The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1967/07/03-Agenda-Pre-Council MY low MINUTES Pre-Council Conference July 3, 1967 Pri•sent Late Absent I McKinley 7 , Hoover (Item 1) 9. Guinn L Sarsgard 8. Stovall (Item 1) 1. Kemble 't Dunham Kersnick Wilson I i m Follow-Up Ayers Street Improvements (M&C's C-1003 and EHD - Get enlarged distil, L-1897 and L-1898) Ayers-Lancaster interr._ ci showing need for channeii .-i- The City Manager explained that because a petition tion north of Lanca-Let, had been submitted by citizens on June 26, 1967, regarding July 10, the Ayers Street improvements , the staff had accelerated the City Council consideration of the Ayers Street paving Both agendas for July U0 . project from Avenue G to Meadowbrook Drive- He reported that the project included channelization, widening from 30 RNL - Make certain initial to 36 feet , and that the project had been authorized by M&C's for lana acquiaiti—i voters and funds allocated in the 1958 and 1965 bond elec- contain outline of pn, jo( t tit-ns . City Council action was also needed regarding the and estimate of cost . acquisition of right-of-way for the project and to permit utilities to proceed with adjustments ., He reported that HDM - Schedule for snNO rt ii, Ayers Street is a residential collector street located be- Council correspondence . tween Beach and Oakland . Councilmen Kemble and Sarsgard mentioned that a num- her of the adjacent property owners appeared to be opposed to the project, that a railroad crossing was involved. Corincilman Sarsgard said that it appeared thatthe assessment Of property owners where a reasonably satisfactory street was in existence was inequitable and that primary objections appeared to be to the assessments , and not necessarily the ii,iprovements . Councilman Kemble emphasized that although the unit scheduled for improvement was included in the Capi- tal Improvement Program and therefore obligated the City Council at some time in the future to make the improvements , the project need not be undertaken at this time ., Mayor McKinley inquired about progress in the acquisi- tion of right-of-way, and stated his opinion that the widen- ing of a street seldom enhances value, and inquired if an :appraiser had been retained to justify the amount of the assessments . It was replied that part of the right-of-way had already been acquired, that the City Council had under consideration two additional parcels during the regular meeting and that other parcels of property remained yet to he acquired , The Mayor was concerned that right-of-way had been acquired in advance of final Council determination of the need for progressing with the paving improvements . r4S� lie also mentioned the possibility that the City Council TINA ��.J may wish to review certain bond programs in order that shifts may be made to correspond with changes after the till SLUI`41�1R� bonds had been allocated for a project . t There was general discussion about mechanics which might he employed to advise the City Council of the effect of land acquisitions on CIP projects, and ways to alleviate controversy after the City had proceeded to purchase con- siderable right-of-way and receive bids on the project . The i 2 City Manager said that he would annotate communications in tlw future to draw the attention of the Council to land acquisitions or other actions which precede or pre lure the way for major awards of contracts for CIP projects . After discussion of the basis for priorities in the Capital Improvement Program and the assessment paving pro- - cdures, including the difference between assessment paving .ind reconstruction of paving in which property owners have previously participated in the cost, several ' Council members .if-reed thar the City Council needs to devote more time to the studying of :various projects and their priorities at th- time that the Capital Improvement Program is submitted and adopted by the City Council. In that connection, Coun- cilman Hoover suggested that the City Council be given more ii :c to study materials submitted by the City Manager, and . k;ested that a revision of the schedule be made in which i ., material is transmitted on Wednesday as a final cutoff ,11L prior to the following Monday Council meeting. Mayor ';,Kinley suggested that the transmission of materials on friday night does not give ample time to consult with staff law ethers or make independent investigations regarding the items to be acted upon on Monday morning. The City Manager indicated that the staff would re- view its procedures to determine how greater lead time could be given to Council Members without excluding communications which need quick attention by the City Council . At the regular Council meeting, a number of citizens ;appeared against the paving, chiefly from Lancaster north to 1radowbrook, and several citizens appeared in favor of the p.c.,ing, chiefly in the section south of Lancaster to Avenue G A motion by Councilman Kemble to exclude the area frim t , o feet to 150 feet north of Lancaster to Meadowbrook Drive, r.nn the award of contract was withdrawn after several Coun- ,.ilmen indicated a desire for one week's further study of M&C's L-1897, L-1898, and C-1003, which was granted As the --onsideration of the matter closed, a number of Councilmen questioned the need for channelization north of Lancaster on Ayers Street in connection with the street im- hrovements > _ Railroad Underpass Replacement - Long Avenue EHD - notify Public Works Do- East of Main Street (M&C G-1110) partment to proceed with ne,;o- tiations for change order, grist The City Manager explained that the existing railroad estimates and submisri, t of ;s;r :tructu res on Long Avenue east of Main Street in the current early M&C to authorize constt'nt contract call for building new structures to accommodate the tion of the overpasses oct a north lane but the use of existing structures for the south change order basis ., lines of the new thoroughfare section. He mentioned that the old structures are narrow and below safe tolerances RNL - develop a history of the for truck traffic at this location. He mentioned that the Long Avenue project, giving. Reck Island Railroad was now preparing to ship welded rail attention to the items roque-.r - to install over the new structures, and that it appeared ed by Councilman Stovall . advisable to determine at this time whether the other two �r n existing strncLures should be replaced while the shoo fly �``{(►1A1 n�C01�� track diverting existing rail track is still in place, `Cllrll� v It was estimated that the two new structures would ,_o::t approximately $150,000, and that the staff proposed till Uhl completion of plans and the negotiation with the con- f�• VIM% 1GA• tractor using the same bid prices as bid on the other r structures to complete on a change order basis for future amity Council consideration, The contractor. , design r J engineers and railroads were reported to be agreeable to the work on the change order basis . Councilman Hoover inquired if it were possible to v tend the bridges using a common center support . Both Lt , City Manager and a Public Works Department representa- live indicated that the single support in the center would not hear the loads required, and furthermore, that the distances between the two spans would be too long for a single support. Councilman Stovall said the project should be com- pleted at this time, and Councilman Hoover indicated that the volume of trunk traffic justified the improvement . Mr. Stovall also asked for a staff report on the history of the Long Avenue Extension project, the original anticipated cost for the street improvements, with its original limits , compared with actual progress in the con- struction of the thoroughfare, including bonds voted, ex- penditures made and future total anticipated cost of com- plL-ting_ the thoroughfare. a IMINI iJ��• �LU��If��