►
From YouTube: Public Works, Finance & Safety Meeting - 07-20-2020
Description
Public Works, Finance & Safety Meeting - 07-20-2020
A
B
D
B
D
E
C
B
D
C
C
B
C
B
A
A
A
C
B
C
A
F
F
Some
of
those
components
include
some
fencing
around
some
of
our
drainage
structures
and
and
some
more
aesthetically,
pleasing
handrails
and
things
on
the
on
the
bridge
structure
and
on
highway
212,
and
then
also
some
powder
coating
or
black
epoxy
painting
of
the
street
light
poles
as
well,
and
all
those
components
have
been
complete.
Now
that
phase
one
of
highway
212
is
done
and
the
dot
has
submitted
these
invoices
to
us
for
our
reimbursement
to
them.
For
those
components
this
this
amount.
This
29736
was
not
in
the
2020
budget.
F
A
E
F
B
A
C
B
C
D
F
We
already
had
them
on
the
hook,
so
to
speak
for
other
design
elements
out
there
at
the
facility.
We
had
them
going
ahead
and
give
us
an
assessment
on
this.
It
was
kind
of
a
preliminary
structural
analysis
of
the
primary
clarifier,
and
since
that
point,
we've
we've
gotten
recommendation
from
them
that
we
do
need
to
replace
the
clarifier.
It's
it's
not
structurally
salvageable
in.
F
In
simple
terms,
there
are
some
components
of
it
that
are
salvageable,
but
it's
looking
like
a
full
reconstruct
is
in
order
for
that
primary
clarifier
and
that's
what
their
structural
analysis
showed
us
that
hdr
performed
for
us
at
no
charge
and
the
subsequent
to
those
discussions.
We
had
hdr
put
together
proposal
for
the
design
services
for
the
primary
clarifier
reconstruction
and
that's
what's
before
the
council
tonight,
it's
166
489
dollar
contract
with
hdr
for
their
design
services
and
also
on
the
line
of
mike
berger,
the
wastewater
superintendent.
F
He
could
talk
circles
around
me
on
the
technicalities
needed
here
and
I'd
defer
to
him
for
any
specifics
in
that
regard,
and
but
in
a
nutshell,
staff
does
recommend
approval
of
this
contract
for
hdr's
design
services,
and
then
we
would
be
bringing
forth
subsequent
actions
as
well
related
to
the
construction.
The
funding
of
this
project
highly
likely
to
be
through
the
state
water
fund
and
the
programs
that
they
offer
for
the
srf
loans,
but
those
would
all
come
subsequent
to
getting
the
design
accomplished
mike.
G
Yes,
I
would,
I
would
just
add
that,
as
you
mentioned,
they
did
an
evaluation
of
the
clarifier
back.
In
those
days
we
were
hoping
it
would
be
rehabilitated,
but
just
looking
at
the
60
year
old,
concrete
in
that
structure,
it's
exhibiting
some
silica
alkali
reaction,
which
just
simply
means
crumbling
concrete
and
the
outside
concrete
trough
around
the
tank
goes
all
the
way
around
the
exterior
circumference
of
the
circular
tank
that
that
trough
has
to
be
taken
off
and
replaced.
G
It
cannot
be
repaired
and,
as
I
can
imagine,
the
wall
is
crumbling,
so
part
of
the
vertical
wall
would
have
to
be
removed
and,
additionally,
on
the
floor,
there's
a
two
inch
sacrificial
slab
over
the
base
slab
and
that
has
significant
crumbling
on
it.
So
you
have
to
take
that
off
to
see
how
much
damage
is
on
the
base
slab,
so
they
they're
with
rehabilitation.
G
Additionally,
one
of
the
other
major
components
of
the
clarifier
is
the
clarifier
mechanism.
It's
much
like
well,
it's
kind
of
like
the
hands
of
a
clock.
You
you
have
a
center
column
pipe,
which
is
the
influence
pipe
to
that
tank
and
on
that
sits.
The
collector
drive
off
of
the
collector
drive,
hangs
the
collector
mechanism
and
there's
a
metal
baffle
that
directs
the
flow
downward
all
those
metal
components
that
are
composed
that
make
up
that
clarifier
drive.
G
They
were,
they
were
constructed
back
in
those
days
with
plain
steel,
not
stainless
steel,
so
they
would
they've
told
us
that
pretty
much
almost
all
of
those
structural
members
have
experienced
significant
section
loss,
which
means,
if
you
were
to
cut
that
piece
of
steel
in
half
and
look
at
the
thickness
today,
as
opposed
to
the
original
thickness.
It's
all
been
reduced
and
there's
lost
strength
and
a
particular
concern
would
be
that
center
pipe
where
the
water
comes
in.
G
It's
the
pedestal
that
that
holds
the
collection,
the
collection,
collector
mechanism,
but
it's
also
the
influence
pipe.
That's
got
holes
through
the
pipe
at
the
base
and
that
interferes
with
the
efficiency
of
the
tank.
It's
no
longer
capable
to
tur
to
move
and
turn,
as
as
it
should
and
scrape
the
solids
to
the
center
of
the
tank,
but
also
at
the
same
time,
water
is
coming
in
some
water
squirting
out
at
the
base
of
that
where
the
holes
have
rot.
G
Several
holes
have
rusted
through
and
that
sort
of
stirs
up
the
solids
that
you're
trying
to
settle
out.
So
all
things
considered,
hdr's
recommendation
is
to
go
with
a
new
tank.
They
they.
They
think
that
the
rehabilitation
cost
could
possibly
equal
the
cost
of
the
new
tank
because
of
the
greater
time,
and
then
you
would
still
have
with
rehabilitation.
