Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout(3)HIKE & BIKE/SAFE SCHOOL RTSCITY OF PORT ARTHUR, TEXAS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM: TO-' ' Steve Fitzgibbons, City Manager FROM: Leslie E. McMahen, P.E., Director of Public Works DATE: March 27, 2003 SUB3ECT: Report on Hike and Bike Trail Project and Safe Routes to Schools Grant As you recall, we recenUy bid the Hike and Bike Trail project and received only one bid which was twice the amount that we' had budgeted for the project. The length of the project could be further reduced (according to TxDOT) to bring the cost down, but it would begin to lose its intended benefit. A decision on what to do with the Hike and Bike Trail project was held pending the outcome on our Safe Routes to Schools grant request. The latter project was developed with the Hike and Bike Trail as the ~spine" of a network of new sidewalks to schools adjacent to and along the route of the trail. Now that we have been turned down on our Safe Routes grant request, we must return to the derision on what to do about the trail project, The project could be reduced to the section of Houston to Gilham, or Gilham to Woodworth, and re-bid, or the funds in the CZP for the t~il project could be used to install improvements in Barbara 3acket Park as proposed by the Parks Department. Tf we abandon the Hike and Bike Trail project, we will owe TxDOT not less than $:[0,600 nor more than $:[5,000 for work they have put into the project, over the nine (9) years of its life, since they will not be able to recover these expenses through the federal funding portion of the. grant for the project. CITY OF PORT ARTHUR, TEXAS. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM: TO: steve Fitzgibbons, Ob/Manager FROM: Leslie E. McMahen, P.E., Director of Public Works DATE'- 3anuary 29, 2003 SUB3ECT-' Hike and BikeTrail Project Here are some points for consideration when we meet to discuss the options on the Hike and Bike Trail project: 1. Zt has been shortened tea project that has some logic to the end points, though it could be further shortened to be Houston to Gilham or Gilham to Woodworth. TxDOT may say that it is no longer the project for which the grant was sought. 2. We spent approximately $9,700 on the design contract but the engineer put in much time than that without additional charges. We currently have a construction phase services contract with them for approximately $14,000 of which only a small portion has been spent. 3. The project as bid was used as the ~spine" of our plan for the Safe Routes to School grant request. Shortening the project to the Houston/Gilham section would still serve three of the schools mentioned in the grant but shortening the project to Gilham/Woodworth would serve only two schools. 4. As of August, 2002 TxDOT had incurred approximately $13,250 in engineering reviews and other incidental costs, of which we 'have paid our 20% share of $2,650 to them. Since additional work by TxDOT has occurred since August, 2002, their ~ .will obviously rise. Since they would not be reimbursed for their 80% share of the pm]ect by FHWA if we totally abandon the project, we would be responsible to them for at iea~ $10,600. 5. We could re-bid the project at a more appropriate time such that the contractor would not be workin9 during the iate winter/early spdn§ months, on the assumption that the Council is ~tl supportive of the project and is wi&ting to commit an additional $80,000, more or less, to the project.