PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING. September 27, 2000

Transcription

1 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING September 27, 2000 The Public Works Committee meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Mr. Byron C. Loudon, Chairman. The following members were present, constituting a quorum: Mr. Thomas C. Tim Owens, Mr. Kris Kobach, and Mr. David Belpedio sat in for Mr. George Kandt, who was absent. Mr. Michael J. Lally was also absent. Also present were: Mr. Bob Lowry, Director of Public Works; Mr. Brian Shields, City Traffic Engineer; Mr. John Nachbar, City Manager; Mr. Doug Brown, City Engineer; Mrs. Susan White, Communications Assistant; Mr. Bill Heatherman, Civil Engineer; Mr. Mike Hale, Supervisory Civil Engineer; Mr. Mike Miller, Supervisory Management Analyst; Mr. Daniel Stack, Civil Engineer; Mr. Bill Ebel, Jr., Manager, Maintenance Operations; Ms. Michelle Mendoza, Assistant City Manager; Mrs. Jane Neff-Brain, Senior Assistant City Attorney; and Mrs. Barbara Potts, Senior Recording Secretary. Approximately 15 persons were in the audience. DRAINAGE & BANK STABILITY IMPROVEMENTS: 9941 ROE Civil Engineer Bill Heatherman informed the Committee that Mr. Charles Hadden, 9941 Roe Avenue, contacted the City in January of this year concerning the stability of the earthen bank north of his home. The top of the bank is approximately 10 to 12 feet above the stream channel and approaches within 10 feet of the north wall of Mr. Hadden s house. The drainage channel is an earthen ditch that flows from the north and makes a sharp bend to the west, and the outer side of this bend is where the erosion problem occurs. The flow then continues through a triple 8-foot by 6-foot reinforced concrete box culvert under Roe and into a concrete-lined channel downstream. As shown in the records from aerial photos, a significant amount of migration of the channel took place between 1962 and 1988, and Mr. Hadden reports that additional erosion has occurred since he has owned the property (approximately 4-5 years). Mr. Hadden s house is located in the Cherry Hills subdivision, which was platted in 1956, prior to the adoption of the City s storm sewer standards. Although most of the houses along Roe were built in the 1960s, the subject property remained undeveloped for many years. In 1983, Ashner Realtors, representing a buyer for this lot, requested a variance be granted from the storm sewer standards to allow construction of a home without the need to construct a concrete ditch liner in the current channel. In the request, it was noted that the buyers were fully aware of the nature of the drainage system. The variance was granted, subject to a stipulation that the owners of the property would not object to the creation of an improvement district at a later date. In 1987, Dr. Cassius Tucker, a previous owner of this property, contacted the City to request assistance in addressing the erosion of the channel. At that time, Dr. Tucker was given the option to create a one-owner improvement district, and a feasibility study was prepared to install a gabion wall along the south bank of the creek. However, Dr. Tucker declined to pursue the option, citing cost as the primary factor.

