Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, February 10, 2014 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />    Page 22 of 30   <br />(10. WATERTOWN ROAD FEASIBILITY STUDY – PRESENTATION, Continued) <br /> <br />Martini noted from a financing and funding standpoint, it would be beneficial to have as large of a project <br />as possible, and completing the project from one end of town to the other is the most cost effective. The <br />total cost of the project is $1,796,500. Martini indicated they did look at splitting it into two projects, <br />which would result in more immobilization costs and inflation. The estimated cost of accomplishing the <br />road project if it is split into two portions would be $1,867,000. Martini noted since it is a municipal state <br />aid route, state aid funds could be used for the proposed improvements. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if the estimated costs for the overlay were $1.1 million. <br /> <br />Martini indicated that is correct. Martini stated that is a significant enough cost that in their view the <br />more feasible option would be to go with the reclamation which would give the City to maintain it and <br />maximum its life. Martini stated once the mill and overlay develops cracks, moisture tends to get in <br />there and it becomes difficult to maintain. <br /> <br />Levang asked where they would start the project and how traffic would be routed. <br /> <br />Martini stated they anticipate they would be able to grind up the existing surface and lay gravel down. <br />Attempts would be made to minimize traffic on the road but some level of traffic would be able to travel <br />down the roadway. If the project moves forward, Martini indicated they would hold a neighborhood <br />meeting to address some of the residents’ questions and concerns. Martini noted access would be <br />provided to everybody who needed access but that they would make attempts to limit other through traffic <br />on the roadway. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if the reclaiming would go faster than a full reconstruction. <br /> <br />Martini indicated it would be and that a full reconstruction can turn into a mess if it rains, which can slow <br />down progress. The reclaiming with the gravel surface allows the contractor to recover a lot faster from <br />inclement weather. <br /> <br />McMillan asked what would happen if it was discovered used oil was put down on the road. <br /> <br />Martini indicated it would not be a big issue and would just be part of the new portion. <br />Printup asked if there are any utilities that need to be discussed with Long Lake on the shared portion. <br /> <br />Struve stated Orono does not have utilities on that side but that Long Lake does, and whether those are <br />replaced would be up to Long Lake. Struve stated as the project details are developed, the scope of the <br />entire project will be gone into more thoroughly as well as the cost sharing. <br /> <br />Martini stated it is his understanding Long Lake has bigger drainage issues that they will need to address. <br /> <br />McMillan noted the City has $1.4 million in its MSA fund, which is less than what the reclamation <br />project is estimated to cost, and that the City will need to figure out how to make up for that difference. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />