HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Public Works, Utilities and Public Safety 2016-01-14
Thursday, January 14, 2016
Public Safety, Utilities 8:00 a.m.
& Public Works Committee Town Board Room
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
2. PUBLIC SAFETY
a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD
i. None.
b) REPORTS
i. End of Year Statistics. Commander Pass
ii. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions.
3. UTILITIES
a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD
i. None.
b) REPORTS
i. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions.
4. PUBLIC WORKS
a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD
i. Dry Gulch Road Rehabilitation Project Change Order. Manager Ash
ii. 2013 Flood Ground Engineering Change Order:
Material Testing. Manager Ash
iii. Requesting CDOT to Reinstate Barnes Dance at
Riverside/Elkhorn and Elkhorn/Moraine. Dir. Muhonen
b) REPORTS
i. Update on Estes Park Sanitation District Fee Waiver for
Visitor Center Restroom. Manager Landkamer
ii. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions.
5. ADJOURN
AGENDA
Presented by:Commander Corey P. PassJanuary 14, 2016
0200040006000800010000120001400016000180002013 2014 2015158931788014591total CAD Stats (PD Only)
02004006008001000120014001600180020002013 2014 2015151917281903Report Numbers
050100150200250300350400450Hit and Run Injury Non Injury UnknownInjuryTotal4624245103255329271836179382828407MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS201320142015
0102030405060708090Cleared byArrestCleared byExceptionalMeansCasesInactivatedOtherIncidentsTotal Cases41107765491210 1081INVESTIGATIONS20142015CLEARANCE RATES:2014 78%2015 75%
05000100001500020000250002013 2014 2015156562023517217
01002003004005006007008009002013 2014 2015626761846
400042004400460048005000520054002013 2014 2015448848135250
36000380004000042000440004600048000500002013 2014 2015490264149642157
420004400046000480005000052000540002013 2014 2015535144630947407Total Phone Calls
0204060801001201401602013 2014 201523142144
Community Group Conferencing24 referrals: 1 re-offense, 1 on hold for residential treatment, 1 did not complete contract.Girls Circle55 girls participated in 8 circles: grades 6-8Student Support and Accountability Circles7 circles serving 7 student core members, 5 High School students, 2 middle school students. Restorative Community Mediation16 referrals involving 58 people, 3 full mediation processes, 1 on hold, 7 cases one party refused to mediate, 6 cases staff was able to effect resolution through shuttle mediation.Community CirclesNo Participants in 2015. We have pursued all parolees who live within our community. The pool is smaller due to housing challenges.VolunteersTrained 18 new volunteers; we have a total of 44 trained volunteers. We used 45 additional community members, who participated as representatives of the community in both Community Group Conferencing and Student Support and Accountability Circles.
Development of Boys CouncilExpansion of Girls Circle into Elementary (4thand 5thgrades)Development of Conflict Management Courses and Presentations for private and public entities.Develop in-house Mediation Training for our Volunteers.
05001000150020002500300035004000450050002013 2014 2015326145774508
0200400600800100012002013 2014 20157251179725•Temp Records Asst covers window on Mondays and Fridays. •There are more Aux doing window
6517 hrs
Utility Department Verbal Report
To: Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Linda Swoboda, Flood Recovery Project Manager
Date: January 14, 2016
RE: Flood Recovery Projects
Objective: To up-date the PUP Committee on the Flood Recovery Projects
Present Situation:
Three areas of construction: Fish Creek Utilities Project, Windcliff, and Glen Haven.
Fish Creek (PW240)
Construction of the Utilities work was completed in early October 2015 when the
contractor de-mobilized. The project for the Town included five electrical sites and five
water sites. Our contract value for construction was $1,282,837.21 –breakdown as
follows:
Initial contract amount (KRS) $1,244,348.45 (includes $94,855.56 improvements)
Change Orders $ 38,488.76 (3 % overall)
Final Contract value (KRS) $1,282,837.21
Light & Power’s work $ 108,745.42 (includes $11,366.43 improvements)
Engineering & CM $ 419,055.21
Total Project Value $1,810,527.70
One third of the change order amount was for Soils & Concrete Testing which was
always required but handled as a pay as needed basis and not a lump sum bid amount.
So this cost was expected. The remaining change order value was mainly attributed to
relocating a water tie in for a better connection and on the Scott site, wet site conditions.
The Town will be sending a Scope Change for this project for cost overrun. The cost
overrun covers additional Engineering expense for Environmental Assessment that was
not listed in the PW, one electric site that was removed from the PW, and remaining
amount is construction. We believe that all these cost will be covered. Only amount not
covered is the Improvements for both water & electrical for a value of $106,221.99.
The Town received the final invoice for this project on January 11, 2016 and plan to
have all the paperwork processed by February or before.
Overall the Town was very pleased with the progress of the Contractor, their
persistence of dealing with a wetter Spring, and their overall professionalism in running
the project. They added additional crews and worked well with the neighbors that were
impacted during construction.
Windcliff and misc water sites (PW258)
The Windcliff project progressed very well. This project consisted of a 2,465 LF of an
underground conduit bank relocated to replace the 760 LF of underground conduit that
was on a 40% grade. The project was constructed by our Light & Power crew. It
began in late May 28th and finished on July 13, 2015. Because this was an in-house
project we were substantial below the PW estimated value. The Windcliff portion of the
PW has been invoiced and the remaining misc. water sites will be submitted very soon.
Glen Haven (PW255)
Glen Haven has been subdivided into three separate projects: All of this work was
covered by our Insurance.
1. Fox Creek – This was an entire over-head line rebuilt. The project began in April 2015
and finished in October 2015. The project schedule was a bit longer due to blasting was
required on many of the last poles that were placed. This work was completed by our
Light & Power crew.
2. North Fork – As reported in June, this over-head line began in the fall of 2014 and
finished in April 2015. Work was completed by our Light & Power crew.
3. CR 43 (Downtown Glen Haven to the end of our line, approximately three miles beyond
Glen Haven) - In June we reported that we were looking at an alternative solution of
running the line close to the existing temporary line through the National Forest Service.