2 Page 2 Reference was made by Mr. Heatherman to the Public Works Committee Meeting minutes of July 22, 1987, which indicated that improvement district proposals were made to line the entire channel. However, the adjacent property owners showed little interest. According to Mr. Heatherman, significant flood issues exist in this neighborhood. He explained that Roe Avenue (downstream of this house) is subject to frequent overtopping of the bank. He indicated that inundation was significant in the October 1998 rain storm. The four properties along Roe, between 99th Street and Mr. Hadden s house, sit much lower and are within the FEMA designated floodplain. Responses were received from a survey sent to those owners in February, indicating that these property owners had experienced flood problems, and one of the largest issues was sanitary sewer backup. After performing some preliminary calculations, staff believes that widening or lining the earthen channel would probably not be sufficient to fully address the flood issues. Mr. Heatherman explained that a more detailed study would be needed to identify the controlling factors and the possible solutions. He noted that the Johnson County Storm Water Program plans to initiate a study for the entire Indian Creek Basin beginning this winter, and staff believes the study would provide the needed data to undertake a more detailed plan of the alternatives. He said that staff has committed to Mr. Hadden that his neighborhood would be given high priority in the modeling process. Because of the uncertainty concerning the feasibility, scope, or timing of a comprehensive drainage improvement, Mr. Heatherman explained that Mr. Hadden asked staff to examine a more limited project that would focus specifically on his bank stability concern. He commented that the more limited project was the basis of the feasibility study. He referred to the current report, which updated the original feasibility report prepared in 1987 for Dr. Tucker, the previous owner. The updated study consists of installing a gabion wall midway between the original 1962 location and the current bend in the drainage channel. He explained that the gabion wall would stabilize the area and allow the water flow to line up with the reinforced concrete box culvert. Although this project could be built independently, it would still be compatible with future wide-ranging improvements. If this approach would be pursued, it would first be necessary to complete a full drainage study to make certain the wall installation would not have a negative impact on the flood situation upstream. As he explained, the current feasibility study was developed without the benefit of geotechnical information, and such data would need to be gathered during the preliminary engineering phase and could lead to modifications of the detailed design. Following the completion of this project, Mr. Heatherman said the City would perform the maintenance required to preserve the proper functioning of the improvement. The property owners would be responsible for adhering to any necessary limitations, such as landscaping, grading or plantings within the permanent maintenance easement. The property owners are also responsible for maintaining vegetation upon the soil cover, once final sodding or seeding is complete.

3 Page 3 Mr. Heatherman said the estimated total project cost for the proposed improvement in the year 2002 would be $154,524. He explained that easement costs were based on the donation of easements from properties within the improvement district and for condemnation and award for outside easements. He also noted that easement costs were estimated without the benefit of a professional appraisal, and therefore, should be considered accordingly. According to Mr. Heatherman, the proposed bank stabilization project falls under the policy of Governing Body Resolution No. 2395, which requires one-third of the contribution to be paid by the property owner, which would be approximately $51,000. The property owner has indicated, however, that this amount is more than he can afford. Additional discussion was held by the Committee relative to possible options or an interim low cost step that could be used, and it was decided that more research would be needed. A motion was made by Mr. Thomas C. Tim Owens to direct staff to research a twophase improvement district and present a report to the Public Works Committee in October. Mr. Kris Kobach seconded, and the motion passed by a vote of 4 to MAINTENANCE PROGRAM City Engineer Doug Brown informed the Committee that this is the third year that the staff has presented a five-year maintenance program to the Public Works Committee. He explained that 2001 will be the third year since the maintenance funding has been tracked as a separate element of the City s operating budget. He believed the five-year program increased the visibility of this mission, provided greater flexibility in efficiently executing the program, and allowed better performance measurement to improve staff management and Public Works Committee oversight of this program. In last year s presentation, staff noted two new program elements major storm sewer repair and street reconstruction. Mr. Brown explained that the funding options to address the $5-6 million requirement for major storm sewer repair is currently being investigated in the Storm Water Utility Feasibility Study and is planned for inclusion in the Maintenance Program. Although street reconstruction is not included in the Maintenance Program, significant street and curb repair/ replacement is scheduled for Santa Fe Drive; Grandview to 80th Street. In terms of budget impact, Mr. Brown said the Maintenance Program is based on projected revenue estimates provided by the Director of Finance, Budget and Administration. After the presentation of the 2001 program, he explained that he will be requesting approval by the Committee to proceed with the planning and execution of the proposed 2001 projects, as well as some of the plans for the out years. According to Mr. Brown, the Maintenance Program is basically the same as this past year with the exception of maintenance of City-owned parking lots, which was added as a standard item beginning this year. He explained that this item will be a cyclical maintenance program, exclusive of the parking lots that are maintained by the Parks Department.

