Plan for Polly Ann Trail bridge under review

“What’s it going to look like?”
Ever since it was announced a few years ago that a pedestrian bridge for Polly Ann Trail users would be constructed over M-24, people have asked this question.
Finally, there’s an answer.
The proposed bridge site plan is currently under review, after which it must go before the Oxford Village Planning Commission.
“From my point of view, with the exception of whatever happens at the planning commission meeting, this thing is pretty much ready to go,” said Larry Obrecht, who initiated the $1.3 million bridge project when he served as an Oakland County Commissioner and the Polly Ann Trail manager.
Sometime in the spring, a 100-foot long prefabricated, black steel “bow truss bridge” could be placed over M-24 south of Church St. and north of Center St. – the area in which the Polly Ann Trail runs through downtown Oxford.
According to Obrecht, the proposed bridge will have a 10-to-20-foot high arch and a 17-foot high under-clearance.
The distance from the surface of M-24 to the top of the bridge’s arch will be between 27 and 37 feet, said Obrecht, who now manages the county’s Animal Control Division.
Users will cross the bridge over a 12-foot wide cement surface, protected on each side by a 6-foot high, PVC-coated, black, chain link fence.
Pedestrians will enter and exit the bridge using two 400-foot long, 20-foot wide approaches (12 feet of which is the walking surface) located to the east and west. A 4-foot high, PVC-coated, black, chain link fence will extend on both sides of each of the ramps as well.
The concrete-surfaced ramps will begin to the west near Pleasant St. and to the east near Louck and Center streets.
The approaches will be constructed using earth held in place by concrete walls, the maximum height of which will be approximately 17 feet near the bridge and taper to zero near the beginning of the ramps.
The plans call for 16 ornamental piers adorned with a “simulated fieldstone veneer” to be placed along the approaches. Obrecht said private sponsorships will be solicited to eventually install more ornamental piers – one every 20 feet – along the ramps.
Obrecht wanted it noted that all the details of the bridge’s appearance are “as demanded by a special ad hoc committee,” consisting of village council members, planning commissioners and members of the Oxford Community Development Authority.
“We didn’t spec this,” he said.
Rather than go through the normal planning process, which can involve numerous design changes and drafting of new plans each time (a potentially costly ordeal), Obrecht said he went to village officials a few years ago and said “tell me what you want. Tell me what the bridge should look like.”
Obrecht said the bridge was designed to local officials’ specifications, which were approved by the council, planning commission and OCDA.
The bridge plans must now go before the village planning commission for final approval.
“I always said that I would bring it to the planning commission. I would take it through the regular process,” Obrecht said.
Obrecht said obtaining final approval from the Michigan Department of Transportation is the most important last step in the whole process, considering a majority of the funding for the bridge project came from a $1.5 million “enhancement grant” from MDOT.
“MDOT is in control,” he said. “They’ve got the money and the oversight. They are the ones in control, not the (village) planning commission, not the village, not the (Oakland County) road commission, not the council.”
Obrecht wanted it noted that the MDOT grant required a 22 percent match. “For every brick, I have to pay 22 cents of every dollar,” he said, adding he personally raised more than $500,000 in private matching funds.
Once the village planning commission and MDOT’s approval is obtained, Obrecht said the project can go out to bid. It’s an MDOT requirement that the bid be advertised for three to six weeks, he added.
“We’re going to require that (the construction’s) done in the spring,” Obrecht said. “What that window will be? I don’t know. Could be March to June.”
It’s anticipated construction will last approximately two weeks, which includes the three days it’s expected to take for the bridge’s installation.
The bridge itself will be constructed off-site and simply placed between the east and west approaches, Obrecht said.
Polly Ann Trail Manager Amy Murray is optimistic about the bridge project. “I think the bridge will be liked by village residents and admired by people passing through town,” she said. “It will be a great stimulus and asset to the village.”
The bridge will allow walkers, joggers, bicyclists, in-line skaters and others using the Polly Ann Trail to cross M-24 easily and safely, she said.
Back when the bridge concept was first being discussed, there was talk that horse riders on the trail would be using the bridge.
When asked about this, Obrecht replied, “No horses, get a life would you. You’ve been out here in Oxford long enough to understand that horses can’t go across that tall of a bridge. No horses.”
“People will, I’m sure, attempt to do that. More power to them,” Obrecht added. “But the bridge will be posted ‘Riders Walk Your Horses.’”
Obrecht described taking horses across the bridge as “very risky business.”
Murray said “it’s unlikely from a practical standpoint” that horses will be crossing over the bridge because “most” of the equestrian traffic on the trail takes place east of Oxford and horses must be “trained” with “extreme care” and “competence” to cross bridges.
However, she did note that horses “won’t be excluded from the bridge” and equine are “allowed on the whole trail.” Riders would be required to dismount before crossing the bridge, she said.
In addition to the bridge, the project includes the resurfacing of 12.2 miles of the trail from Indianwood Road to Bordman Road.
With the exception of a mile of asphalt in Oxford Village and a ?-mile of blacktop in Leonard, Murray said the majority of the trail will be resurfaced using “aggregate,” a hard, smooth, fine surface similar to what’s used on the Paint Creek Trail.
Obrecht wished it to be noted that the bridge and trail resurfacing will be accomplished at no cost to communities they will serve. “When I set out to do this I told the communities I’d do it without any cost to them,” he said. “What you will have when it’s all completed it over a $3 million asset to all the communities.”

