Manchester Trail Alte lternat rnatives ives Presentat entatio - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Manchester Trail Alte lternat rnatives ives Presentat entatio ion n Meeti ting ng

August 27, 2019 19

Agenda

 Project Team  Project Schedule  About the Project  Alternatives Analysis  Next Steps  Public Input

Meet the Project Team

Town of Manchester – Project Administrator

 John O’Keefe, Town Manager

VHB – Design Consultant

 Dan Peck P.E., Project Manager  Erica Quallen, EIT, Project Engineer

Vermont Agency of Transportation – Federal Oversight and support

 Peter Pochop

Old Railroad Bed, LLC Bennington County Regional Planning Commission

 Jim Sullivan

Project Schedule

 Project Kick-Off Meeting

April 3, 2019

 Existing Conditions Assessment

April - May

 Local Concerns Meeting

May 16, 2019

 Alternatives Assessment

May - August

 Alternatives Presentation

Tonight

 Final Public Meeting

October

 Final Scoping Report

October 31, 2019

Draft Purpose and Need

Purpose: The Town of Manchester wants to identify options, potential impacts, and costs associated with the development of multi-use path along the abandoned MD&G Railroad corridor. Need: There has been an informal path along the rail corridor and there has been expressed interest in formalizing the trail and creating a public amenity for locals and visitors.

This Study and Design Local Citizens Purchase Rail Corridor Right-of- Way and Funding Delayed Project Conceptual Path from MEMS to North Road 2000 Feasibility Study along Rail Corridor

Project Context

 Create additional bicycle and

pedestrian connectionS in Manchester

 Add approximately 1.6 mile

multi-use trail along the old railroad corridor

 Extend from Riley Rink at

Hunter Park and extend northerly to North Road (Across from Squires Road Intersection)

Stream Crossing Private Property

1.6 Miles of New Trail

Beattie Lane Riley Rink

Existing Conditions

Natural Resources

 Flood Hazard Zone  Wetlands, River Corridor at

Streams

 Cultural Resources previously

identified along the corridor

Manchester Trail – Segment 1

Segment 1

Cross Section A

Manchester Trail – Segment 1

Segment 2

Cross Section B

Manchester Trail – Segment 1

Segment 3

Cross Section C

Manchester Trail – Segment 1

Segment 4

Cross Section D

Fence at Private Property Fence at Steep Slopes

Manchester Trail – Segment 1

Segment 5

Manchester Trail – Segment 1

Segment 6

Evaluation Matrix - Trail

Alternative A: No Build Alternative B: Aggregate Path Alternative C: Paved Path Engineering

Construction $0 $582,000 $810,000 Design, Mobilization, and Contingency $0 $435,000 $520,000 Total Cost (Rounded, not including ROW) $0 $1,000,000 $1,300,000 Constructability N/A Easy Moderate Service Life N/A Moderate High Maintenance Requirements N/A Moderate Moderate

Impacts

Prime Agricultural Soils None Potential Potential Hazardous Materials None Potential Potential Floodplains None None None Fish & Wildlife None None None Rare, Threatened & Endangered Species None Potential Potential Public Lands - Sect. 4(f) None None None LWCP - Sect. 6(f) None None None Managed Lands None None None Right-of-Way None Yes Yes Wetlands None Potential Potential

Permits*

Act 250 No Unlikely Unlikely Section 404 - Wetlands (USACE) No Yes Yes Section 401 Water Quality Certification No Yes Yes State Wetlands Permit No Yes Yes Stream Alteration Permit No Potential Potential Construction Phase Storm Water Discharge Permit (General Permit 3-9020) No Yes Yes Operational Phase Storm Water Discharge Permit (General Permit 3-9015) No Potential Potential Lakes & Ponds No No No Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species No Potential Potential Aesthetic Quality No Change High Moderate Meets Purpose & Need No Yes Yes

*Stream Crossings and Path would be submitted as single permit application

Stream Crossing #1

 Between Mt. Aeolus Lane &

Beattie Lane

 Intermittent Stream  Existing Stone and Wood

Structure Replaced by Corrugated Plastic Culvert

Stream Crossing #1

Improvement Recommendations

1.