Our application for an amended approval to utilize this section of the Forest was
submitted in June 2015. After waiting for the Forest service to respond, another solution
was presented to us. Joe Lockhart was instrumental in working with Platte River Power
Authority to coordinate adding an additional conduit in an underground line that they
were installing for fiber purposes from Drake to Glen Haven. This conduit will soon be
completed and our crews will install the power line sometime this year.
ENGINEERING
Memo
To: Public Safety, Utilities, Public Works Committee (PUP)
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Kevin Ash, PE, Public Works Engineering Manager
Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date: January 14, 2016
RE: Dry Gulch Road Improvements – Farnsworth Group Change Order #3
Background:
On January 8, 2015, the Town Board approved a design services contract with the
Farnsworth Group to provide a design for Dry Gulch Roadway (from Elkhorn Avenue to
Stonegate Drive). The original budget for the Dry Gulch project was $1.67 Million. This
included $1.37 Million for construction, $200,000 for design and $100,000 for
construction management services. The initial executed contract with Farnsworth for
$172,482 included a design for a detached walk in the Sombrero Property to the east.
When an easement could not be negotiated, the Town directed the consultant to
evaluate options of including a walk along Dry Gulch Road. Several iterations and
alternatives were evaluated. On May 12, 2015 at a Town Board Study Session, the
most feasible options/costs were presented. The Board authorized staff to proceed with
a walk on the west side of Dry Gulch Road at a cost estimated at $2.6 Million.
Present Situation:
In the process of finalizing bid documents, Public Works was alerted to 2 adjacent
property impact issues that were not identified in the initial project scope and need
addressed prior to the beginning of construction. Change Order #3 was received from
the Farnsworth Group (included) with the following Tasks:
Task #1 - The proposed extension of the trail under State Highway 34 that will
connect with the existing Lake Estes Trail, crosses Bureau of Reclamation
property. After meeting with the Bureau, this crossing requires a Special Use
Permit approved by the Bureau before any construction on their property can
occur. The fee to meet with the Bureau and prepare the Special Use Permit is
$3,084.00.
Task #2 – A recorded plat for Lone Pine Acres Addition (1960) shows a 10’ strip
of land identified as “Private Ground” along the north side of State Highway 34
ROW. This is in a location that the proposed Dry Gulch Road alignment would
cross. Standard research of this property through the Larimer County Assessor
does not identify this strip of land. Concerns were then raised that there may be
additional encumbrances associated with this parcel. The fee for additional
research is $3,376.00.
This change order adds $6,460.00 to the design budget. The original design services
contract with the Farnsworth Group was $172,482, previously approved change order
#1 and change order #2 brought the design budget to $238,862.50. Approval of
Change Order #3 will increase the design budget to $245,322.50. This value
represents 9.4% of the estimated construction cost ($2.6 Million) and is well within
industry standards.
The design plans and specifications are complete. Bidding documents have been
modified and the project is ready to go to bid for a second time pending clear property
encumbrances.
Action Recommended by Staff:
Public Works has evaluated the submitted change order fee for services and feel that it
is equitable to the Consultant and satisfies the intent of the project scope with the Town.
Staff recommends approval of Change Order #3 as presented.
Budget:
This project will be funded from the newly created Street Improvement Fund. The
additional $6,460.00 design budget will come out of the Capital line item within that
fund.
Level of Public Interest
Public Interest on this project is expected to be high. This will be the first major project
for the voter approved sales tax increase. In addition to the roadway improvements,
this project will address trail connections, drainage, wetlands, and utilities.
Sample Committee Recommendation:
I recommend the Town Board approve Change Order 3 to the professional services
contract for design of the Dry Gulch Roadway Improvement Project to the Farnsworth
Group for a project cost increase not to exceed $6,460.00. This is to be included as a
Consent Item at the January 26, 2016 Town Board Meeting.
Engineering Services
Dry Gulch Road Improvements i Town of Estes Park
1612 Specht Point Road, Suite 105
Fort Collins, CO 80525
p 970.484.7477 f 970.484.7488
www.f-w.com | www.greennavigation.com
File: 0150096.00
December 21, 2015
Town of Estes Park
Attn: Kevin Ash, PE, Engineering Manager
Public Works Department
Town of Estes Park
P. O. Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
RE: Change Order Request No. 3 | Dry Gulch Road Improvements
Dear Mr. Ash:
We are pleased to submit our proposal for the additional work effort concerning the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation (USBR) property, south of HWY 34, where the proposed trail ties into the existing Lake
Estes Trail for the Dry Gulch Rehabilitation Project (Project) for the Town of Estes Park (Town). A
detailed description of the Tasks to be performed is as follows:
DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1: Additional Effort Concerning USBR Property Access
• Initial Meeting – Meeting with Town of Estes Park staff, USBR staff, Estes Valley Recreation
and Park District (EVRPD), and Farnsworth Group staff to discuss the area affected and what is
required so that construction of the trail and trail connection can occur.
• Completing Special Use Permit (SUP) – We will complete the SUP for the trail and trail
connection construction and provide to the Town of Estes Park.
Employee Bill Rate/Hour Hours Total
J.C. Cundall $152.00 8 $1,216.00
Rob Lauer $131.00 4 $524.00
Scott Turner $112.00 12 $1,344.00
TOTALS: 20 $3,084.00
Engineering Services
Dry Gulch Road Improvements ii Town of Estes Park
Task 2: Determining Status of 10-Foot Strip of Private Ground – According to the latest Plat for the
area between North Lake Avenue and HWY 34, a 10-foot wide strip of land is designated as “Private
Ground”. Neither the Town of Estes Park Planning Department nor Larimer County Assessor shows
this as a separate piece of property. Therefore, the Town of Estes Park has requested that Farnsworth
Group contact a Title Company in Estes Park to determine the status of this strip of property. The
Town will pay the Title Company themselves, Farnsworth Group will not pay the Title Company.
