03/24/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

proposal. He added that because of the costs i~volved, lighting standards had not been upgraded for anyone neighborhood. Rather, lighting had been installed on a request basis with the idea that. those who fel t. they needed the lighting could have it installed. In response to the Assistant Manager, Traffic Engineer _ said there were no changes in lighting scheduled now for Royal and Barger. However, ~ the proposal was to use some of the amortizatioa money for the balance of existing arterials, and if those particular streets were to be upgraded some of this money could be used. Councilman Haws was not sure he wanted to go alo[lg with the priorities set in this proposal until there was input from the public. He thought perhaps some people would rather have lights in the residential areas than downtown. When ,Mayor Anderson suggested that adopting this propOsal would not cause any critical change in current expenditures for neighborhoods versus downtown, Mr. Haws said he would rather consider spending this money in neighborhoods than vote now to spend it on lighting downtown. The Mayor didn't think any requests for street lighting would be turned down, it was a question. of whether requests would come from individuals or from neighborhood groups. Manager noted it was desirable to know the lighting levels to be installed in the urban renewal area since those fixtures would have to be installed at the same time street improvements there were constructed. Councilman Hamel noted it was a joint venture with the ERA so the dollar amount would be less. Councilman Haws wondered what would happen to the money in this proposal if it was not spent for street lighting. Manager answered that probably it would be carried forward as a balance and the Council t1o~ld be presented with future recommendations for use of the funds. It didn't necessarily have to be used for street light, it could be used for any capital improvements. Councilman Hamel commented that his and Mr. Haws' concerns were with outlying areas they represented where there were few street lights. He thought expendi- ture of some of the money for .1ighting in those areas would be appreciated. In response" to Councilman Murray, Manager said if the $45,000 expenditure was approved for amortization with the understanding that the high level standards would be used in the central business district, then staff would feel they should go ahead and at least replace the lights on thos, streets being upgraded this summer in the urban renewal project. There would also be the need for response to Councilman Haws' concern by allowing the opportunity for neighborhood groups to react with regard to street lighting levels in their neighborQoods. Recom- mendations could be brought back to the Council based on that input, whether to go ahead with further expansion of the downtown lighting or set money aside for residential areas. If expansion of the downtown lighting was approved, he said, there would have to be rescheduling because of t~e development planned in the peripheral area. Assistant Manager wondered if lighting on those streets already meeting standards would be converted because of the energy saving factor. Traffic Engineer answered that that would be one of the last things to be accomplished, it was not included in this proposal. He added that lighting neighborhood areas was the right approach, but his office had not been lnundated with requests for residential lighting. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to approve the capital projects as outlined on the agenda, with the .underst4nding that approval was given for the proposed high-level lighting standa~ds within the outlying central business district and peripheral areas as d~scribed; that the street lighting to take place in the area west of Charnel ton would be accomplished 3/24/75 - 12 142..' -- comm. ~- 3/19/75 Approve