to getting folks in and out of town before and after games.
Craig Lounsbury
Wed, Aug 19, 2009 : 6:37 p.m.
"This is not the UM's problem. This is a city/state issue, so wishing that UM pay for it out of ticket fee's or whatever, is absurd." With all due respect we the people of the state of Michigan not only own the bridge, we own the University. So we the people discussing which of OUR POCKETS the money comes out of is not absurd.
racerx
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 11:11 p.m.
Some people really should just let it die when they think the UM should pay for most things, like this State, County, City bridge. This is not the UM's problem. This is a city/state issue, so wishing that UM pay for it out of ticket fee's or whatever, is absurd. There are other ways to get to the stadium other then the bridge. What is lacking is city leadership and setting the proper priorities. The bridge has been in bad shape and known for at least 15-20yrs. But the "leadership" of the city decided to use funds elsewhere (new city hall, underground parking), and now they cry foul and want to implement a city income tax. This isn't leadership people and residents should seriously look at those council memebers who've been elected and carry on this charade. If it took $1.2M THREE years ago to obtain "preliminary designs" but, according to Pirooz, it'll take the same amount of time to build the bridge WTF?!? So, the bridge could be built for $21M if the city had just decided to build it instead of unnecessary design work?! It is no wonder that the city is having a hard financial time due to very poor management of tax dollars. Still, the roads are crumbling. Yea, as someone else said, maybe if the city tagged this as a "greenbelt" it would've been built by now. Sheez, and this is a "smart" community?!?
Borbsi
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 10:19 p.m.
It is hard to understand why these important bridges are waiting for an alignment of the stars for a replacement plan. Three more years of this, maybe! btw I thought the library structure was a DDA project.
treetowncartel
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 3:14 p.m.
Billy Mays, thank you for the information on pre-emption. I was not aware of that. maybe you could come back as a writer n your second life. Although, based on what i have heard you would be more a Hunter S. Thompson or Shelly type than a local news reporter.
OverTaxed
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 3:05 p.m.
Others are right! Why doesn't the University with the largest endowment, every building in reconstruction, teachers averaging $150K/year, etc, etc, pitch in for this? I'm tired of the same old story, overtaxed residents.
Alan Benard
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 12:14 p.m.
Ah, yes. The brick-road and hitching-post fans are out in full force, now calling for devolution from overpasses to grade crossings at an intersection which sees tens of thousands of crossings a day. Have any of you driven over that bridge? How much would it cost to undo the elevated grade leading to the bridge deck? Cities cost money, and if you live here you have to keep the city running with your money. If you want bucolic and restful, there are hundreds of millions of sleepy acres all over Michigan for you.
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 11:44 a.m.
"The bridge has needed attention for quite a while, we could probably go back twenty years of council members and administration." I think Marcia Higgins has been on council for TEN years, both as a Republican and then as a Democrat. I guess we could ask what it means to look out for the 4th Ward as a council member while we're at it because she's clueless.
treetowncartel
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 11:43 a.m.
I'm not absolving anybody, I am indicting more bedfellows. Marvin, I second. that would provide hours of endless entertainment on game days.
Moose
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 11:35 a.m.
As if that absolves Teall and Higgins for their time in office. "The bridge has needed attention for quite a while, we could probably go back twenty years of council members and administration."
Marvin Face
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 11:35 a.m.
I propose a roundabout for the Stadium-State intersection.
treetowncartel
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 11:28 a.m.
Moose, gotch ya on that one. The bridge has needed attention for quite a while, we could probably go back twenty years of council members and administration.
AnnArborGal
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 10:03 a.m.
The University of Michigan should contribute to the bridge construction. If the University can do massive construction on the Stadium, they can certainly fork over some needed cash to the City and it's residents.
treetowncartel
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 9:36 a.m.
Ah, mojo, good spin, but I was talking about the current railroad crossing on State Street. That crossing goes across State Street right now and I have not seen too much fanfare about it impacting traffic. You want two bridges or one with your ARRA money? Whther it is local, state or federal tax dollars, it is still coming from our wallets. Stop the useless spending. Plus those bridges are home to trolls, and we already know the attitude towards trolls on here.
Moose
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 9:35 a.m.
