Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />· 1995 ANNUAL STREET M'A .1N~.E~N.,ANCE .PROGRAM <br /> By: Steven J. Jankowsk~, City Engineer <br /> <br />i Background: <br /> Previous to this gase, public hearings will have been held on Improvement Project Nos. 95-01 <br /> through 95-10, ~Fhich will comprise the 1995 Annual Street Maintenance Program. The City <br /> performed its fi.~t sealcoating work in 1981 and has had an annual program for addressing the <br /> routine maintena~lc.~ need~ of its paved streets since 1984. The City has a considerable investment <br /> in the 123 miles ~}f paved roadway for which it is responsible. It is estimated, the replacement cost <br /> for this pavemen~t, excluding curb, gutter, drainage, and tuff restoration, approaches $I0 million. <br /> To protect the ~lnvestment in its bituminous pavement, the City has set a goal to address <br /> comprehensive ~rfiaintenance needs on a five to seven year interval. <br /> <br /> Initially, the Ci~s program consimd entirely of sealcoating streets. With the advancing age of the <br /> City's pavementS, the scope of this work has been expanded to include crack filling and minor <br /> patching prior tO sealcoating. Pavements with weaker subsoils and advanced age are now <br /> beginning to need to be overlayed, a more expensive maintenance operation. <br /> <br />A history of the ~nnual Street Maintenance Cost is attached. The program will consist both of <br />crack filling and~ealcoating 7.14 miles of roadway and overlaying an additional 4.33 miles of City <br />streets. The cona~truction cost is anticipated as follows: <br /> <br /> S ~ealcoating 51,147 <br /> Cfack Filling 12,500 <br /> Or.' erlays 133,733 <br /> <br /> i . <br />The addition of~mtnor preparatory work by the City's Public Works Department and project <br />overhead of 22 p~cent brings the total cost for the 1995 program to $243,163. The City has had a <br />policy of assessi~ig 50 percent of this cost to benefitted parties. <br /> <br />Council Action: <br /> <br />Following the p¢blic hearing, the Council should direct any revisions to the feasibility study it <br />deems necessary~ as a result of the comments made at the public hearing, as the feasibility study <br />will serve as thcibasis for determining thc work to be performed and thc method in which costs <br />will be assessed, l <br /> <br />Reviewed by: <br /> <br />City Engineer <br />City Administrator <br />Finance Officer <br /> <br />CC: 0~14D5 <br />/ccr <br /> <br />/'-/7 <br /> <br /> <br />