You'd
still
have
the
old
concrete
married
to
the
new
concrete,
and
that
would
really
reduce
the
expected
life
expectancy
of
the
finished
product,
because
you
have
this
this
fix
as
a
as
a
questionable
fix.
G
So
that's
not
all.
I
have
to
say
about
that.
I
guess-
and
so
tonight
we
wanted
to.
We
want
to
proceed
with
the
design,
because
in
in
these
projects,
like
this
much
like
the
admin
project,
there's
significant
contingencies
in
the
opinion
of
probable
construction
costs.
At
this
point,
because
you
really
don't
know
what
you're
going
to
build,
so
what
we
really
need
to
do
now
is
move
forward
with
the
design
and
then
that
design
will
will
refine
and
hopefully
reduce
as
it
did
with
the
admin
building,
reduce
the
opinion
of
probable
construction
costs.
G
But
it's
going
to
give
us
a
more
realistic
number.
It's
going
to
tell
us
roughly
what
it's
going
to
cost
us
subject
to
whatever
is
going
on
in
the
bidding
climate
at
the
time
of
bidding,
but
the
next
step
is
to
go
through
design,
and
I
think
we
also
mentioned
in
the
rca
that
we
should
probably
go
on
the
state
water
plan.
We
don't
know
if
or
how
much
funding
we're
going
to
need,
but
we
want
to
be
prepared
to
have
funding
in
place
if
we
do
need
it.
G
So
at
some
point
we
will
want
to
come
back
with
an
application
to
get
on
that
state
water
plan,
because
I
think,
although
our
administration
building
is
about
a
million
dollars
under
budget,
we
do
have
our
cash
reserves
are
fairly
low.
But,
as
you
know,
we're
also
going
through
a
rate
study.
So,
hopefully,
by
time
we
go
through
the
design
and
get
this
project
on
the
state
water
plan.
Then
we'll
have
realistic
costs
and
we
can
look
and
see
how
much
funding
we're
actually
going
to
need.
F
G
Yes,
the
the
collector
mechanism
will
no
longer
work
again
that
pipe
that
supports
it
is
rusted
through
and
all
of
those
steel
members
are
thin.
So
it's
out
of
service
and
with
clarifier
number
two
out
of
service.
We
cannot
take
clarifier
number
one
out
of
service
to
perform
the
maintenance
on
that
tank.
Some
of
the
things
that
need
to
be
done
to
that
tank,
so
you
really
have
to
when
you
need
one
in
wastewater.
You
always
usually
have
two,
because
you
need
one
with
one
fails
or
one's
down
for
service.
F
Thanks
mike
and
that's
exactly
why
I
wanted
to
bring
that
point
up
is
usually
at
a
wastewater
treatment
plant.
There
is
redundancy
for
that
reason.
You
can
take
one
unit
offline,
while
the
other
one's
operating,
so
you
can
do
maintenance,
but
this
one
in
particular
is
why
it's
important
for
us
to
continue.
This
project
has
been
down
for
quite
some
time
and
something
we
need
to
get
back
up
and
running
again
for
the
plant
redundancy.
E
A
G
Yes,
that's
confusing
because
the
newer
clarifiers
number
one
just
the
way
these
are
numbered
through
the
plant.
It
had
to
be
built
west
of
the
existing
clarifier.
So
the
old
clarifier,
which
we
think
is
number
one,
is
actually
number
two.
But
yes,
we
would
build
on
that
same
site
and
the
other
thing
that
they
mentioned
underneath
that
floor
there's
some
60
year
old
piping.
G
D
C
G
We
would
probably
at
that
point:
we'd
probably
have
the
state
tell
us
to
get
up,
get
busy
and
take
care
of
the
repairs
or
whatever,
because
we
won't
get
proper
treatment.
We
really
need
primary
clarification
is
simply
settling
water
goes
through
there.
This
clarifier
creates
a
coastal
zone,
so
scum
floats.
We
skim
it
off.
G
The
top
sludge
settles
to
the
bottom
and
that
sludge
gets
pumped
off
to
go
to
the
digester
to
be
treated,
and
without
that,
although
solid,
if
you
have
a
primary
clarifier,
all
those
solids
that
you're
capturing
in
it
are
going
downstream
and
they're
going
to
have
a
significant
detrimental
effect
to
all
other
processes.
We
we
would
struggle
to
meet
permit
limits
and
there
would
be
other
consequences
such
as
these
solids
would
show
up
in
other
processes.
G
E
Heath
or
mike
I've
got
a
question
not
not
on
the
project,
because
the
technology
that
is
I'm
trusting
you
guys
to
that
I've
got
a
question.
I
know
this
does
not
need
to
be
bid
out
and
we've
worked
with
hdr
for
a
long
time,
but
for
our
sake
and
for
members
of
the
public
that
might
be
weighing
in
166
000
for
a
design
of
something.
E
F
Yeah,
I
know
that's
a
great
question:
councilman
phil
howard,
a
good
point
to
make,
particularly
on
the
record
as
we're
making
approvals
for
items
and
contracts
such
as
this
so
mike,
and
I
talked
extensively
about
that
ahead
of
having
hdr
submit
a
proposal,
and
it
really
came
down
to
the
relationship
that
we've
got
with
this
consultant
at
our
wastewater
treatment
facility.
Their
in-depth
knowledge
of
our
operations
out
there,
and
primarily
the
biggest
component,
was
the
fact
that
they
did
this.
F
We
felt
that
it
certainly
made
sense
to
piggyback
off
that
structural
analysis
on
into
a
full
development
contract
with
hdr,
based
again
on
the
sheer
knowledge
that
they
had
of
the
system
and
of
this
particular
primary
clarifier
that
we
need
to
have
replacement
work
done
on
mike.
I
don't
know
if
you
have
anything
further
to
add
to
that.
But
that's
in
a
nutshell
is
where
we
stood
on
that.
G
Yeah
that
that
evaluation,
that
we
budgeted,
I
think
we
budgeted
40
dollars
for
that,
and
we
were,
I
think
we
had
a
contract
with
them
to
to
perform
that.
And
then
then
we
cancel
the
contract
because
it
wasn't
needed
to
spend
that
money
and
there
was
a
savings
of
thirty
four
thousand
nine
hundred
five
985
on
that
contract,
but
yeah
they
they
know
our
plant
well
and
time
is
of
the
essence.
G
A
C
B
C
D
C
C
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Item
c
is
approval
of
the
bid
award
for
the
lake
and
pesky
trail
final
loop
improvements,
phase,
one
project
number
1726
to
dunk
inc
in
the
amount
of
579
277
dollars,
so
moved
motioned
by
vilhar
in
a
second
by
helene,
and
we
do
have
our
design
engineer
vanessa
victor
we
have
the
public
works
director
and
we
also
have
the
parks
and
rec
director
terry
kelly
here,
and
I
think
terry
I'll
ask
you
to
tell
us
about
this
project.
First.
H
Okay,
yeah
I'll
start.
Obviously
we
got
a
team
of
players
here
for
discussion.
We
did
open
bids
july
14th.
We
had
one
bidder
which
was
dunnock
and
that
bid
did
come
in
at
579
277,
which
was
slightly
about
10
higher
than
than
infrastructure's
engineer,
estimate
and
I'll
turn
it
over
to
vanessa
to
to
discuss
kind
of
why
we
felt
that
happen,
but
this
does
come
with
a
a
recommendation
both
from
the
consultant
and
the
staff
for
for
award.
I
I
Yet
in
2020,
as
far
as
the
the
forestry
items,
there
is
some
room
for
potential
cost
savings
by
removing
those
from
the
actual
project
within
a
change
order
and
going
with
a
a
contracted
unit
price
that
tk
has
with
his
forestry
division
or
if
he
has
the
manpower
to
do
them
themselves
or
we
can
award
the
project,
as
is
in
general,
it
is
10
higher
than
our
estimate,
but
we
feel
in
order
to
keep
this
project
going.
Time
is
of
the
essence.
I
A
H
If
you,
if
you
go
past
the
prop
where
we
ended
that
trail
system,
we
would
pick
up
at
pompeska,
it
would
go
along
south
lake
drive
and
end
up
easy
way
to
kind
of
refer
to
as
fourth
avenue
where
the
water
tower
is,
which
would
be
spooner
drive
if
you
can
kind
of
just
picture
that
water
tower
where
fourth
avenue
comes
straight
out
of
town,
where
it
hooks
onto
south
lake.
So
that
would
be
the
roughly
just
shy
of
one
mile
of
trail
again,
basically
for
ease
of
understanding.
H
H
D
I
I
E
H
And
and
I'll
probably
have
matter
vanessa
clean
up
this
conversation,
but
you
know
we
have
the
arnold
property,
where
we
do
have
some
some
current
property
that
would
be
given
to
the
city
that
we'd
have
to
look
at.
You
know
a
garden
here,
a
shed
there
kind
of
things,
but
matt
vanessa
other
than
that.
I
think
we're
pretty
wrapped
up
with
those
conversations.
H
I
As
far
as
actual
easements
and
actual
property
that
is
owned
by
other
individuals,
we
have
construction,
easements
and
all
the
permanent
easements
that
we
need
to
either
maintain
any
infrastructure
on
somebody
else's
property
or
for
the
contractor
to
access
the
site
during
construction,
and
we
set
those
up
with
significant
buffer
zones.
So
we
should
not
hinder
anybody's
property
that
we
don't
have.
An
easement
on.
E
E
I
Glenn
we
we
do
actually
do
that
when
we
start
a
project.
So
as
soon
as
there
is
a
notice
to
award
there
we'll
get
a
letter
that
we'll
send
out
from
our
office.
That
explains
when
the
contractor
plans
on
mobilizing
the
site
gives
them
a
chain
of
command
for
who
they
can
contact
if
they
have
concerns
during
the
project.
E
Okay
and
then
that
will
still
cross
over
on
the
up
to
the
other
side
of
south
lake
drive
for
the
last
stretch
to
the
water
tower.
Is
that
correct?
And
that's
that's
on
right
away
for
that
part
of
it,
because
I
know
there
was
some
concern
by
a
couple
of
land
owners
out
there,
but
again
that's
right
away,
as
I
understand
it
out
there.
I
E
E
A
B
C
B
C
H
Yeah,
absolutely
you
know-
and
this
is
a
best-case
scenario
we
do
have.
You
know,
phase
three
and
three
b
and
phase
2
and
what
really
is
going
to
determine
which
one
we
do.
First
is
really
the
state's
plan
and
what
they're
going
to
do
through
through
sandy
shores
vanessa-
and
I
you
know
what
the
grant
dollars
anticipate,
3a
and
3b
in
2021
and
then
coming
back
with
phase
two
which
would
link
basically
into
the
water
tower
to
sandy
shores
in
probably
2022.,
so
that
that's
an
ideal
time
frame.
H
I
I
would
agree
with
basically
everything
tk
said
you
know
we
want
to
do
the
whole
leg
on
old,
south
dakota
139
there
from
212
to
parkview,
drive
kinda
at
once,
get
the
contractor
that
way.
Even
residents
out
there
don't
have
to
deal
with
traffic
control
or
anything
on
the
streets
for
two
summers
in
a
row.
I
I
If
the
city
has
an
influx
of
cash,
because
I'm
sure
you
guys
have
been
having
a
lot
of
extra
dollars
these
days,
we
can
finish
up
the
last
little
section
of
phase
two
phase
two
actually
shrunk
considerably,
because
the
state
is
picking
up
a
lot
of
the
trail
within
their
state
park
of
sandy
shore.