The point that people are missing in the debate is that the bridge has been in need of replacement while Teall and Higgins dawdled. Council had more important things on their mind like parking structures, the new city hall and expensive art than public safety and preserving our infrastructure.
mojomagic
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 9:18 a.m.
treetowncartel, you're right it would also cause a backup right there at state. I didn't think about that intersection because it isn't there. Personally the bridge reconstruction is something that should be done, plus with the federal funding it shouldn't be that big of a burden in comparison to an underground parking structure
treetowncartel
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 9:17 a.m.
Mojomagic, the surrounding traffic signals, e.g. main Street and Stadium, can be synched up with the crossing gates. I would also think that if that is the concern, wouldn't it have the same effect on State Street? Should we build some bridges there? One other option is to build an underground paking structure near that site and have the road as a part of the structure going under the tracks. It would be kind of like Detroit Metro.
treetowncartel
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 9:05 a.m.
Mojomagic, the surrounding traffic signals, e.g. main Street and Stadium, can be synched up with the crossing gates. I would also think that if that is the concern, wouldn't it have the same effect on State Street? Should we build some bridges there? One other option is to build an underground paking structure near that site and have the road as a part of the structure going under the tracks. It would be kind of like Detroit Metro.
treetowncartel
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 9 a.m.
We don't need no stinking bridges, return it to a traditional intersection and save some money. Plus the city can make some money on people disobeying traffic signal devices there.
mojomagic
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 8:59 a.m.
In response to Treespinei. The road can't be at the same level of the railway because the tracks are actually used several times a day and the train goes about 12 miles an hour and would cause back-ups into both intersections of Main and South Industrial.
anonamoose
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 8:12 a.m.
Yeah, what Craig11152 said, except why charge the football lover a dollar, I'm sure the UM football dept. has some money lying around. Have you seen that new field bldg.? I'm not sure how that was allowed to be built, it is a enormous! Anyhoo, UM should pitch in. Ann Arbor Girl--don't forget the AAPD presence at the games, for how many hours?
DebbieDora2
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 7:44 a.m.
Another U o f M feebie what the Mayor can't stand up and rewrite the old laws?????????????????????We no longer live in teh community of Ann Arbor. We have no community anymore very little. FRIDGET CITY. I think the Mayor should hand it over to u of M and call it Screw town
DebbieDora2
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 7:41 a.m.
Is U of M paying for that??????????????With there revenues from the $5000.00 to $10,000 box seats which include alcohol hmmmmmmmmmm if you have 5000.00 you can drink if your a normal seatee you are arrested whats wrong with this secret picture????????????????????????????????????????
ann arbor girl
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 7:10 a.m.
Craig11152 asks a very good question - where is the UM partnership in this project? We have heard from UM officials that they are unwilling to provide a PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) despite their campus use of city services (e.g. snow plowing, fire protection, etc.) but that they ARE willing to shoulder half the cost of road construction projects that serve their property. Since the Stadium Bridges directly serve the UM golf course and the entire UM Athletic Campus, do we know if the UM is planning to provide 1/2 the costs of the bridge repairs? Given that UM holds 10-15% of city property off the tax rolls, as a resident of the city I hope that they will step forward, lest tax payers like me shoulder not only my share, but their share of the financial burden, as well.
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 6:38 a.m.
Maybe the M Athletic Department ought to chip in. It is, after all, one of only four ways to get 100,000 people to and from the stadium every fall. It occurs to me the gate receipts from a half a season would almost cover the whole thing just for perspective. How about a dollar surcharge on each ticket? Disclaimer: I am a big football fan, but do not have season tickets as a way for football to pay their "fair share" for a couple bridges crucial to their fan base
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Aug 18, 2009 : 5:17 a.m.
"The city hired Northwest Consultants Inc. three years ago for $1.2 million to complete preliminary designs for the project. In March, with federal stimulus dollars being announced for shovel-ready projects, the city asked the consultant to expedite design of the bridges." THREE years ago for $1.2 Million and now we want this company to expedite the design process? For that kind of money we could have bought a German designed water garden and closed the bridges.
DagnyJ
Mon, Aug 17, 2009 : 11:27 p.m.
Maybe we could say the bridge is part of greenbelt.
Treespinei
Mon, Aug 17, 2009 : 10:18 p.m.
Wouldn't it be cheaper to eliminate the bridges and bring the road to street level and have a "normal intersection" at Stadium and State?? The railroad isn't very active on these tracks.