Add more fill to cover the inlet and outlet of the culvert, which are exposed.

2.

Add stone fill to armor the inlet and outlet to prevent erosion and scour.

3.

Lay down gravel on the trail to improve the walking surface. Estimated Cost: $2,500

Stream Crossing #2

 Southeast of Beattie Lane  Perennial Stream  Existing Bridge Mostly

Deteriorated

 Potential Long Span Bridge

Stream Crossing #3

 North of Field  Perennial Stream  Existing Bridge Mostly

Deteriorated

 Potential Long Span Bridge

Stream Crossings #2 & #3

Alternatives A, B, & C

Alternative A: Steel Girder Bridge Alternative B: Concrete Arch Alternative C: Steel or Aluminum Plate Arch

Pros:

• Construction would be out
• f channel
• Matches existing bridge

south of Riley Rink Cons:

• Has greater maintenance

requirements Pros:

• Low maintenance

requirements leading to longer service life Cons:

• Most expensive option

Pros:

• Least expensive option

Cons:

• Shorter service life than

concrete arch due to corrosion and abrasion

Stream Crossings #2 & #3

Alternatives D & E

Alternative D: Prefabricated Timber Bridge Alternative E: Prefabricated Steel Truss Bridge

Pros:

• Reasonable cost for a unique look

Cons:

• Timber typically has a shorter service

life than concrete or steel Pros:

• Easy to install

Cons:

• Similar maintenance requirements

to girder bridge

Evaluation Matrix - Structures (Crossings #2 & #3)

Alternative A: Girder Bridge Alternative B: Concrete Arch Alternative C: Pipe Arch Alternative D: Timber Bridge Alternative E: Steel Truss Bridge

Engineering

Construction $150,000 $238,000 $110,500 $213,000 $216,000 Design, Mobilization, and Contingency $60,000 $83,000 $38,000 $73,000 $73,000 Total Cost (Rounded, not including ROW) $210,000 $330,000 $150,000 $290,000 $290,000 Constructability Moderate Simple/Moderate Simple Moderate/Hard Simple/Moderate Service Life Moderate 50 - 75 Years High 75 - 100 Years High 75 - 100 Years Low ~ 50 Years Moderate 50 - 75 Years Maintenance Requirements Moderate Low Low Moderate Moderate

Impacts

Prime Agricultural Soils Potential Potential Potential Potential Potential Hazardous Materials Potential Potential Potential Potential Potential Floodplains None None None None None Fish & Wildlife None None None None None Rare, Threatened & Endangered Species Potential Potential Potential Potential Potential Public Lands - Sect. 4(f) None None None None None LWCP - Sect. 6(f) None None None None None Managed Lands None None None None None Right-of-Way During Construction During Construction During Construction During Construction During Construction Wetlands Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Permits*

Act 250 Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Section 404 - Wetlands (USACE) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Section 401 Water Quality Certification Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State Wetlands Permit Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Stream Alteration Permit Potential Potential Potential Potential Potential Construction Phase Storm Water Discharge Permit (General Permit 3-9020) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Operational Phase Storm Water Discharge Permit (General Permit 3-9015) Potential Potential Potential Potential Potential Lakes & Ponds No No No No No Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species Potential Potential Potential Potential Potential Aesthetic Quality Moderate High Low/Moderate Very High High Meets Purpose & Need Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

*Stream Crossings and Path would be submitted as single permit application

Next Steps

 Selection of Preferred Alternative

September

 Draft Scoping Report

Early October

 Final Scoping Report

October 31

Questions? Comments? Share them with us!

Daniel M. Peck, PE Project Manager

40 IDX Drive Building 100, Suite 200 South Burlington, VT 05403-7771 802.497.6195 dpeck@vhb.com