Minutes - Public Works Committee - 10/20/2015

Home

Public Works Superintendent Riemer replied the next one to the south is at County Road 63/Green Valley Road, and to the north it is at County Road 64. Chairperson Riley clarified the light will be mounted on an existing pole. Public Works Superintendent Riemer confirmed. He stated that arrangement is in several areas of the city. If the pole wasn't used, the cost could be up to $4,500.00 Motion by Councilmember Johns, seconded by Councilmember Shryock, to approve installation of priority street light at the intersection of 180th Ave and County Road 5. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Riley, Councilmembers Johns and Shryock. Voting No: None. 5.05: Receive Update on Public Works Campus Space Needs Analysis Economic Development Manager/Assistant City Administrator Brama reviewed the staff report. He explained there are five steps in the process, and this is the first step. Staff has drawn up preliminary site plans and concepts with costs. He noted this item will come back to this Committee in November. He said the City is considering four options. He referred to the Space Needs Analysis document in the meeting packet. The document includes a summary along with costs on each option. The layout options were created in consideration of the flow of operations and ease of use. He said staff does not recommend options C or D. Public Works Superintendent Riemer explained option D is basically the size of the current campus. It is starting to get cramped. There is no room for further expansion at the current site, nor is there at the proposed site. While this is the most economical option, it is the smallest. Economic Development Manager/Assistant City Administrator Brama stated the layout of Option C is very challenging. Marketability is challenging as well. He said this area should be zoned E-1. Councilmember Shryock asked what the size of an average industrial lot is. Economic Development Manager/Assistant City Administrator Brama replied it can be anywhere between 3 and 13 acres. He pointed out having an area more north is helpful because it is farther from the train tracks. He explained Options A and B work well in terms of operations for the Public Works team. Option A was identified as the preferred option, after weighing all the pros and cons. This site is predicated on the City not needing access to McKinley Street. A discussion regarding the possibility of bisecting this street will take place in the near future. Chairperson Riley pointed out McKinley Street is along the tracks in the southeast corner. He asked if McKinley Street would be parallel to the railroad tracks the entire way. Economic Development Manager/Assistant City Administrator Brama replied it would be going up Jasper. He stated it would be better for the long term to steer away from bisecting the street. Public Works Committee/ October 20, 2015 Page 6 of 10