Employee Bill Rate/Hour Hours Total
J.C. Cundall $152.00 8 $1,216.00
Alan Warner
(Surveyor)
$158.00 8 $1,264.00
Scott Turner $112.00 8 $896.00
TOTALS: 24 $3,376.00
BUDGET
Each individual task fee is as follows:
Task 1: Additional Effort Concerning USBR Property Access Fees: $3,084.00
Task 2: Determining Status 10-Foot Strip of Private Ground Fees: $3,376.00
Total: $6,460.00
Should you have any questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
J.C. Cundall, PE
Engineering Manager
Farnsworth Group, Inc.
970.484.7477 | jcundall@f-w.com
PUBLIC WORKS Memo
To: Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Kevin Ash, PE, Engineering Manager
Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date: January 14, 2016
RE: Change Order Approval for Materials Testing Services – Ground
Engineering (2013 Flood Repairs)
Objective:
The approval of a change order is needed to compensate Ground Engineering for the
additional Materials Testing services required to meet the prolonged flood repair work
by Osmun, Inc. at over 20 roadway sites damaged in the 2013 flood.
Present Situation:
On October 7, 2014 the Town entered into a professional services agreement with
Ground Engineering in the amount of $9,247.50 to provide required material testing
services for the Osmun repairs of roadway damage caused by the 2013 flood at over
20 locations. This agreement was then split to separate the FHWA reimbursable
work (Community Drive) from the 20 FEMA sites work. $4,900.00 was contracted
with Ground for the FEMA sites and $4,347.50 was contracted with Ground for the
FHWA site.
The Town awarded the construction contract for the FEMA-eligible sites to Osmun,
Inc. on October 21, 2014 and issued a Notice to Proceed on November 3, 2014.
The agreed upon contract completion date was extended to December 19, 2014.
The work still remains incomplete as of the date of this memo.
On April 7, 2015 the Town awarded the construction contract for the FHWA-eligible
site (Community Drive) to Osmun, Inc. only after tightening the performance
provisions of the contract in response to ongoing construction delays experienced by
Osmun, Inc. Osmun completed the Community Drive work in a timely and high-
quality fashion, raising optimism that renewed motivation to complete the project had
been achieved.
After many months of meetings, unfulfilled schedules, broken promises, and receipt
of numerous claims of nonpayment for work completed by subcontractors, the Public
Works Department issued a Notice of Termination to Osmun, Inc. on October 13,
2015. A follow up notice was sent on November 6, 2015 to Osmun Inc. and
Page 2 of 3
Allegheny Casualty Company, the surety provider of Osmun’s Performance and
Payment bonds.
On November 11, 2015, Public Works received a Change Order Request from
Ground Engineering. The change order is specific that the over-runs are directly
related to the pace of the project. Ground technicians have been scheduled 2-6
times as much as the original scope and bid indicated. Additionally, contractor
cancellations and performance related retesting have been provided.
Incomplete work remains at 4 sites. Ground Engineering has provided an estimate to
complete the remaining materials testing needs.
Proposal:
The Public Works Department proposes the Town approve 3 Change Orders respective
to this request. Change Order 1 with Ground Engineering would compensate them an
additional $19,566 for materials testing services completed through October 2015 as it
directly relates to the FEMA sites. Change Order 2 with Ground Engineering would
compensate them an additional $3,253.00 for material testing services associated with
FHWA (Community Drive). The cost of this work is proposed to be deducted from funds
owed Osmun, Inc. per the provisions contained in Section 15-2.1.8 of the Contract.
Additionally, a Change Order 3 is proposed to fund materials testing services through
the procurement of a new contractor and completion of the remaining flood repair work.
The cost of this change order is also proposed to be deducted from construction funds
otherwise due to Osmun for work completed, but not yet paid for. We have additional
financial recourse through the bonding company if needed.
Advantages:
Ground Engineering has in-depth familiarity with the project, the community, and the
design since they were the original design consultant on this project.
Ground Engineering has shown perseverance through the difficult construction
contract work with Osmun and are willing to continue this project with the Town.
Ground Engineering has the staff resources available now to assist the Town in
moving this project forward toward the completion goal in early 2016.
Disadvantages:
Ground Engineering is based in Loveland, Colorado. Added cost is incurred for
travel time and scheduling for our site inspection needs.
Some risk exists that Town reimbursement for this change order work from FEMA
(and also from CDBG-DR for local match dollars) for the construction dollars
redirected from Osmun to Ground could be delayed or denied.
Action Recommended:
Page 3 of 3
The Public Works Department recommends the Town approve and pay Ground
Engineering for a Change Order 1 in the amount of $19,566.00 for materials testing
services on the 20 FEMA sites; for a Change Order 2 in the amount of $3,253.00 for
materials testing services on the Community Drive FHWA site; and for a Change Order
3 in the amount of $4,000.00 for future materials testing work on 2 incomplete FEMA
sites.
Budget:
Expenses for the 2013 flood repair work are paid from the Streets account within the
General Fund (#101-3100-431-22-02). The Town expects to be reimbursed from FEMA
for 87.5% of the repair costs at the FEMA sites, from FHWA for 91.9% of the repair
costs at the FHWA sites, and from CBGD-DR funds for the remaining local match.
These reimbursements are not guaranteed. The costs for Change Order 1 and Change
Order 2 are fixed and no contingency is needed. The cost for Change Order 3 is
estimated. To allow expedient administrative approval of potential changes in this
future materials testing cost, Public Works staff recommends a 20% contingency be
included in an itemized budget encumbrance of $5,000 for Change Order 2.
Level of Public Interest
The known level of public interest in this item is moderate, and is focused primarily
among the residents living adjacent to the incomplete repair areas.
Sample Motion:
I move to recommend/not recommend the Town Board authorize approval of a
Change Order 1 in the amount of $19,566.00 and a Change Order 2 in the amount of
$4,000.00 and provide Public Works staff budget authorization to spend up to $5,000 if
necessary for the Change Order 2 work.