They
want
to
embrace
the
the
bicycle
path.
So
it's
nice.
A
A
Okay,
moving
on
item
d
is
approval
of
the
bid
award
for
the
2020
park
and
rec
improvements.
Project
number
2018.
schedule
a
only
to
dunk
inc
in
the
amount
of
fifty
five
thousand
six
hundred
seventy
two
dollars
and
rejection
of
the
bids
for
schedules,
b
and
c
motion
by
lalum
and
a
second
by
holleen
and
terry
I'll.
Let
you
kick
this
one
off
too.
H
Okay,
I'll
kick
it
off
with
again
july.
8Th
was
the
bid
opening
justin
heath
and
their
staff
broke.
This
into
three
schedules:
try
to
get
more
competitive
bids
bidding
as
a
package
breaking
it
down
schedule
a
was
the
mount
hope.
Cemetery
road
schedule
b
was
olive
place.
Bike
trail
and
schedule
c
was
some
roadways,
walkway
repairs
in
within
the
zoo,
after
bid
opening
as
staff
we
discussed
this
and
within
the
budgetary
allotments
we
felt
schedule
a
could
be
awarded
for
the
cemetery
roadways.
H
It
is
approximately
50
500
over
budget,
but
I
do
have
the
means
to
to
recover
those
expenses
due
to
other
projects
coming
in
lower
or
that
we're
not
doing.
Currently,
we
do
recommend
schedule
b,
the
out
of
place
and
schedule
c,
the
zoo
walkway
to
reject
those
beds
just
because
the
dollars
are
not
there
and
in
in
the
last
agenda
item
olive
place,
bike
trail
with
the
bid
that
we
just
approved.
Roughly
you
know
about
65
70
000
over.
H
I
felt
that
that
that
connector
area
we
really
needed
to
save
those
funds,
as
we
after
this
project
we're
going
to
probably
be
down
to
about
400
000
that
account
and
we
did
just
get
the
faa
approval
on
21st
street
trail.
So
I
re-prioritized
our
our
trail
system,
where
I
would
rather
see
21st
street
get
completed
prior
to
the
olive
place.
Connector
route
so
and
justin's
worked
a
lot
of
hours
on
this,
so
justin
feel
free
to
jump
in
and
clarify
anything.
I
might
have.
E
C
A
H
H
A
C
B
C
C
C
C
F
You
mayor
this
is
one
of
our
pavement
management
program
projects
that
we
run
annually,
a
couple
of
which
the
council
has
already
approved,
such
as
the
mill
and
overlay.
We
have
a
900
000
project
going
already
right
now
within
the
city,
with
the
mill
and
overlay
project.
This
one
was
postponed
once
covid
came
on.
We,
we
kind
of
held
back
on
this
this
project
because
of
the
amount
of
it
and
not
knowing
how
things
would
fall
here
as
we
as
we
crept
out
of
some
of
the
covid
conditions
that
we've
been
in.
F
We
are
at
the
point,
though,
where
we
felt
in
conversing
with
finance
officer
again
kristen
and
I
getting
together
looking
at
these
projects,
prioritizing
them
making
sure
we
are
moving
forward
with
what
we're
comfortable
at
a
staff
level
to
present
the
council
to
move
forward
with.
This
is
one
of
those
projects
that
we
deemed
necessary
to
move
forward
with
this
particular
one.
F
Is
we
call
it
the
pavement
management
system
schedule
c,
it's
a
neighborhood
project
where
we
find
streets
within
any
given
neighborhood
or
multiple
neighborhoods
throughout
the
community
and
and
scope
the
the
needs
for
the
street
reconstruction
or
milan
overlay
type
of
work
in
those
neighborhoods.
This
one
specifically
is
located
on
14th
avenue,
northeast
and
I'll
share.
My
screen
here,
quick.
F
The
other
location
is
down
here
on
fifth
avenue
southwest
and
there's
a
there's
a
stretch
here.
As
well,
that's
been
torn
up
for
a
while
rob
and
his
crews
had
to
do
some
removals
in
there
last
year
and
it's
it's
been
gravel
surfacing
since,
or
maybe
some
crushed
asphalt
that
they
put
down
to
help
mitigate
the
dust
issues,
but
an
ongoing
maintenance
issue.
Nonetheless,
and
again,
an
area
that
needs
to
be
paved
back
in
and
repaired.
F
F
F
That
just
came
in
the
removals
were
about
twice
what
we
thought
they
were
going
to
be,
and
anyway,
the
nature
of
the
bid
is
is
what
it
is
that
we've
got
before
us,
but
we
were
confident
and
even
though
the
price
came
in
higher
than
we
anticipated,
we
are
confident
that
the
cip
fund
can
handle
this
amount
of
a
bid
award
for
these
roads,
and
we
do
feel
that
they
are
in
a
position
that
need
to
be
done
yet
this
year.
So
that's
why
we're
bringing
forth
recommendation
of
the
contract
to
the
council.
A
F
G
G
A
That's
often
one
that
can
spiral
if
we
have
a
hit
a
bad
spot
in
the
subgrade
that
we
weren't
anticipating
and
be
a
lot
higher
than
our
estimates.
That
makes
me
nervous
when
I
see
an
item
like
that,
where
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
control
over
what
the
volume
is
going
to
be
and
the
unit
price
is
considerably
higher.
But
what
do
you
do?
F
F
Some
of
the
reasons
for
the
potential
cause
for
the
the
the
failure
that
we
saw
this
year.
It
is
a
half
street
section,
so
the
north
half
is
exposed
to
a
rural,
ditch
or
a
swale
where
water
can,
you
know,
tend
to
collect
during
rain
events
or
some
duration
after
rain
events,
sometimes
that
can
cause.
F
C
F
F
Okay,
so
you
know
trying
to
you
know,
make
sure
we
have
at
least
a
sufficient
adequate
base
course,
underneath
that
pavement
section
is
step
one
and
in
our
reconstruction
efforts,
so
that
the
drainage
is
is
performed
adequately
throughout
the
life
cycle.
That
pavement,
you
know
we
have
had
discussions
too
on
the
the
half
streets
and
and
how
to
whether
continue
allowing
for
those
or
how
to
best
consider
those
situations
when
they're
presented
to
us
as
things
develop
when
you've
got
land
adjacent.
F
That
still
remains
in
the
county
and
a
developer
that
wants
to
to
build
and
develop
in
the
city,
and
I
don't
want
to
say
that
this
being
a
half
street
is
completely
the
reason
for
the
early
failure,
but
I
do
definitely
think
it
had
something
to
do
with
it.
It's
not
a
conventional
urban
street
section
with
curb
and
gutter
and
storm
sewer
and
where
the
water
and
storm
water
runoff
is
mitigated
a
little
more
effectively.
D
I
would
guess
a
portion
of
that
is
because
it
is
a
half
street.
There
is
more
traffics.
On
the
other
side,
I
mean
just
noticing
people
driving
there,
they
don't
drive
in
the
gravel
portion
they
move
over.
So
I
would
assume,
there's
probably
more
actual
traffic,
that's
on
the
middle
to
the
south
side
of
that
street,
either
way
because
I
I
have
family
that
lives
up
there
and
they
go
there.
They're,
never
driving
on
the
gravel
portion.
C
D
I
F
A
F
E
F
Yeah,
so
those
are
still
in
the
cip,
they
are
there's
funds
that
were
committed
as
of
last
year
for
those
projects,
and
we
are
under
contract
to
have
those
done
also
with
with
donek
and
we're
looking
at
doing
jackson
park.
Yet
this
fall,
I
believe
the
anticipated
availability
of
the
contractor
was
until
after
labor
day
in
order
to
perform
the
jackson
park
improvements
the
city
park,
improvements,
we've
put
the
brakes
on
it's
the
conditions.
There
still
aren't
favorable
to
go
in
and
do
this
work.
F
We
feel
we're
gonna
be
running
into
water
issues,
high
water
issues,
saturated
issues
underneath
the
pavement
and
one
of
the
things
that
staff
and
I
and
will
continue
to
work
on
with
tk
and
park
and
rec
director
is
to
maybe
look
at
a
holding
off
on
that
phase
of
the
work
and
look
at
a
larger
scale
project.
I
know
that
the
north
part
of
the
campground,
for
example,
has
some
issues.
A
D
C
C
A
A
F
F
It'll
include
a
center
turn
lane
along
this
route
to
help
mitigate
all
the
driveways
and
all
the
the
side
street
turns
that
occur
along
this
route
and
we're
also
looking
at
bringing
back
a
parking
lane
on
the
south
side.
Only
along
this
stretch,
and
so
with
all
those
improvements
being
said,
really
the
action
tonight
or
the
guidance
tonight
that
we
were
looking
for
relates
to
the
sidewalk.
F
We
effectively
take
away
the
use
of
these
driveways
that
become
blocked
by
a
car
parked
in
those
driveways.
So
we've
shifted
the
plan
to
include
sidewalk
and
incorporate
sidewalk
on
the
north
side.
Only
now
with
the
street
widening
this,
the
sidewalk
alignment
doesn't
change
a
whole
lot,
but
a
little
bit
in
some
areas.
F
Some
of
these
lots
don't
have
any
sidewalk
on
them.
Currently,
most
of
them
do
marcy's
got
a
detailed
analysis
on
what
lots
have
sidewalk
and
which
ones
don't
that
she's
obtained
when
working
with
our
consultant
the
biggest
question
before
the
council
tonight
that
we
want
some
guidance
on
so
we
know
how
to
move
forward
with
this
project
is
whether
we
would
want
to
look
at
just
incorporating
that
north
side
sidewalk
into
these
project
costs
as
a
city
expense.
F
F
Given
the
given
the
widening
of
the
street
and
the
impact
in
this
neighborhood,
it
is
staff's
recommendation
to
go
ahead
and
incorporate
these
costs
into
this
project.
We're
looking
at
a
roughly,
I
think,
was
90
some
thousand
dollars
total
for
the
sidewalk
on
the
north
side
of
this
street
and
in
relation
to
the
total
project
costs.
It
is
a
small
fraction
of
the
overall
expense
of
this
roadway
widening
in
this
roadway
reconstruction
project.
F
F
In
some
cases,
the
sidewalk
alignment
and
the
sidewalk
existence
is
going
to
be
different
from
what's
been
there
in
the
past.
So
we
think
that
there
were
enough
talking
points
in
this
example
for
this
project
to
go
ahead
and
incorporate
it
into
the
city's
funded
portion
of
the
project
and
not
go
through
the
formal
assessment.
F
But
that
is
the
question
we
wanted
to
pose
to
council
because
it's
obviously
not
a
decision
that
staff
should
be
making
on
our
own
and
wanted
to
check
that
off
with
the
elected
officials
and
that's
in
a
nutshell,
what
I've
got
and
I
know
marcy
is
standing
by
with
justin
they've
got
specifics.
If
we
have
questions
here,
we
want
to
hash
out.
We
can
do
that.
A
Looks
like
most
of
the
people
have
sidewalk.
