|
<br /> In answer to Councilwoman Campbell, Public Works Director said the projects un~er considera-
<br /> ti.on were not listed in .order .of priority. The arterial projects presented have pri.ority
<br /> in that they are the first year's projects undertaken in a four-year pr.ogram covered by
<br />. the recently approved bond issue. In answer to Councilman McDonald, Manager said the.
<br /> contract award was not in ordinance form, theref.ore a "no" v.ote would;not .delay,a favorable
<br /> majority. ; -I
<br /> Manager commented on, the importance of answering c.oncerns ab.out the value of the project to
<br /> abutting pr.operties. He said this street, as well as Echo Hollow, Norkenzie, and others
<br /> .on which future impr.ovement is anticipated, were built as County roads to much less than
<br /> City standards. Regardless of whether they were considered arterials, safety considerations
<br /> would require impr.ovement to City standards with assessment to abutting properties. It
<br /> should be rec.ognized that owners of property abutting this street use other improved streets
<br /> in the City where they have n.ot participated in the c.ost. Experience has shown c.onsiderably
<br /> reduced maintenance costs after improvement in addition to improved storm drainage and
<br /> sweeping .operations. -
<br /> Councilwoman Beal reiterated her belief that the widening project, would not benefit those
<br /> properties .on which homes were established before the r.oad became an arterial type facility.
<br /> Councilman Wood felt the improvement would prom.ote safety of the people in the immediate
<br /> area as well as those in the entire City. He suggested that if there was to be discu~sion of
<br /> the method .of assessment f.or this type street, it sh.ould be pursued as an issue rathe~ than.
<br /> .on c.onsideration of each project.
<br />.. Rollcall vote was taken:".on the motion t.o appr.ove 49-f.oot paving section. Motion
<br /> carried, Councilmen Williams, Hershner, Campbell, Murray, and Wood voting aye;
<br /> Councilmen Beal and McDonald voting no.
<br /> Public Works Director reviewed unit bid prices for 42-foot basic bid, contract to be adjusted
<br /> to provide for 49-fo.ot design, and rec.ommended award on that basis.
<br /> Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to award contract as recommended. Rollcall
<br /> vote. Moti.on carried, Councilmen Williams, Hershner, Campbell, Murray, and Wo.od
<br /> voting aye; Councilmen Beal and McDonald voting no.
<br /> Manager said if it is found possible when running lines on-~the project to move the curb
<br /> without grade problems, it would be d.one to gain m.ore width f.or the center turn lane.
<br /> : ~ :.h,: ..2.~!.!..T~~1ir.\U!I'L.~~Jli'.u.!'.!!.!::~ I ,-----.
<br /> 1". 11.lrUn Street from Wen A:nJ~on Dr. to'
<br /> C,nter War: Sanitary Scwer in orca botvccn
<br /> 150 It. North and 200 It. South of Martin
<br /> St. from W09t MOr.O" Drlvc. to 160 ft. Eoae .
<br /> ~f Center Wny (DOli) .'
<br /> .!!M.!9. ALTERNATE
<br /> '. . .
<br /> 'I " .
<br /> I to F.U~CIIO ~oncl & crovcl C"l\lrony...........llo nid........$76,l1G.OS......~.....,36' Pys...$ 15.57 Ct/ft...,.l'ark rrop.....$ O,sco.oo..;...$ 7,150.0'0
<br /> 2. IHldioh Conatruction C"mrony..........$OO.241.00....$77,700.20 .. Lat........$. 0.076 . Ex. Dl,pth AC..$ 2,062.60 . .0-"
<br /> I ). DovoI'cnuI< & Frocc.....................lIll nJ.J........SO~,3J.O.!lO Scrv......$127.00 each SDnl.lory......O 5,736.00 02,540.nO
<br />. I- . Lcvy...,..$ 0.005 aq. ft. Stor~......".$JI,015.00 $34,~40~nn
<br /> . '-.~ . - . t;O~.!'lOT~.ON!J.^!1! i __~.c: ~tl,b.!t:..!~...!97 3 I
<br /> I .. "
<br /> PA'IIW:
<br /> . '" ....----..-----...----------...------------- ------------- -- ------- --------- ------ ..
<br /> L U. \/<:ot Mn,,"n Drivo from 5no11 Stroet ----------------------------------------------------.
<br /> tv Hartin Strect (952)
<br /> ! ~5IC ALTlmNATll
<br /> 1- ~~f~~:hS~:~s~r~~~~~~ ~~:~:~~.........~~7U~t8.80......:~~,~~~.~~...........J6~ PvS.........$13.6!1 (t/[t........Pork rror..~27.~OO.OO....$26.000.00
<br /> L
<br /> ), 'r! . ,......... , . ...... , . S Conc........$ 1.82 oq. ft. 'I~x. D,,"pth $ 6 192.00 ..0-
<br /> DevcLGux' PCGtt.....~..............NO BLd..........$74,236.80 St"rrn......$lO:5~9.00 $ 6.650.00
<br /> SonLtary...$ 3,053.00 -0-
<br /> t, .<___~ .___._ _...~~~.n:.L.~:.~~~_D~:!E~__.~~.~~~'. :.9~__ ~
<br /> .. ," ,,_,,"'H .-'- ...- "'.-,-' ~... -." -.. '-"--'-~-'-"-""'-.- . ....., ..,.. - - . -- '.--;-.-_._____...,.- ._.__ ..H.,_.....
<br /> Pol~ revealed on Martin Street 84% opposed, and 16% n.o response. On West Amazon Drive,
<br /> 9% favored the project, 31% were against it, and there was no response from 60%. Rec.om-
<br /> mended award .on the l.ow alternate bid on West Amaz.on Drive, and .on Martin Street if award
<br /> is made on West Amazon Drive.
<br /> Public hearing was opened. . <,
<br /> Margaret Anderson~ 830 Martin Street, said ~ssess~e~t for the proj'ect at this'time would
<br /> create a pers.onal hardship. . She saw no ne~dfor the improvement. . Councilwoman Campbell
<br /> continued that property owned by Mrs. Anders.on is in litigation and she would have no way
<br />. to meet the Obligation. Mrs. Campbell asked if the proj,ect c.ould be postponed. She also
<br /> questioned whether 36-foot wide paving was necessary.
<br />- Manager described the project as a connecting link between East and West Amazon Drives and
<br /> said the staff's prop.osal for Martin Street was based upon c.ompletion of the lo.op between
<br /> the tw.o drives. There seemed to be no emergency from the standpoiD-t ..:6f,.:;..tnaffic volumes".
<br /> Public Works Direct.or recognized the amount of assessment which would apply to the large
<br /> property in Mrs. Anderson's ownerShip. He said there was no high pri.ority, the Council
<br /> sh.ouid feel free t.o.d~cide whether to. award,.or delay.
<br /> . ~ . . . . ," .. . .... '" ..... , .. '.. ~ ~ . - -
<br /> 2.0; 6/25/73 - 7
<br />
|