This contract is to be included as a consent item on the agenda for the January 26th
Town Board meeting.
Attachments:
Ground Engineering Change Order Request
November 11, 2015
Job Name: Materials Testing, Town of Estes
Park 2013-2015 Flood Repairs,
Estes Park, Colorado
Job Number: 14-0667 / 15-0546
Change Order Request
Town of Estes Park
170 MacGregor Ave
Estes Park, Colorado 80517
Attn: Mr. Kevin Ash
Flood repair projects excluding Community Drive (14-0667): As of October 10th, 2015,
Ground Engineering Consultants, total billing for all of the flood repair projects (minus
Community Drive) is $24,466.00. Our previous estimated cost for this portion of the work
(developed in April of 2015) was $18,045 based on anticipated schedule. Please see the
attached spread sheet that is updated through October 2015. Based on the actual testing
scheduled to date, the cost associated with this portion of the project is $25,000 to date. I
have tried to contact the project team to estimate the remaining testing on this project and
have not heard back. Based on our own estimate, we anticipate $4,000 more to finish the
remaining work, however this is only and estimation without input from the on-site project
team.
Over –run of the project is directly related to the pace of the project. GROUND has been
scheduled up at the site to provide quality control over the project, however based on the
slow pace of each of the projects, our technicians have been scheduled 2 to 6 times as
much as anticipated during bidding. In addition there has been some contractor
cancelations while arriving to the site, retesting (contractor performance related), and down
time. Those daily documents associated with contractor time are attached for review.
Community Drive (Job No. 15-0546): This project occurred from April through July of
2015. The original budget of this project was $4,347.50 and we billed $7,600.50 to
complete that project. GROUND has already been paid for this project.
Several portions of Community Drive had unstable subgrade and shallow groundwater
conditions. A significant portion of this roadway was excavated and replaced with imported
structural fill to obtain stability. This work increased the amount of soil visits by 6 times.
The following table summarizes the costs associated with Community Drive.
Construction Items Proposed
Billings
Actual
Scheduled
Billings
Difference in
billing
Soil tech $540 $3,690 -$3,150
Concrete tech $270 $450 -$180
Asphalt tech $810 $697.5 +$112.5
Proj. Manager (onsite visits
for unstable subgrade)
Recommendation
$425 $1190 -$765
Please call me with any questions.
Sincerely,
GROUND ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
Joseph Zorack, P.E.
Town of Estes park Project Name: Estes Park 2013 Flood RepairAttention:Kevin AshApplication Date: Summary of Billings170 MacGregor AvePeriod To: 10/10/2015Estes Park, Co 80517Job #DESCRIPTION OF WORK ASSOCIATED WITH EACH JOB NUMBEREstimated Field Testing Plus LabTOTALS FROM PREVIOUS PERIODTO BE PAID THIS PERIODCOST TO DATE% Complete AMOUNT REMAININGContractor Time (strictly cancelations, retesting, etc)Contractor Time (cancelations, retesting, etc)14-0667Site B ESTP05-Site 02: BROOK COURT 1,115.26$ 250.00$ 2,678.50$ 2,928.50$ 262.6% (1,813.24)$ 5.0 225.00$ C ESTPK05-Site 3: BROOK DRIVE 1,000.26$ 147.50$ -$ 147.50$ 14.7% 852.76$ -$ A ESTPK06-Site 01: FALL RIVER COURT BRIDGE 1,350.26$ 1,907.50$ 1,907.50$ 141.3% (557.24)$ -$ E ESTPK06-Site 02: FALL RIVER DRIVE UPHILL -$ -$ -$ -$ #DIV/0! -$ -$ D ESTPK06-Site 03: FALL RIVER DRIVE 1,000.26$ 1,290.00$ -$ 1,290.00$ 129.0% (289.74)$ -$ F ESTPK06-Site 04: FALL RIVER DRIVE 1,000.26$ 217.50$ 217.50$ 21.7% 782.76$ -$ G ESTPK06-Site 05: FALL RIVER ROAD PED TRAIL 1,115.26$ -$ -$ 0.0% 1,115.26$ -$ H ESTPK06-Site 06: W. ELKHORN AVE PED TRAIL 1,115.26$ 2,568.50$ -$ 2,568.50$ 230.3% (1,453.24)$ 5.0 225.00$ I ESTPK06-Site 07: SPRUCE DRIVE BRIDGE 1,115.26$ 3,309.50$ -$ 3,309.50$ 296.7% (2,194.24)$ 2.0 90.00$ J ESTPK06-Site 08: CHEROKEE ROAD 1,115.26$ 810.00$ 810.00$ 72.6% 305.26$ 3.0 135.00$ K ESTPK06-Site 11: HEINZ PARKWAY 765.26$ 720.00$ -$ 720.00$ 94.1% 45.26$ 1.0 45.00$ L ESTPK06-Site 12: GREY FOX DRIVE (SOUTH) 765.26$ 60.00$ 60.00$ 7.8% 705.26$ -$ M ESTPK06-Site 13: GREY FOX DRIVE (EAST) 765.26$ 60.00$ 60.00$ 7.8% 705.26$ -$ N ESTPK06-Site 14: LEXINGTON LANE 765.26$ 962.50$ 962.50$ 125.8% (197.24)$ 7.0 315.00$ O ESTPK06-Site 15: GRAND ESTATES DRIVE 765.26$ 632.50$ -$ 632.50$ 82.7% 132.76$ 2.0 90.00$ P ESTPK15-Site 01: OLD RANGE DRIVE 1,115.26$ 4,257.00$ -$ 4,257.00$ 381.7% (3,141.74)$ 4.0 180.00$ Q ESTPK15-Site 02: STEELE COURT 765.26$ 567.50$ -$ 567.50$ 74.2% 197.76$ -$ R ESTPK15-Site 03: ASPEN Ave 765.26$ 375.00$ -$ 375.00$ 49.0% 390.26$ 3.0 135.00$ S ESTPK15-Site 04: MONRAINE AVE DRAINAGE 530.26$ 285.00$ 1,462.50$ 1,747.50$ 329.6% (1,217.24)$ 7.0 315.00$ T ESTPK16-Site 01: RIVERSIDE PARK 1,115.32$ 1,905.00$ -$ 1,905.00$ 170.8% (789.68)$ 3.0 135.00$ 18,045.00$ 20,325.00$ 4,141.00$ 24,466.00$ 135.6% (6,421.00)$ 42.0 1,890.00$ 15-0546Community Drive4,347.50$ 7,600.50$ -$ 7,600.50$ 174.8% (3,253.00)$ 4.5 202.50$ 22,392.50$ 27,925.50$ 4,141.00$ 32,066.50$ 143.2% (9,674.00)$ 46.50$ 2,092.50$ Totals with Community Drive14-0667 Estes park (minus Community drive) totals
PUBLIC WORKS Memo
To: Public Safety, Utilities, & Public Works Committee
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Greg Muhonen, PE, Public Works Director
Date: January 14, 2016
RE: Barnes Dance Reinstatement Request to CDOT
Objective:
The purpose of the proposed request is to decrease intersection accident risk by
reducing conflicts between high volumes of cars and pedestrians at two downtown
intersections.