“It’s not a done deal.”
That’s what John Elsarelli, the planning/zoning official for Oxford Village, had to say about the recently submitted site plan for the Polly Ann Trail pedestrian bridge over M-24.
Elsarelli said the village planner, the Northville-based McKenna Associates, Inc., has reviewed the plans and was not satisfied.
“The site plan is incomplete, little more than a conceptual description of the proposed bridge location,” wrote Senior Principal Planner David Nicholson in a Dec. 9 letter to the village planning commission.
The letter detailed 19 “general requirements of the Zoning Ordinance,” which are necessary for site plan review, but were not supplied in the submitted plans for the bridge.
One of the 19 deficiencies noted stated, “The site plan drawing, labeled ‘Sheet 15 of 18,’ generally lacks dimensional details. Notations indicated a ‘Proposed Pedestrian Bridge’ and similar information, but there is no indication of the width, length or height of any proposed improvements. Those details must be added to the plans in order to comply with minimum Ordinance requirements.”
“We recommend that the Planning Commission withhold action on this plan until the additional detail information required by the Ordinance is provided for review. . .A more complete review should be prepared after the remainder of the information is submitted,” Nicholson wrote in his recommendation.
A site plan review by the village planner is required before it can move forward for possible action at the planning commission level, Elsarelli noted.
A Dec. 15 review by the village’s engineer, the Lapeer-based Rowe, Inc., also noted the plan was lacking certain necessary details. “The drawings do not indicate the bridge elevation or clearance over M-24,” according to Project Engineer Susan Bertram and Senior Project Manager Doug Skylis.
Fire Chief Jack LeRoy, who’s department is currently reviewing the site plan, called the bridge “a gross waste of money,” “especially in a time when the State of Michigan is trying to draw in its purse strings a little bit.”
“There’s other places that could use the money, including revenue sharing funds that are going to be trimmed,” the chief said. “How many of these projects are there that we don’t know about out there in the state that if they were reined in, would help to offset the deficit?”
As for the bridge’s proposed appearance, LeRoy commented that it looked like an “abandoned railroad bridge.”
LeRoy also noted that he was told by the Oakland County Road Commission that “this bridge would more than likely block our signal.”
The chief is referring to the traffic signal in front of Fire Station #1, which remains a constant green at all times, except during an emergency when it turns red so as to allow emergency vehicles to depart safely and quickly.
The proposed pedestrian bridge would block the emergency signal for drivers heading north on M-24. An “advanced warning signal” would be needed south of the bridge, LeRoy said.
Rowe’s review also indicated concern over the bridge’s blocking of the signal.
“The drawings do not indicate any attempt was made to check the visibility and site distance for the emergency traffic signal (fire station) on M-24 just north of the bridge. It may be necessary to install an emergency signal warning light on the bridge to reduce accidents between the emergency vehicles and northbound M-24 traffic,” according to Rowe’s review.
In his Dec. 16 review of the bridge plans, Oxford Village Police Chief Mike Neymanowski posed many questions.
“Will the construction of this bridge obstruct the view of the traffic signal at Washington and Church? As you are aware, the signal is used by the Oxford Fire Department for a safe exit and entry to their fire station,” the chief wrote.
“Is there anything going to be put on the pathway of this bridge to deter it being used as a giant ramp for skate board, BMX bicyclists and roller blade enthusiasts?” he wrote.
“Are there going to be any barriers to prevent someone from climbing on the outside (of the bridge)?” the chief asked.
Neymanowski then penned a few lines to “express” his “thoughts” on the bridge as a “citizen and community leader.”
“I am puzzled as how we can find and allocate a million dollars just to connect a trail pathway for a minimal amount of our population, but continually have difficulties in finding funds for the real needs of this community (downtown pedestrian safety; creating a skate park and community center),” the chief wrote.
“There are many other ways that the funding could be put to better use for the Polly Ann Trail.”

Comments are closed.