HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/18/2025 Item 7b, Pease
Andy Pease <
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Agenda Item 7b. Consider alternatives to Prado Overpass
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Dear Council Members -
I’m writing to request that the council deny, or at least delay, the PS&E contract award for the Prado
Road overpass and take steps to consider the alternative of no overpass or possibly a bike/pedestrian
overpass only.
I understand that stopping or significantly altering the project would be kind of a nightmare, to untangle
the project, the land use assumptions and committed funding. Traffic flow without the overpass would
be a little slower and more frustrating for car drivers, and we know a lot of those impacted would be
commuters to or from other towns with limited non-car options. There would be staff time and tradeoffs.
But going forward would also be a nightmare, and in my opinion a bigger one, due to the significant cost
increases. When the project was conceived some years ago, it was $30 - $50 million. Design
requirements combined with construction increases, and it’s now at least $140 million, which, to be
clear, we do not have. We have some of that from outside sources, but most of it is on us, Local Revenue
Measure, Capital Improvement funds and financing for 30 years. That expenditure would reduce or delay
other important city projects, potentially including fire station #5, which is truly needed for better
response time, and the Public Safety building, so we have an up-to-date facility for community
emergencies. Other at-risk projects are new parks that have been on hold for years, flood mitigation
projects, and other traffic and safety improvements throughout the city.
Although the Prado Overpass would address circulation issues, I think we need to make this decision
within the context of trade-offs, and I don’t believe it’s worth the cost.
I suggest denying award of the contract and directing staff to investigate the No Build option, with
consideration that a bike/pedestrian only bridge could be considered in the future as part of the active
transportation plan and the circulation element.
There are potentially a few other approaches or supplemental options:
1. Continue this item for at least 60 days so the community can review the cost implications and
participate in prioritization of funding.
2. Award the PS&E contract in phases, awarding only Phase 1 at this time while other options are
explored.
3. If PS&E is awarded in part or in full, concurrently explore the No Build and/or Ped/Bike Bridge
options. The options for a smaller vehicle overpass would likely not have the cost savings to justify
the effort so do not pursue that option. Do consider alternative traffic mitigations, including
1
intersection improvements, supplemental transit funding and possible lane extension for
impacted off-ramps.
4. Recognizing the overpass is important across the region, consider developing a “cap” for the
city’s financial contribution, to see if State and Federal funding would be available at adequate
levels.
Thank you for your consideration.
Andy Pease
2