Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adams County updates on bridge grants, log-jam funds and guardrail plans; one bridge application not awarded federal funds
Summary
County engineers reported one bridge (Bridge 105) failed to receive federal funding while Bridge 93 advanced to the final cut pending ADA/Title VI compliance documents; officials also discussed log-jam removal funding, a $30,000 river cleanup fund, and requests for guardrail quotes tied to a bank-stabilization project.
Adams County officials updated commissioners on several infrastructure matters, saying one bridge project did not receive federal funding while another remains pending and that the county is evaluating guardrail and bank-stabilization bids.
County Engineer Nate said Bridge 105’s federal grant application was not awarded because the competition was strong but that Bridge 93 “did make the final cut” and awaits final NDOT approval after Adams County provides updated Title VI and ADA plan documents. Nate said county staff were preparing and would submit the requested compliance documents to secure the award.
Nate also discussed a recent bank-stabilization project tied to Mathias Miller ditch reconstruction and said he has requested quotes from guardrail contractors; quotes were due May 23. “I should receive quotes from contractors on May 23,” he said, describing plans to drive taller posts and possibly weld posts to improve guardrail performance where slopes might undermine posts.
On drainage and log-jam cleanup, the commissioners discussed a county fund that had been seeded with about $30,000 to address river cleanup (previously referenced as Saint Mary’s/Wabash fund). Nate and county staff debated whether to draw on that specific river-cleanup fund or on cumulative-bridge (CumeBridge) funds for removal work. Nate said the river fund has been used sparingly and that one cleanup spent $1,500; one line in discussion showed a remaining balance of about $28.05 in the dedicated line and additional cash in a cumulative fund that staff track for other bridge and preventative maintenance projects.
Commissioners discussed using narrowly targeted funds if an item fits the designated purpose but noted that CumeBridge money is a flexible cumulative fund for other projects. Commissioners asked staff to present policy guidance at budget time about fund naming and expanded use so the board can consider increasing the log-jam/cleanup allocation if needed.
No formal vote on funding changes occurred at the meeting; staff said they would bring proposed uses and policy language back for future budgeting and commission approval.
