HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-06-02 Mineral Street Bridge Task Force MinutesMineral Street Bridge Task Force
June 2, 1994
(amended)
The meeting was convened at 7:40 p.m. at the Berger Room in
the Reading Town Hall. Present were George Hines, Michael
Slezak, Anthony Guarciariello, Gerald MacDonald, Bill
Goodrich, Bernice Herrick, Francis Doughty, and Gail Wood.
Also present were Tory Stohlman and Cornelia.
ApDroval of Minutes
None to approve
Update by Chair
*Task Force has been given, an extention by the Selectman of
our charter to Tune 7.
*Chair presented a progress report to Town Meeting on 4/25.
No discussion followed that report.
*Marie, Gerry, and hill made a site visit to a "typical"
vehicular in Wilmington and pedestrian bridge in N.Andover
on Saturday May 21.
*Marie, Tony, Frank, Gail, hill, and. Peter attended a meeting
with MHD at 10 Park Plaza. Highlights of that meeting are as
follows:
1) As of 1991.9 MHD changed their design requirements to
meet the Fed's requirements (AASHTO), which allows the
state to replicate the design features of the existing
bridge (Footprint program).
2) The vehicle bridge in Wilmington, that the Task Force
viewed, was built in 1986.
3) Funds are not available through the "Footprint"
program to build a pedestrian bridge.
4) Pedestrian bridges are funded by the state and the
Town must male a request to the Commissioner to
release those funds.
5) The Footprint program does allow for rebuilding both
intersections.
6) The Footprint program does not allow us to retain the
existing height of 16'9" but rather 18'3" to 18'6'".
7) According to hill's calculations: given 18'3" plus 27"
road base; the slope from Vine would be 4.7% and to
Hancock 60. (Upon correction from Michael that the
intersections would need at least an access of 2%
slope for 75', hill changed his grade calculations to
read 6.7% from Vine and 6% to Hancock).
8) No funds for signalization but their is always STP
funds.
9) The vehicule bridge would be designed as a two way,.
bridge but the Town could make it a one-way.
Preliminary Report of recommendations
'hair passed out memo entitled "Preliminary Report of
Recommendations" for discussion and to facilitate a vote on
(2)
the two bridge options. Option A Vehicle Bridge with seven
conditions and Option B - Pedestrian Bridge with five
conditions. The .'ask Force voted to delete condition 3) of
Option B and insert "Resign to comply with applicable ADA and.
State requirements fo handicap access". Condition 5) was also
deleted farm Option B.
Motion by Mike Slezek and seconded by Bernice Herrick to
recommend Option B, as amended, as the `bask Force's
recommended option. Mike's reasons were a) the Police Chief's
comment that the area would be less safe b) the Fire Chief's
comment that anything under 4 minutes is ok c) the 'own
Planner's comment that we should consider a pedestrian bridge
and d) the possibility for cut thru traffic if Inwood Office
Park is built.
Bernice Herrick listed her reasons for recommending Option B
as follows: a) Vine St would be less safe b) a vehicle bridge
would be used as a launching ramp c) the "Chronicle" article
of May 24 that stated that it would take between 4 to 6
minutes before someone would suffocate d) a 6' Pedestrian
bridge may deter kids from hanging out under the bridge e)`fom
Stohlman's finance report on property values in the bridge
area and f) a memo she drafted and handed out entitled "
Response to Tony Guarciariello's summation".
Frank Doughty announced: his reasons for recommending Option
A , the vehicle bridge, as follows: a) the 30 calls to
Tannerville of which 22 people had to be transported to
hospitals as his main reason and b) not convinced that there
will be any cut thru traffic.
Gail Wood said she would vote for the pedestrian bridge
provided that a time limit was put on the completion of the
construction because she feared that MBD would soon shut it
down because of the recent accident in the western part of
the state and so there was " a good chance of having nothing„
George Mines declined to vote unless necessary,
Tony Guarciariello referred to his memo of 5/10/94 entitled
"Personal Summation" as his reasons for recommending Option A
(vehicle bridge) and added that he is more convinced after
attending the meeting with MHD i.e., funding is only readily
available for a vehicle bridge.
Gerry McCarthy would go with a vehicle bridge if it could be
made one way. His reason was that minutes could save a life
Bill Goodrich said that he would vote a vehicle bridge
because there was no reliable funding sources for a
pedestrian bridge and to seek out any available sources would
(3)
he a long and protracted process and any delay may cause MHD
to close the bridge.
At this point, George Dines added that the Task Force
shouldn't make their decision based on money but rather on
Public Safety which, he said, the Selectmen are concerned
with. fie added that we should let the Selectman decide about
money issues.
The Task Force theca proceeded to vote on a number of
different options with a number of conditions to those
options A
(see memo dated. June 7, 1994 for the outcome of those
votes)