Present Situation:
Prior to 2010 the traffic signals at the intersections of Elkhorn Ave at Riverside Dr and
Moraine Ave were programmed by CDOT to include an all-walk phase approximately
every 2 minutes. This operation (known as the Barnes Dance or pedestrian scramble)
stops the vehicles on all legs of the intersection for a brief period of time and allows the
pedestrians to cross the intersecting streets in any direction. It also prohibits
pedestrians from crossing any of the intersecting streets during the remainder of each
traffic signal cycle.
In 2010, the Town and CDOT teamed to construct turn lane and access ramp
improvements at the intersection of Elkhorn & Riverside and upgraded the traffic signal
controls at Elkhorn and Moraine. The traffic signal timing was changed to the
common/conventional pattern allowing pedestrians to cross the intersection side-streets
by traveling parallel to the through-traffic during the green light phase of the traffic signal
program.
In 2015, the Town conducted numerous public meetings regarding the proposed one-
couplet known as the Downtown Estes Loop. This public discourse on downtown traffic
congestion prompted many citizen requests for reinstating the Barnes Dance signal
timing. In response, the Town asked CDOT to perform a real-time comparative
measurement evaluation of the traffic delay, traffic volume, and vehicular backup when
the two downtown intersection operate with the conventional vs Barnes Dance traffic
signal timing. The study showed the Barnes Dance signal timing nearly doubled the
westbound corridor travel time (12 minutes vs 6.3 minutes), increased average
vehicular delay by 22% (from 139 seconds to 169 seconds per vehicle (ave of all
directions)), diminished the volume of cars that could pass through the intersections by
9% (1266 vs 1381 vph), and the traffic backup approaching downtown from the east
were longer. The Barnes Dance also allowed 7% more pedestrians to cross all legs of
the intersection during the peak hour (2825 vs 2637).
The Estes Park Police Department has expressed its desire to see the Barnes Dance
restored. At a meeting with CDOT traffic engineers on December 16, 2015, the citizen
Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) members requested CDOT officials consider
benefits beyond impacts to motorized vehicles and reinstate the Barnes Dance signal
timing. The CDOT representatives declined, stating the engineering study/technical
analysis confirmed the conventional traffic signal timing best serves the CDOT mission
to efficiently move cars on the highway system. They indicated further discussion on
the matter needs to be directed to the CDOT Region 4 Director from either the Town
Administrator or Mayor.
Proposal:
Staff, in response to citizen input, requests CDOT restore the Barnes Dance all-walk
phase at the Elkhorn Ave intersections with Riverside Dr and Moraine Ave.
Advantages:
The advantages of reinstating the Barnes Dance signal timing include:
• Pedestrian flow and safety is prioritized over vehicular traffic flow for a fraction of
the traffic signal cycle.
• Turning cars do not conflict with pedestrians in the crosswalks. The intersections
are safer when moving (turning) cars and pedestrians are not both assigned
right-of-way authority by the traffic light to be in the same place at the same time.
• Intersection capacity for turning vehicles is increased, as traffic flow behind
turning vehicles is not blocked while the turning vehicles wait for pedestrians to
clear the crosswalk.
• Separation between cars and pedestrians is improved. Pedestrians are invited
into the street only when all the autos are stopped.
• Pedestrian street crossing time, and the associated exposure to vehicular traffic,
is reduced for one diagonal crossing of two streets instead of two separate street
crossing movements.
• Community Safety Officers will be assigned full-time presence at the two
intersections during periods of peak visitation.
• Large volumes of pedestrians can cross one or two streets simultaneously.
• The pedestrian scramble is viewed as improving the unique guest experience
when visiting Estes Park.
• The Barnes Dance signal timing will be included in the Downtown Estes Loop if it
is approved and constructed. Reintroduction now improves visitor expectation
for future return trips to Estes Park.
Disadvantages:
The disadvantages of reinstating the Barnes Dance signal timing include:
• Larger crowds of pedestrians queue at the four intersection corners every signal
cycle and can obstruct mobility and/or access into adjacent businesses.
• Total intersection capacity for moving cars is diminished about 9% (July 2015).
The Barnes Dance operation is less efficient for moving both cars and
pedestrians when they have to “take turns” instead of both moving concurrently
during the multiple traffic signal phases. Green time during the traffic signal cycle
assigned to the all-walk phase could be dedicated to the moving more cars
through the intersection with each signal phase.
• Automobile delay is increased about 22% (30 seconds per vehicle in 2015).
• Automobile queues (backups) are increased.
• Automobile driver frustration escalates in proportion to increased delay.
• Impatient pedestrians are more inclined to violate traffic laws and cross the street
against the signal indications. Added law enforcement presence is typically
needed.
• New pedestrian signals or signage should be installed to clearly communicate
the “all way walk” or “diagonal crossing” is permissible.
