At it’s meeting in February (Monday, 2/6), the Zionsville Town Council unanimously passed a resolution opposing the plan to use historic iron truss bridge to replace the current concrete bridge on Ford Road over Eagle Creek. The resolution cites seeming safety and design limitations of the proposed replacement plan currently being pursued by Boone County, who has jurisdiction over the project.
These concerns apparently stem from an email sent by Anne Rearick, Director of Bridges with INDOT to Michael Wink also of INDOT:
Mike,
As we discussed, I feel that several design exceptions will be needed.• A TL-4 bridge railing is required. The railing shown is a TL-2. (Note that the CF-1 railing was misidentified as a TL-4 railing in the manual for awhile)
• The horizontal curve at the south end of the project is substandard. The minimum radius for a low speed urban street with no superelevation is ~430’. The proposed curve has a 98’ radius. The current project limit is set at the PT of the curve. This does not appear to be appropriate because there is still significant work being done to the vertical curve as well as the shoulder transitions in the limits of the horizontal curve.The designer will need to address these items and provide the necessary documentation for a design exception if necessary.
In addition, the design currently calls for 8’(7’ paved) shoulders and transitions in a very short distance to a curb offset 1’ from the roadway. The use of the curb is inconsistent with the approach roadway. This is a rural area with no other curbs. If a curb is not used, the bridge will be too narrow.
James Barker, the engineer hired by Boone County to draw up plans for placing the historic iron truss bridge over Eagle Creek, responded to these issues as follows (PDF of original correspondence):
Dear Ms. Rearick,
We were forwarded a copy of review comments about our Stage 1 plans for the Ford Road Bridge project (Des. 9506590), sent by e-mail to Mike Wink. We had not expected additional review comments 13 months after our submission and a year after your consultants Janssen and Spaans sent the formal review comments, but we appreciate your interest.
We have reviewed the concerns expressed in that email, and offer the following response:
Regarding your first “bullet point”:
We found barrier crash test requirements for 30 mph and 40 mph design speeds in the INDOT Design Manual (TL-2 and TL-4 railing ratings, respectively), but none for 35 mph so we consulted the AASHTO [American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials] Guide Specifications for direction as to which should be used. Those specifications (Note 1 on last page here) indicate to us that a TL-2 railing would be appropriate for our project. Could you clarify why you think a TL-4 railing is required and the quoted AASHTO guidance is not applicable to our project?
…
Regarding your second “bullet point”:
We had hoped that by extending our project limits we could make minor improvements to the sharp curve south of the bridge without exceeding our project scope. In deference to your concerns, however, and considering INDOT’s long-standing direction that the project length of bridge replacement projects should be kept to the minimum needed to meet geometric standards, we are redesigning the project to reduce the project length and ensure the curve is beyond the project limits.
Regarding your comments on curb design:
In deference to your concerns about the off-structure guardrail, we will make sure that it conforms with Design Manual Figure 59-1G (new in year 2011) as you verbally requested (phone conversation, Dec. 29, 2011).
…
Ms. Rearick subsequently responded as follows (PDF of original correspondence):
Dear Mr. Barker,
I have reviewed your response to my January 11, 2012 comments.
My comments relating to the bridge railing were based upon the Level 1 Checklist documentation provided. It recommended the TL-4 railing. My independent review shows that with the reduction factors correctly applied, a TL-2 railing is acceptable.
Since you propose to address the comments related to the horizontal curve, shoulder width and curb with changes to the design, I think that it would be best for you to provide a copy of the revisions prior to continuing the discussion. Also, please provide a copy of the design plans and the schedule for the proposed work to be done on 96th Street.
The Zionsville resolution opposing the bridge was passed without taking into account Mr. Barker’s response to the concerns raised nor Ms. Rearick’s subsequent acknowledgement that her concerns over the bridge railing may have been unfounded. Ms. Rearick also deferred judgement on the other concerns pending revised plans from Mr. Barker. In fact, Mr. Barker is now proposing to omit the sharp curve at 96th Street from the plan to satisfy Ms. Rearick’s objections to it’s design, an inclusion he only made in an attempt to improve the quality of the roadway in proximity to the proposed bridge.
Additionally, the Zionsville Town Council is now bringing an objection to the width of the bridge which, at least in the public record, has never been an issue for INDOT. In particular, one Zionsville Town Council member has proposed defunding the historic iron truss bridge in favor of a “modern” concrete bridge which would be more expensive (estimates are from $700,000 to $900,000 more costly), waste the investment the county has already made in the historic iron truss bridge and need to be an additional 9 feet higher in elevation than the existing concrete bridge (due to needed clearance for possible flooding of Eagle Creek) with accompanying raising of the approach roadways north and south of the bridge.
In a final attempt to scuttle the historic iron truss bridge, some Zionsville Town Council members have voiced concerns over safety of the sharp curve south of the bridge. According to Boone County Sheriff Jim Campbell (the area is outside of Zionsville and hence in the jurisdiction of Boone County) at a Boone County Commissioners meeting, the area is not prone to accidents and the statistics show that.
Given all of the above, the Boone County Commissioners have generously agreed to meet and work with Zionsville toward a compromise with Commissioner Applegate designated as the main contact person. Zionsville has agreed and an initial meeting has taken place and another is to occur in the coming weeks.
Zionsville and Boone County residents with an opinion on whether the proposed historic iron truss bridge or a modern concrete bridge (with associated massive changes in the surrounding landscape and significant additional cost) are encouraged to contact the Zionsville Town Council or Boone County Commissioners as appropriate. Contact information for Zionsville Town Councilors can be found here and for Boone County Commissioners here.