There
are
several
sections,
though,
where
they've
never
installed
the
sidewalk,
and
I'm
just
wondering
I
mean
we
have
ordered
people
to
put
sidewalk
in
it
is
in
by
our
ordinance
a
requirement
for
the
adjacent
property
owner
to
put
sidewalk
in,
and
some
people
have
gone
to
that
expense.
Others
have
not
what
would
make
this
project
different,
where
we
wouldn't
assess
this,
where
we
have
assessed
property
owners
in
the
past?
F
A
F
It
was,
as
was
that
a
state
project-
it
was
part
of
the
watertown's
urban
systems,
though
with
our
urban
systems
funding.
So
now,
instead
of
this,
the
d.o.t
shifted
how
they
manage
those
funds
and
they
just
channel
that
money
right
to
us
and
they
don't
run
those
projects
for
us
any
longer.
So
you
could
look
at
this
as
an
urban
systems
project
similar
to
what
the
state
did
on
19th
street
and
apply
it
this
similar
way
that
they
did
again
if
we
wanted
a
comparison
to
use.
F
A
And
I
think
the
the
council
could
do
several
things
there
are
you're
talking
about.
We
could
possibly
even
assess
the
rehabilitated
sidewalk
by
law.
We
have
the
ability
to
do
that
because
it
is
the
responsibility
of
the
adjacent
property
owner
to
maintain
the
sidewalk,
and
I
understand
there
are
sections
on
here
that
are
in
pretty
bad
condition
and
we
could
order
the
property
owners
to
do
it
at
their
expense
or
we
would
do
it
and
assess
it
to
them.
A
F
D
D
F
And
I'm
I'm
going
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
I
think
unless
it's
in
the
rca,
I
think
the
rough
estimates
we
had
for
the
new
sidewalk
all
together
was
somewhere
around
fifteen
thousand
fourteen
and
then
the
remainder
of
it
up
to
that
ninety
sum
total
was
to
replace
everything
else
along
the
route,
so
the
new
again
was
a
small
portion
of
the
of
the
total.
Ninety
is
fourteen
to
fifteen
grand
yeah.
D
A
So
a
sing,
a
typical
single
family
lot
with
75
foot
frontage
and
a
four
foot
sidewalk,
which
is
our
minimum
requirement.
That
would
be
about
3
000
square
feet
or
300
square
feet,
75
times
four
yeah
300
square
feet,
and
then,
if
it's
we've
seen
it
used
to
be
five
dollars,
a
square
foot
would
pay
for
sidewalk.
But
it's
it's
more
now
like
I
see
you
did
an
estimate
of
eight
dollars
on
another
project,
so
that
could
be
anywhere
from
fifteen
hundred
to
two
thousand
twenty
five
hundred
dollars
for
a
single
lot.
J
J
We
want
to
hear
people
out,
but
the
fact
the
matter
is
some
people
get
the
rest
of
the
taxpayers
to
buy,
to
pay
for
their
assessments
and
others
don't
and
we've
all
had
somebody
come
up
and
ask
us
the
question:
why
did
I
have
to
pay
for
that
sidewalk
or
that
road
or
whatever
it
was
when
I
know
other
people
don't
have
to,
and
we
do
not
have
a
good
answer
for
that.
So
my
question
is-
or
I
guess
my
statement
is
in
the
effort
in
the
the
interest
of
fairness.
A
J
E
C
Glenn
just
beat
me
to
my
point,
and
that
was
going
to
be
that
we're
in
this
project.
The
engineering
is
recommending
it
for
the
north
side
and
if
we
said
to
the
north
side,
you
know
what
you
get
the
you
get
the
opportunity
to
pay
for
it
south
side.
You
don't
have
to
have
it
on
your
side
for
the
circumstances,
and
I
I
agree
with
that,
but
I
think
under
this
under
this
plan,
I
think
that
engineering
is
correct
and
that
the
city
ought
to
just
do
it.
B
Manty
yeah
I'm
sitting
on
both
sides
of
the
fence.
With
this
one
I
wanted
to
echo
that
I
have
always
felt
as
dawn
does
that,
because
my
ward
is
full
of
inconsistencies
with
sidewalks
and
no
sidewalks
and
we
have
people
pushing
their
baby
carriages
out
into
the
street.
So
I
would
like
to
see
us
be
more
consistent
with
that.
B
I
guess
I'd
like
to
hear
from
heath
about
again
state
why
I
know
it's
because
we
would
take
too
much
of
the
people's
front
yards
in
order
to
put
sidewalks
on
the
one
side
of
the
street,
but
okay
make
the
argument
for
us
either
way.
I
still
feel
like
we
could
put
sidewalks
and
on
the
is
that
the
north
side
and
assess
those
property
owners.
B
I
guess
I
would
have
to
hear
why
other
than
we
aren't
putting
them
on
the
other
side,
but
that
seems
to
be
a
design
issue
more
than
just
a
where
we
need
sidewalks.
So
I'd
like
to
hear
what
would
be
an
argument
as
to
well,
if
I
say
we
should
put
sidewalks
on
there
other
than
the
fact
that
they're
not
consistent
on
both
sides
of
the
street.
What
else
would
you
give
me
for
why
we
should
pay
for
them?
F
F
But
that
would
be
another
consideration
if
we're
having
to
procure
right
away
the
sidewalk
and
the
cost
of
it
becomes
a
negotiating
chip
or
a
bargaining
chip.
If
you
will
in
those
processes-
and
I
think
that
looking
at
this
project
of
this
magnitude-
that's
where
we
were
leaning
on
that
side
of
having
this-
be
a
carrot
of
concession
towards
the
land
owners
in
their
favor
to
go
ahead
and
plug
it
in
and
include
it
with
the
full
scope
of
the
work
that
we'd
be
doing.