• Barnes Dance signal timing is uncommon and will not be expected by visitors
walking or driving. Unfamiliar pedestrians are inclined to instinctively begin
crossing the side street when the parallel traffic flow begins with each signal
phase.
Action Recommended:
The PW staff proposes the Town Administrator ask the CDOT Region 4 Director to
authorize preparation of updated and optimized signal timing plans to restore the
Barnes Dance all-walk phase at the Elkhorn Ave intersections with Riverside Dr and
Moraine Ave no later than May 27, 2016.
Budget:
There is no budget impact/cost to the Town for this request. The Police Department
2016 budget includes funding for two additional seasonal CSO positions needed to
support Barnes Dance signal timing at the two intersections during the summer season.
Level of Public Interest
Public interest on this proposal is expected to be high.
Recommended Motion:
I recommend the Barnes Dance reinstatement request to CDOT be included as an
Action Item at the January 26, 2016 Town Board meeting.
Attachments:
CDOT Region 4 Estes Park Signal Operations Study
Preliminary Results Memorandum
Memo
To: Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
Copy: Greg Muhonen, Town of Estes Park
From: Matthew J. Brown, PE, PTOE
Date: September 9, 2015
Re: CDOT Region 4 Estes Park Signal Operations Study
Preliminary Results Memorandum
Introduction
The intersection of Elkhorn & Moraine in downtown Estes Park is the most congested
intersection in Town, particularly during the summer recreational season. Very high pedestrian
activity, combined with high vehicular traffic and inefficient intersection geometry are to blame
for much of the problem.
The Barnes Dance treatment, at one time in effect at the intersection, adds an additional,
exclusive traffic signal phase that allows pedestrians to “scramble” without interference from
vehicular traffic.
The geometry at the intersection of Elkhorn and Moraine requires that the intersection be “split
phased” meaning that each approach to the intersection operates in sequence rather than at the
same time. The pedestrian crossing treatments further constrain intersection operations, either
by requiring an exclusive signal phase (Barnes Dance) or by limiting the signal timings to
accommodate pedestrian crossings on each leg of the intersection along with traffic.
At a glance, benefits of the Barnes Dance are to completely separate vehicle and pedestrian
traffic, thereby eliminating the “friction” that occurs when these movements are allowed to go
simultaneously. However, the trade-off is that the Barnes Dance option lessens the amount of
signal time available for the vehicular movements.
Data Collection
Traffic conditions on both data collection days were recorded using digital video cameras placed at
the intersection of Elkhorn & Moraine. Video recordings were made for the purposes of obtaining
vehicle turning movements, pedestrian volumes, queue lengths and average vehicle delays.
Vehicle and Pedestrian Volumes
Intersection traffic counts were collected on two consecutive Saturday’s (July 11th and July 18th,
2015) during the Town of Estes Park’s busiest season. Based on the field observations, there
was much more traffic demand in the westbound direction than could be accommodated by the
intersection. As result, the vehicular counts that were recorded do not accurately represent the
demand for this movement; only the amount that could be processed. The difference between
the amount of traffic processed by the intersection and the demand is reflected in the vehicle
queues on the westbound approach to the intersection. These queues often extended back to
the intersection with US-36 and beyond.
Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
September 9, 2015
Page 2
Queue Lengths
Using the digital video, vehicle queue lengths were evaluated by approach in 5 minute intervals
between 11:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. The back of queue could be observed in three of the four
directions. The westbound queue extended back to US-36 for virtually the entire period of
observation. Traffic on US-36 was observed back to the SH-7 intersection the weekend of the 18th.
Delay
Average Intersection stopped delays were calculated by approach in 15 minute intervals between the
hours of 11:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. These were determined by recording the duration of time between
when the sampled vehicle joins the back of queue until it passes the stop bar at the intersection.
Travel Times
Stolfus also conducted a sample of travel time runs along Elkhorn Avenue during the peak period on
July 11th and July 18th, 2015. The travel time runs were completed using a dash-mounted GoProTM
digital recording device. The GoPro allowed the runs to be conducted by a single person and the
time-stamped video to be downloaded at a later time in the office.
Analysis
The relative performance of each of the options was evaluated based upon measures of
effectiveness including average vehicle delays, intersection level-of-service (LOS), and vehicle
queue lengths.
Vehicle and Pedestrian Volumes
Vehicle and pedestrian volumes were nearly equal across the two weekends. Intersection vehicle
counts were higher the weekend of July 11th by approximately 9% (1,381 veh/hour versus 1,266
veh/hour). Pedestrian counts for the weekend of July 18th were higher by 7%. In general, pedestrian
counts are approximately double that of vehicle counts. Peak hour vehicle and pedestrian volumes
are shown on Tables 1a & 1b.
Table 1a:
Intersection Turning Movement Count Summary
Date Peak
Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left Right Thru Left
7/11/2015
No Barnes 1:45 - 2:45 6 86 25 10 187 430 332 28 90 53 123 11 1381
7/18/2015
Barnes 2:00 - 3:00 3 79 24 16 143 373 318 24 85 51 137 13 1266
Vehicle
Total
MORAINE AVE
Southbound
ELKHORN AVE
Westbound
MORAINE AVE
Northbound
ELKHORN AVE
Eastbound
Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
September 9, 2015
Page 3
Table 1b:
Pedestrian Count Summary
Date Peak
7/11/2015
No Barnes 1:45 - 2:45
7/18/2015
Barnes 2:00 - 3:00
MORAINE AVE
Southbound
ELKHORN AVE
Westbound
MORAINE AVE
Northbound
ELKHORN AVE
Eastbound Pedestrian Total
2637
2825
389
351
1014
1034
327
415
907
1025
Because the westbound movement at the intersection at Elkhorn Avenue & Moraine Avenue was
clearly over-saturated, the turning movement counts for the westbound direction do not necessarily
reflect actual traffic demand. In order to evaluate whether demands were substantially different from
one weekend to the next it is necessary to look further upstream before flow becomes capacity-
constrained. Stolfus located the closest permanent count stations along US-36 and US-34 east of the
Town of Estes Park. For both highways, the nearest stations are located just east of Mall Road at the
edge of Town. For the dates of July 11th and July 18th, westbound US-36 and US-34 volumes were
combined to represent potential inbound traffic. Eastbound US-36 and US-34 volumes were
combined to represent potential outbound traffic. Inbound and outbound traffic was then combined to
represent potential total traffic for the day. The combined data are plotted on Figure 1.
Figure 1
Traffic Demand by Hour of Day, Town of Estes Park
The results indicate that the traffic demands for the two weekends, like the counts taken at the
intersection, are very comparable. Between the hours of 11:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., the demands on
Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
September 9, 2015
Page 4
the weekend of July 11th are marginally higher. This eliminates concerns that overall demand on one
of the weekends far exceeded that of the other.
Queue Lengths
The observed queue length data was converted to (1) an average queue length, (2) a 95th percentile
queue length, and (3) the maximum queue length that was observed. The 95th percentile queue
length represents the length of queue that is rarely exceeded (only 5% of the time on average).
Table 2:
Summary of Observed Queue Lengths (Peak Hour)
Avg Q 95 Q Max Q Avg Q 95 Q Max Q
Southbound 1.4 3.0 3.0 4.2 7.9 9.0
Northbound 3.9 10.7 14.0 4.1 7.9 9.0
Westbound *********
Eastbound 11.0 13.5 14.0 6.6 10.5 11.0
Avg Q 95 Q Max Q Avg Q 95 Q Max Q
Southbound 35.4 75.0 75.0 104.2 197.5 225.0
Northbound 97.9 267.5 350.0 102.1 197.5 225.0
Westbound *********
Eastbound 275.0 336.3 350.0 164.6 261.3 275.0
*Queue regularly extended back to US 36
**Queue regularly extended beyond US 36
Approach
Approach
7/11/2015 - No Barnes 7/18/2015 - Barnes
7/11/2015 - No Barnes 7/18/2015 - Barnes
Car Lengths
Feet (25-ft/vehicle)
The queue length findings indicate that the Barnes Dance lengthens the southbound and westbound
queues, while shortening the northbound and eastbound queues. It appears that eliminating
concurrent pedestrian movements benefits the eastbound direction by eliminating the conflict
between right turning vehicles and pedestrians. When eastbound vehicles and pedestrians are
permitted to occur at the same time, one right-turning vehicle waiting for pedestrians to clear has the
potential to block the eastbound direction for virtually the entire signal phase.
In the southbound direction, eliminating concurrent pedestrian movements enables the Barnes
Dance scenario to shorten the southbound vehicle phase to minimally service southbound vehicles.
As result, southbound vehicle queues increase.
Westbound vehicle queues were incredibly long on both weekends. On July 11th, westbound queues
extended to US-36 virtually the entire time from 11:00 to 3:00. On July 18th, the queue was even
longer, extending down US 36 to State Highway 7.
Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
September 9, 2015
Page 5
Delay study
The results of the intersection delay studies correlate well with the queue length studies. Overall
intersection delays were approximately 30 seconds per vehicle longer the weekend of 7/18/15
(Barnes Dance). Thirty additional seconds of delay translates to approximately 22%. Most of this
additional delay was due to increases in delay for westbound vehicles.
Table 3:
Summary of Observed Intersection Delays (Peak Hour)
7/11/2015
No Barnes
7/18/2015
Barnes
Avg. Delay
(sec/veh)
Avg. Delay
(sec/veh)
Southbound 65 119
Northbound 84 105
Westbound 192 229
Eastbound 143 91
All 139 169 (+22%)
Approach
In terms of vehicle-hours of delay, the Barnes Dance resulted in approximately 10 additional hours of
delay during the peak hour. The amount of person-delay is based upon the number of persons per
vehicle. Although this data was not collected, it is anticipated that there were typically 2 persons per
vehicle; resulting in additional person delay of 20 hours. Once this number is multiplied by the
number of congested hours per weekend day and the number of seasonal peak weekends, the
difference between the two operational strategies becomes even more significant.
Travel Time Runs
Based upon a limited number of samples, the time required to travel the Elkhorn Avenue corridor in
the eastbound direction was similar between the two weekends. The westbound direction took nearly
twice as long to traverse the weekend of July 18th. Note that these travel times are based on the
segment from between US 36 and Moraine Avenue. The weekend of July 18th there was
considerable delays in turning from US 36 onto Elkhorn Avenue. This delay is not represented in the
table. End to end, the second westbound travel time run on July 18th took over 20 minutes to
complete. For this reason, only two travel time runs were completed on the weekend of July 18th.
Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
September 9, 2015
Page 6
Table 4a:
Summary of Travel Time Results (July 11th, 2015) (No Barnes Dance)
Begin End Distance (ft)
Time 1
(sec)
Time 2
(sec)
Time 3
(sec)
Time 4
(sec)
Average
(sec)
Speed
(MPH)
Moraine Ave Riverside Ave 612 74 133 76 93 94 4.4
Riverside Ave Ped Signal 756 50 30 32 25 34 15.0
Ped Signal US 36 619 83 17 16 45 40 10.5
169 8.0
Begin End Distance (ft)
Time 1
(sec)
Time 2
(sec)
Time 3
(sec)
Time 4
(sec)
Average
(sec)
Speed
(MPH)
US 36 Ped Signal 619 112 48 87 121 92 4.6
Ped Signal Riverside Ave 756 138 78 106 250 143 3.6
Riverside Ave Moraine Ave 612 152 190 167 71 145 2.9
380 3.6
WESTBOUND
SEGMENT TOTALS
EASTBOUND
SEGMENT TOTALS
Table 4b:
Summary of Travel Time Results (July 18th, 2015) (Barnes Dance)
Begin End Distance (ft)
Time 1
(sec)
Time 2
(sec)
Time 3
(sec)
Time 4
(sec)
Average
(sec)
Speed
(MPH)
Moraine Ave Riverside Ave 612 67 89 78 5.3
Riverside Ave Ped Signal 756 24 33 29 18.1
Ped Signal US 36 619 16 26 21 20.1
128 10.6
Begin End Distance (ft)
Time 1
(sec)
Time 2
(sec)
Time 3
(sec)
Time 4
(sec)
Average
(sec)
Speed
(MPH)
US 36 Ped Signal 619 120 172 146 2.9
Ped Signal Riverside Ave 756 400 228 314 1.6
Riverside Ave Moraine Ave 612 274 251 263 1.6
723 1.9
WESTBOUND
SEGMENT TOTALS
EASTBOUND
SEGMENT TOTALS
Synchro
In addition to collecting observed data, Stolfus conducted Synchro analyses using in place timings
and existing traffic data. The initial analyses results overstated how well the intersection was
performing when compared to field observations. For this reason, additional calibration of the model
was performed to better reflect actual conditions. Using the digital video recording, a saturation flow
rate study was completed of the intersection.
Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
September 9, 2015
Page 7
LOS
Avg. Veh
Delay
(sec)
Queue
(95th %)
(ft)LOS
Avg. Veh
Delay
(sec)
Queue
(95th %)
(ft)
EB Left D 43.6 27 D 39.5 25
EB Thru/Right F 88.8 #284 E 62.6 #237
WB Left D 45.9 #407 C 32.4 #381
WB Left/Thru/Right E 63.2 #454 D 42 #431
NB Left/Thru F 96.4 #225 D 52.5 158
NB Right C 25.0 309 C 21.6 126
SB Left/Thru/Right E 56.5 158 D 45.5 153
All E 55.5 -D 38.7 -
#95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer
ELKHORN AVE &
MORAINE AVE
WITHOUT BARNES DANCEWITH BARNES DANCE
INTERSECTION MOVEMENT
Table 5:
Synchro Measure of Effectiveness (MOE) Comparison
Despite calibrating the saturation flow rate the synchro model continues to over-estimate the quality
of traffic flow at the intersection. This is a result of the way the intersection turning movement counts
were completed – recording vehicles as they pass through the intersection. Actual demand for the
westbound movement was much higher than recorded as evidenced by the extensive queuing that
occurred.
Larry Haas, CDOT Region 4
September 9, 2015
Page 8
Findings
The following summarizes the findings of the study:
• Intersection turning movement volumes were 9% higher the weekend without the Barnes
Dance. Pedestrian volumes were 7% higher the weekend with the Barnes Dance. The
volumes appear close enough to get a reasonable comparison in operations.
• Review of traffic data entering Estes Park on US 36 and US 34 suggests that demand was
comparable between the two weekends. The higher volumes counted the weekend without
the Barnes Dance may indicate a higher traffic capacity for that scenario.
• The travel time runs conducted by Stolfus suggested that the westbound movement along
Elkhorn Avenue does not perform as well when the Barnes Dance is in operation.
• The westbound vehicle queue at the intersection was incredibly long both weekends. Virtually
the entire analysis period westbound vehicles were queued from Moraine Avenue back to
US 36. Westbound queues for the Barnes Dance scenario were generally longer than for
the scenario without the Barnes Dance.
• Based upon the delay study, the Barnes Dance scenario results in average vehicle delays
that are approximately 30 seconds per vehicle longer than the scenario without the Barnes
Dance.
• Eastbound travel times and speeds were better for the Barnes Dance scenario. Westbound
travel times and speeds were better for the no Barnes Dance scenario.
• Due to over-saturated conditions, results from the synchro models do not closely match
observed conditions. However, model results suggest that the scenario without the Barnes
Dance performs better.
• Based on a review of the video recordings, the presence of the Community Service Officers
(CSOs) did not appear to influence pedestrian behavior in a meaningful way.
It should be noted that the Barnes Dance timings were from several years ago. Should CDOT and
the Town decide to further consider that scenario it is recommended that updated signal timing plans
be prepared.
Please let me know if you have any questions on the data or our recommendations.
PUBLIC WORKS Memo
To: Public Safety, Utilities & Public Works Committee
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jon Landkamer, Public Works Facilities Manager
Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
Date: January 13, 2016
RE: Visitors Center Restroom Addition
Update to the Visitors Center Restroom Addition Memo
Here is where I am at with the budget for the Visitors Center restroom project.
Attended the EPSD Board meeting on Tuesday, January 12th to answer
questions and get request results for fee waiver of Estes Park Sanitation
District permit fees of $11,938
o They would not waive the fees, but offered to spread the cost out quarterly
for up to five years
Town of Estes Park Water Tap fees of $16,616, also not budgeted
o I was told by Director Bergsten that these fees cannot be waived
o Typically the tap fees that are waived are paid to Water from the General
Fund, therefore, not real savings
Plan “B”
Part 1 of Plan B would be to limit the scope of the Conference Center Interior
Repairs to the contract with B&E Builders
o Contract with B&E is for $39,804.95 plus a $200 change order for a total
of $40,004.95
o Total project authorization is for $49,709.49, including a used ceiling tile
salvage option and 10% contingency
o The budget for this project has already been paid to the Town from an
insurance claim, and approved by Finance and Administrative Services
to be reallocated to the VC Budget
o This project could be limited to the contract with B&E and kept at that $40k
number
o Project savings of $9,700 could be redirected to the Visitors Center budget
Part 2 of Plan B is to defer approved capital budget money to complete this
project as designed
o Reduce approved 2016 capital project, Town Hall windows, by $18,655.40
Budget Table with Plan B
1. Company Contact City Total Bid
Basis Architecture Steve Lane Estes Park $10,500
Heath Construction Travis Warner Fort Collins $176,801.40
Value Engineering Travis Warner Fort Collins $(9,000)
Contingency 10% $20,000
Landmark $1,500
EPSD Jim Duell Estes Park $11,938
TOEP Water Fees Steve Rusch Estes Park $16,616
Total Project $228,355.40
Plan B Reallocation Jon Landkamer Estes Park $(28,355.40)
Total Budget $200,000