My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-27-2014 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
10-27-2014 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2015 2:35:04 PM
Creation date
3/5/2015 2:34:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 27, 2014 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> Page 29 of 32 <br />(12. WATERTOWN ROAD AND STUBBS BAY ROAD REHABILITATION, Continued) <br /> <br />McMillan stated the eastern section is probably in the best shape, but that if there is an opportunity to <br />piggyback on what Long Lake is doing, that would be advantageous and would leave the option open. <br /> <br />McMillan stated she would only do the engineering for those two sections in case the City is not able to <br />complete the other two sections for a couple of years. McMillan stated she understands the City could go <br />back and tweak something but that she does not want to spend another $100,000 on engineering for two <br />sections of road that are not going to happen for at least 12 months. <br /> <br />Levang asked whether the City would still save time if the project is broken up into two sections rather <br />than four. <br /> <br />Martini stated some of the efforts would be duplicated, such as public hearings, and that there is some <br />efficiency to be gained by doing it all at one time but that they are flexible and do it either way. <br /> <br />Levang stated she would not want to get the hopes up of people in sections three and four if the City had <br />to delay it until 2017 and that she would feel more comfortable with dividing it into one and two. <br /> <br />Martini stated the advantage for the City is the fewer number of projects, the fewer plans and <br />specifications that would need to be put together as well as public meetings and going through the bidding <br />process. <br /> <br />McMillan stated there probably will not be a lot of public comment on this stretch of the road unless there <br />is going to be more reconstruction of utilities located in the right-of-ways. <br /> <br />Martini stated sometimes those issues arise as they are doing the work. <br /> <br />Printup indicated he would leave his motion as is. <br /> <br />Motion by Printup died for lack of a second. <br /> <br />Levang moved, McMillan seconded, go forward with Option 3, Option B, with the surveying, <br />design, and bidding process to be done by phase. <br /> <br />Printup noted it would be approximately $46,000 more to do it that way. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if the survey work is what needs to be done now. <br /> <br />Martini stated the sooner Staff receives direction on that, the sooner it can be scheduled and that it is now <br />getting to the point of the year where it could snow. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if the engineering costs could be revised somewhat. <br /> <br />Martini stated he will consult with the Public Works Director with the understanding that they will be <br />looking at two projects rather than one. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.