B
C
F
F
C
F
Yeah
and
that's
that's
one
of
those
encumbrances
on
the
street
division
that
are
inherent
to
that
project
that
they
are
going
to
have
to
rob's,
got
a
plan
in
place
and
how
they
phase
that
in.
But
it
is
an
additional
step
that
they
now
have
to
do
because
of
losing
that
boulevard.
Snow
storage
capabilities.
A
But
remember
it
is
the
adjacent
property
owner's
responsibility
to
remove
the
snow.
The
reason
that
our
street
department
removes
snow
on
these
curbside
sidewalks
is
because
the
plow
piles
up
thick
heavy
icy
stuff,
that's
really
hard
for
people
to
get
with
a
shovel.
You
really
kind
of
need
a
piece
of
equipment
that
isn't
always
the
case,
but
that's
that's.
What
ends
up
being
the
case?
Is
people
go
out
there
with
a
shovel
and
they
can't
even
move
it
and
we've
put
it
there.
Mother
nature
didn't
put
it
there.
J
Glenn
makes
a
good
point.
My
response
to
that
is
twofold.
One,
those
on
the
south
won't
have
to
shovel.
That's
point
number
one,
that's
the
good
news,
but
the
flip
side
again
is-
and
this
again
I
don't
want
this
to
sound
heavy-handed.
But
when
you
buy
a
property,
you
assume
the
risk
that
goes
with
that
property
and
we'll
use
212.
For
an
example,
there
are
a
lot
of
people
on
212
that
lost
frontage.
They
lost
some
parking
space.
It
was.
J
A
J
Think
that's
unfair
or
heavy-handed
at
all
to
say
that
when
you
buy
a
property,
you
assume
the
future
liabilities
that
go
with
that
property.
That
includes,
if
you
are
owned,
property
and
choose
to
buy
property
on
a
busy
street
that
might
someday
get
expanded.
You
got
to
take
that
risk
and
or
it's
your
choice
to
take
that
risk.
D
D
D
C
D
I've
gotten
more
calls
on
this
one,
obviously,
because
it's
right
up
by
where
I
live,
but
we're
taking
assume
trees
down
boulevards
moving
things
of
that
nature.
That's
correct!
So
if
we
were
to
replace
sidewalk
whether
we
asked
somebody
else
to
pay
for
it
or
the
homeowner
that
goes
with
sprinklers
and
all
the
rest
of
the
stuff
will
have
to
be
done
at
the
homeowner's
expense
as
well.
F
D
Okay,
I
I
get
don's
point
like
I
said:
there's
eight,
eight
properties
that
are
affected
that
don't
have
frankly,
they
don't
have
sidewalk
they're.
Four
of
those
are
what
I
would
consider
frontage
and
form.
I
would
consider
side
lots.
I
mean
to
the
people
that
live
there,
it's
literally
on
the
side
of
their
house
versus
the
front
of
their
house.
So
is
there
a
right
answer?
I
don't
know,
but
I
mean
we're
doing
a
major
reconstruction
here
and
moving
100
year
old
trees.
D
F
F
D
So
I
don't
know,
I
don't
know
if
there
is
a
good
answer
or
bad
answer,
it's
probably
going
to
be
an
unliked
answer,
either
way,
one
way
or
another.
So
it's
just
those
are
the
things
I
like
to
see
what
it's
going
to
look
like
how
much
it's
going
to
affect
people's
yards
and
things
of
that
nature.
You
know
just
to
see
what
the
overall
effect
of
it
I
mean
they're
expanding
some.
I
know
I
drive
that
road
every
day
at
least
twice
a
day.
It's
gonna
affect
some
people
pretty
heavily.
F
Yeah
one
more
point
I'll
make
with
the
effect
of
the
existing
sidewalk
we
do
in
our
new
engineering
design
standards
require
five
foot
minimum
width
for
new
sidewalks.
A
lot
of
these
out
here
are
four,
if
not
three,
because
they
put
in
years
ago
and
and
four
used
to
always
be
the
standard,
so
there
will
be
a
widening
of
the
sidewalk,
regardless
of
whether
we
do
it
or
the
homeowners
do
it
to
meet
our
new
engineering
standards.
A
We
generally
don't
even
include
it
in
a
project
and
the
the
sidewalk
exists.
We
make
it
accessible
by
law.
We
pay
for
that
that
by
we
I
mean
each
of
you
and
every
every
citizen
taxpayer
the
taxpayer
pays
for
it.
We
don't
ask
the
adjacent
property
owners
to
bring
it
up
to
current
ada
standards.
If
it's
already
there,
if
there's
no
sidewalk
there,
we
don't
install
one
well.
A
D
A
A
J
Then
the
if,
if
we
were
to
do
this
on
behalf
of
the
homeowners
and
I'm
one
of
those
people
that
had
to
pay
the
assessment,
I
would
be
calling
my
councilmen
or
several
of
them
and
saying:
why
did
I
have
to
pay
for
that?
Nobody
else,
these
other
people
don't
have
to
so
again.
I
I
think
sometimes
it's
viewed
as
a
city
being
heavy-handed,
but
this
is
how
we
build
sidewalks
and
roads
in
the
in
the
in
the
community,
and
I
I
think
we
got
to
try
and
be
consistent
on
it.
A
Boy
and
I
I
do
feel
for
the
staff
they'll-
be
blamed,
it's
hard
to
tell
the
property
owners
this
they're
mad
at
you
they're,
you
know,
you're,
the
one
at
standing,
marcy
will
be
up
there
at
the
podium
on
tuesday
and
the
rotten
tomatoes
are
aimed
at
her
this.
It's
a
community
decision,
though
it's
it's.
Do
we
pay
for
this
out
of
the
general
taxpayer
funds,
or
do
we
assess
it
and
if
we're
wanting
to
be
consistent,
that's
you
know.
We
are
kind
of
taking
a
new
tact.
E
E
F
A
No,
no,
they
paid
for
their
curb
all
of
them,
the
new
ones.
If
there
was
existing
curb
that
got
widened
or
changed
they
already
paid
for
that
once
we
did
not
reassess,
we
could
I
mean
that
hasn't
been
our
practice.
I
have
to
say
I
don't
know
of
any
case
where
we
have
assessed
for
replacement
once
someone
has
made
that
investment.
D
See
that's
where
I'm
looking
at
is
if
they
paid
for
their
sidewalk,
I
mean
the
ones
that
don't
have
it.
I
mean
that's
where
I
would
feel
more
comfortable
because,
frankly,
they
were
supposed
to
have
that,
but
we
got
I
mean
most
of
those
like
I
said
I
live
real
close
to.
There
live
a
half,
a
block
from
10th
avenue.
E
F
B
This
is
marcy.
I
just
want
to
do
a
couple
clarification
clarifications
for
the
sake
of
the
council
members,
so
the
south
side,
because
of
the
expansion
of
the
road
we
do
have
mostly
every
homeowner,
will
have
a
ada
ramp
being
put
in
on
their
corners.
So
there
would
be
essentially
three
items
to
think
about.
It's
one
88
corners
that
are
pre-existing
are
going
to
go
away.
We
have
to
put
in
new.
B
Would
you
assess
those
when
they
may
have
already
been
assessed?
The
new
sidewalk?
That's,
not
pre-existing,
which
adam
is
correct:
councilman
adam
lollam,
it's
about
eight,
eight
lots
that
don't
have
currently
sidewalk
and
then
the
rest
of
the
sidewalk
would
be
existing,
but
we're
going
to
replace
so
there's,
essentially
three
things
to
think
about
as
you're
having
this
discussion.
A
C
B
B
F
A
J
I
just
I'm
sitting
here
trying
to
think
if
I've
ever
voted
to
not
assess.
I
think
the
one
time
I
didn't
was
when
I
I
think
the
case
was
made
that
the
city
damaged
the
sidewalk.
They
were
using
it
driving
trucks
on
it,
so
we
agreed
at
least
I
don't
know
if
we
funded
all
other
part
of
it,
but
we
agreed
to
repair
that
because
I
think
that
the
resolution
was
a
city,
it
caused
a
lot
of
that
damage.
Other
than
that,
I
don't.
I
don't
know.
C
Thank
you
one
comment.
I'm
probably
I
reserve
the
right
to
change
my
mind
before
the
actual
vote,
but
I
am
inclined
to
support
what
don
is
saying
about
assessing
one
question:
why,
on
the
existing
sidewalks
that
are
not
up
to
the
five
feet,
space
requirement,
let's
say:
if
they're
old,
sidewalks
three
feet
four
feet
wide
or
whatever.
Why
are
we
forcing
them
to
upgrade
and
and
assess
that
or
if
we
do
assess
that?
That's
that's
a
question
that
I
have
because
they
bought.
A
B
C
C
C
C
I
mean
I,
don't
I'm
not
sure
how
you
go
about
widening
a
sidewalk.
I've
had
a
little
bit
experience
with
concrete
work,
but
you
know
these
folks
are
going
to
experience
some
property
loss
with
this
project
and-
and
I'm
just
I'll
just
say
at
this
point
from
all
the
things
that
I've
heard
you
know
and
there's
been
a
lot
of
these
land
owners
have
changed
ownership
in
these
properties
several
times,
probably
since
they
were
constructed.
E
J
I
think
the
president,
if
this
passes
again
I'm
trying
to
be
respectful,
I
I
get
both
sides
of
it,
but
this
is
how
we
find
sidewalks
and
streets,
and
if
we
we
just
assessed
somebody
that
came
up
here
earlier,
the
meeting
over
on
third
third
avenue
was
it.
I
I
guys
this
is
how
we
do
it
in
the
city.
Now,
if
we're
going
to
change,
then
it's
going
to
be
a
big
change.
It's
going
to
have
ramifications
on
streets
and
sidewalks
going
forward.
I'm
opposed.
D
I
I
personally
would
rather
see
us
assessing
where
there
is
no
sidewalk.
You
know,
because
they've
never
had
the
initial
uphronic,
you
know
expense
and
I'd
also
be
in
favor
of
assessing
any
sidewalk
that
was
deemed
need
to
be
replaced
due
to
lack
of
just
updating,
and
you
know
in
disrepair.
So
I
will
be
opposing
that
as
well.
C
J
J
D
Make
the
motion
that
we
assess
where
there
is
no
particular
sidewalk
currently
as
well
as
identify
sidewalks
that
are
in
poor
disk
repair
that
need
to
be
replaced
and
we
assess
those
and
the
other
ones
that
are
in
good
frankly,
in
good
condition.
That
would
not
have
needed
a
repair
that
the
city
pays.
That
okay.
Second.
A
E
A
A
A
Beth,
do
you
have
your
hand
up,
or
is
it
just
still
up,
it's
still
up?
Okay.
So,
whereas
this
motion
is
to
assess
where
it's
new
or
where
the
improvement
doesn't
meet
our
standards,
so
we're
replacing
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
those
opposed
signify
or
say,
nay,
roll
call
vote.
Please
kristin.
C
B
C
E
A
F
Perfect,
we
can
postpone
that.
I
just
want
to
say
too:
I
figured
that
would
be
a
split
discussion.
I
appreciate
the
council's
input.
We
at
least
have
direction
now
we
can
get
the
resolution
of
necessities
and
things
like
that
in
motion,
because
those
are
all
it'll
take
time
to
accomplish,
and
and
so
we
appreciate
the
direction
we'll
move
forward
accordingly,.