4 Page 4 Referring to the 2000 Maintenance Program, Mr. Brown reported that the paving of residential streets and subdivision work is completed. He indicated that once the current contractor has finished the work along Antioch Road, the paving of Antioch Road will be added to the program. As he explained, the current contractor is experiencing some problems, and therefore, his project is taking longer than he anticipated. Referring to the Progress Report of the 2000 Maintenance Program, Mr. Brown said 2000 has been a very successful year for planned maintenance activities. He noted that there was timely execution of the projects, within budget and with quality results. The total expenditure for the 2000 Maintenance Program was approximately $6,444,024. In comparison, the proposed Maintenance Program for 2001 totals approximately $7,575,000, which is 17 percent greater than in Mr. Brown explained that there are three areas where staff will be increasing the work effort in One of the areas is thoroughfare overlay of 28 lane miles, as compared to 23 lane miles in The second area is the microsurfacing of 20 lane miles and downtown parking lots. In 2000, 10 lane miles will receive microsurfacing. He noted that curb repair is the third area, and staff will be doing approximately 20 percent more. Looking ahead to the Crack Seal Program in 2001, Mr. Brown said the policy is to seal all 1/4-inch wide cracks, all streets to be chip sealed, and all streets to be microsurfaced. He believed this will reduce the maintenance costs incurred by the City in the past. He noted the improved method of sealing wide cracks, known as Polypatch, was very successful this year and will be expanded for Mr. David Belpedio requested clarification of the Polypatch method of sealing the cracks. Mr. Brown explained that, because of the settlement of new streets, the cracks can become fairly wide after five to six years, and filling the wide cracks with asphalt has not been successful, because the street continues to move. Currently, staff is milling out the deteriorated section of the street and filling the wide cracks with a material called Polypatch, which has proven to be a very good method. He explained that the narrow cracks will continue to be filled with the standard crack material. However, the wide cracks require a special approach, and thus, the Polypatch method will be used. The Surface Treatment Program for 2001 is basically chip seal and slurry seal. The key point and the only difference from last year is that staff is currently constructing streets, including privately milled streets, with a new asphalt (intermediate leveling asphalt). Mr. Brown said the new asphalt is also being used in the Residential Street Program, as well as in overlaying the existing residential streets. He explained that the expectation for the future years is that chip sealing will be done every 8 to 10 years, rather than every 7 years. As he pointed out, this will help to lower the cost of the maintenance. Mr. Brown said that a product called reclamite (asphalt rejuvenation) will be used on selected streets to enable an entire neighborhood to be placed on an 8- to 10-year chip seal cycle. In the past, staff had to chip seal specific streets

5 Page 5 because all of the streets were constructed at different times. He indicated that reclamite is a surface rejuvenator oil that will be used after a street is three years old. By using the reclamite process, the chip sealing would not have to be done for another six to seven years. As he explained, staff wants to have entire neighborhoods on the same year cycle, and thus, allow work crews to be more efficient. He said that staff is planning to complete 64 miles in 2001, which is close to the amount completed this year. In terms of the Thoroughfare Mill/Overlay Program for 2001, Mr. Brown said that staff anticipated that by using the new improved surface mix for asphalt, the cycle could eventually be lengthened beyond what was done in the past. He believed this would save money in the long term. In 2000, the City had $700,000 in CARS funding for overlay for thoroughfares, and in 2001, he anticipated that it would be twice that amount. The key streets for 2001 are Metcalf, Indian Creek Bridge to 86th Street; Antioch, 67th Street to 85th Street; Pflumm, College Boulevard to 119th Street; 119th Street, U.S. 69 to Antioch and Santa Fe, Grandview to 80th Street (which may be done as a separate project). He said this would complete 28 lane miles for a cost of $2,579,000. As mentioned above, the work to be completed on Santa Fe, outside of City Hall, from Grandview to downtown Overland Park, might be done as a separate project in order to focus specifically on that area. In the last year, this project was perceived as a reconstruction project, however, in 2001, the project will be approached as a longterm rehabilitation project. Mr. Brown referred to the Planned Execution graph for the Thoroughfare Mill/Overlay Program. He said that staff is meeting approximately 82 percent of their objectives, in terms of overlaying at the proper time, based on the City s policy. The graph shows a drop off in 2005, because new thoroughfares will be built at that time. In the past five years, staff has averaged 17 lane miles per year, and the proposal over the next five years is to average approximately 27 lane miles per year. In 2001, the Residential Street Mill/Overlay will include Sunset Hill, Westbrook South, Wellington Square, Cherokee, Greenwich Hills, Morningview, Trail West Estates, Essex Place and Pinehurst, which is about 14 miles and basically the same amount as this past year. He commented that the staff has averaged 10 miles per year in the last five years. In the next five years, however, the average will be 12 to 13 miles per year. The Public Works Department had approximately 90.4 percent of their objectives met in 2000 and by the end of 2005, anticipates it will be somewhat higher. However, after 2006 is added to the plan, the average miles will probably decrease because of the building boom in 1979 when many new streets were constructed. As he explained, those streets will be 27 years old, so staff will need to complete more projects in 2006, or the curbs will begin to deteriorate. In reference to the Thoroughfare Microsurfacing Program for 2001, Mr. Brown said that more thoroughfare microsurfacing has occurred over the past several years. He explained that microsurfacing was started as a test, and Public Works staff is currently in the fourth year of the test. He indicated that staff is attempting to

6 Page 6 get five to six years of service life from microsurfacing on good thoroughfares. He mentioned that Quivira Road, from 127th Street to 135th Street has been microsurfaced and appears to be performing very well. As he explained, microsurfacing is considered to be a combat multiplier for the City s program, because it is protection at a lower cost. Although microsurfacing costs have doubled this year, staff believes the process continues to be a good bargain for thoroughfares because of the extended life of the streets. In 2001, the projects will include 119th Street, Pflumm to Antioch Road; Antioch Road, 119th Street to 135th Street; and Johnson Drive, Lowell to Metcalf Avenue, for a total of 18 lane miles. In response to Mr. Belpedio s request for additional information on the microsurfacing process, Mr. Brown explained that microsurfacing is a process where the materials are mixed on site a combination of polymer asphalt and small stone. The mixture is applied as a thin coating (1/4-inch thickness) to the street and is designed to basically protect and rejuvenate the surface of the asphalt which, over time, becomes oxidized by the ultraviolet light. Therefore, if a thoroughfare is in good condition and has minimal cracking, microsurfacing is a quick way to boost the life before major repairs would be needed. He informed the Committee that microsurfacing has a rougher texture than new asphalt, however, the microsurfaced area is less rough than the chip seal process. Mr. Brown noted that the Curb Repair Program is somewhat constricted because of the funding limitations. Therefore, curb repair is normally done during the overlay process of residential and thoroughfare streets. Staff also does curb repair as part of the preparation for the following year s chip seal process. By doing curb repair at the same time as overlay of the streets, it is a relatively efficient way to complete curb repair in one year. In 2001, the City is planning to complete 19 miles of curb repair during the Overlay Program. Mr. Kris Kobach asked the cost difference between chip sealing versus microsurfacing. Mr. Brown said that chip sealing costs approximately 75 cents per square yard, while microsurfacing is around $1.70 per square yard. In response to Mr. Kobach s comment that chip sealing is done within the residential subdivisions and microsurfacing is done exclusively on thoroughfares, Mr. Brown confirmed that to be correct. However, he mentioned that 80th Street in downtown Overland Park was microsurfaced this past year, simply because of the difficulty in performing chip sealing in the parking stalls. Otherwise, he concurred that microsurfacing is done only on thoroughfares. Mr. Thomas C. Tim Owens stated that he received a significant number of complaints this year from constituents who believe that unnecessary curb repair is being done. His constituents have informed him that they have seen new curbs constructed one year, and then next year, torn out and reconstructed. In response, Mr. Brown said that in the past only the deteriorated section of curbs was removed and the area patched. However, the patched area would sometimes crack a year or two later. After review of the process, staff found that it would cost less to replace entire sections of the curbing rather than to patch specific areas.

7 Page 7 Mr. Brown stated that Assistant City Engineer Mike Ross suggested that, with a solid and reliable mixture, the curbs could last for another five to seven years, thus, it would be more efficient for the contractor and result in a less expensive process. However, this process could also be difficult. For example, a 15-foot section could be replaced with new curbing, while the 25-year-old curbing adjacent to it does not need replacing at the same time. Rather than returning in five years to fix the 25-year-old curbing, the entire section would be replaced at the same time. He admitted that he also received calls from residents regarding the same issue. Mr. Owens suggested that the Public Works staff submit their philosophy for curb repair and place it in the Overview Newsletter. By doing this, he believed residents would have a better understanding of the process. According to Mr. Kobach, he received complaints from constituents regarding the quality of dirt that was placed behind the repaired curbing. He said that residents from the Oak Park subdivision claimed that the dirt was replaced with pure sand, and therefore, grass would not grow in that area. He asked the reason that sand was used to replace the soil. Mr. Brown replied that minor repair was done on Nieman around 123rd Street, and he visited the site to observe the work. He commented that the old curb was removed so carefully that the contractor did not even disturb the yard. In the Oak Park subdivision, however, staff plans to put in sod during the growing season. Civil Engineer Dan Stack explained that the issue is to replace the soil that was washed away. He said staff has been reviewing these areas and, basically, replacing some of the areas that had too much sand in the mixture with good black dirt and seeding the area again. If the seed does not achieve the desired results, he explained that the area would have to be sodded. In most areas, however, the seeding has produced good results. In reference to the previous issue, Mr. Brown said that last year, the numbers were significantly different. As he mentioned, there is an economy constraint on curb repair in the next year. However, he assured the Committee that staff will continue to focus on this issue, and with the additional funding received, they will attempt to balance this program. Responding to Chairman Loudon s inquiry regarding the goal for the Curb Repair Program, Mr. Brown said that, currently, 60 percent of the curbs are being repaired or replaced. Typically, he stated that staff would like to be at 90 percent compliance in curb repair on residential and thoroughfare overlay. He assured the Committee that staff is able to rebalance the program from year to year, as they get closer to the year of execution. For the Sidewalk Repair Program for 2001, Mr. Brown said the City has two areas of effort. He noted that one is a wide effort that cycles clockwise around the City on a 10-year cycle. He explained that this effort takes care of the problems on an area basis. Secondly, staff has a spot repair program that began in 1999 and was

8 Page 8 completed this past year. Staff plans to initiate a new contract next year to continue that program and Mr. Bill Ebel, Manager of Maintenance Operations will investigate ways to improve some of the responsiveness in the next year. In 2001, the area contract will cover the portion of the City that is between College Boulevard and 127th Street, west of Metcalf. Referring to the Bridge Repair Program, Mr. Brown stated that staff will be completing the required biennial inspection in He explained that no inspections will be done in He said that the street maintenance staff will continue to do deck patching. He said that staff attempted to do a small deck patching operation on the 91st Street bridge over U. S. 69 Highway. However, since the conditions were poor, staff spent over a week repairing it. He noted that next year KDOT is planning to do repairs on the 87th Street bridge over U. S. 69 Highway, prior to the proposed 87th Street Corridor System Enhancement Project to be completed after Mr. Brown explained that the Minor Storm Sewer Repair Program is for small repairs that cost less than $100,000 per site. Last year, the System Inventory/Assessment was 35 percent complete. This year, the assessment is 60 percent complete, so staff has made quite a bit of progress and would like to finish this next year. At the end of October, three maintenance crews will continue the inspection, so it can be completed by the end of next year. Beginning in 2001, the requirement is to complete 26 minor storm sewer projects. Mr. Brown referred to the list showing the locations of these projects to be completed over the next five years for a cost of about $900,000. He indicated that last year 22 projects were identified, so staff has picked up some additional projects. He informed the Committee that the list is based on reported problems and ongoing storm sewer inventory. According to Mr. Brown, the Tentative 2002 Maintenance Program shows a current budget target of $7,760,000, approximately three percent over the amount that staff expected to spend in He said that additional funding will be received from the County Assistance Road System (CARS) for the thoroughfare overlays. Chairman Loudon requested clarification regarding the words indefinite delivery, as shown on the Tentative 2002 Maintenance Program report under the category of sidewalk repair. Mr. Brown explained that indefinite delivery is a military term which means to deliver as required. Looking ahead to , Mr. Brown said staff plans to maintain approximately 25 lane miles of microsurfacing per year with the presumption that the microsurfacing will produce a 5 to 6-year life. The chip seal/reclamite cost has increased somewhat because of the increase of 10 to 12 miles in the City per year. Mr. Brown said one of the Ongoing/Planned Initiatives of the Public Works Department is improved contract packaging. As he explained, staff wants better management, better contractor attention to the work, and a more efficient and cost effective program. Another initiative of the department is the implementation of ordinance revisions for construction of streets, sidewalks, and storm sewers.

9 Page 9 Mr. Brown said the new asphalt mix design/testing has been successful, but staff is still making improvements in overlay procedures. He noted that the use of Polypatch, as mentioned earlier, has also been favorable for repairing the wide cracks in streets, and reclamite (asphalt rejuvenation) will be used in 2001 as part of the Street Maintenance Program. He said that staff will also be making a transition to Micropaver 5.0 as the software basis for the Pavement Management System. Referring to the Major Storm Drainage Repair Program, Mr. Brown said funding options are now being considered in the Storm Water Utility Feasibility Study. He informed the Committee that the Storm Water Advisory Council will consist of 14 to 18 members. He anticipated the first major storm drainage repair project will be included in the 2002 Maintenance Program. In terms of the Street Reconstruction Program, Mr. Brown said the City is now beginning to have streets that are reaching the end of their useful life. He had expected that Santa Fe was one of those streets, but upon further inspection, staff feels that major rehabilitation can be done rather than reconstruction. He advised that staff is finding more streets that fall into that category. He believed the City will be able to qualify for CARS funding, which will assist in offsetting the burden of that cost. City Manager John Nachbar stated that he spent time with the Public Works staff in order to learn more about this program. He complimented the staff on their maintenance program, which he believed to be thoughtful and comprehensive in using different types of technologies to address the various problems. He indicated that he is very impressed with the staff s efforts in this area. Chairman Loudon concurred. He said the Committee has had the opportunity to listen to these presentations each month and is equally impressed with the high level of professionalism. He believed there is a lot of thoughtful study and creativity that has gone into the presentations in the last couple of years, which has helped the Committee tremendously. Mr. Brown recognized Civil Engineer Dan Stack, who is responsible for putting the presentation together and for the calculations and information given this evening. A motion was made by Mr. Kobach to recommend to the Council approval of the execution of the 2001 Maintenance Program and the planning and development of the Maintenance Program, as recommended by staff. Mr. Owens seconded, and the motion passed by a 4 to 0 vote. WAIVER OF CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS 2001 CDBG RESIDENTIAL STREET PROJECT Mr. Brown commented that an error had been made on the agenda relative to the year of the CDBG Residential Street Project. He clarified that it should read 2001, rather than the year 2000.

10 Page 10 In August 2000, a consultant selection panel, which included Councilmembers Jack Halligan and Michael Lally, selected Bartlett and West to design the 2002 Residential Street Program, Part II. The Wilson Company was also rated highly by the selection panel, but finished a close second to Bartlett and West. As explained by Mr. Brown, the City policy requires a qualifications-based selection process be completed for consultant selection for engineering services, however, waivers to this process may be granted by the Public Works Committee. Mr. Brown indicated that staff would like to award the 2001 CDBG Residential Street Program for construction in 2001, and in order to do so, design must be initiated immediately. By selecting the Wilson Company to do the design, this would allow a contract to be awarded to them on October 9, 2000, which is two months sooner than if a new consultant selection process is undertaken. He assured the Committee that there would be no additional budget impact, since funds for this design are included in the 2000 allocation. Mr. Owens moved to recommend to Council approval that the selection process be waived and the Wilson Company be contracted to design the 2000 CDBG Residential Street Program (Hemlock, 79th Street to 81st Street; and 81st Street, Hemlock to Goodman). A second was made by Mr. Belpedio. In response to Mr. Kobach s inquiry as to the reason that Bartlett and West is not the optimum choice, Mr. Brown said that Bartlett and West is doing the Part II design for the 2002 program. When the panel interviewed, he explained that they favored the Wilson Company, who qualified for the 2002 program, but the approval went to Bartlett and West for that program. However, the City currently has a new design requirement which is the 2001 CDBG. He said the City needed a design firm to complete the work, and rather than going through the process of soliciting proposals again, staff recommended the Wilson Company since they were very favorably reviewed by the previous panel. The motion carried by a 4 to 0 vote. NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL 123RD & NALL City Traffic Engineer Brian Shields said the traffic warrant analyses were recently completed for 123rd and Nall, and the following warrants were met: 1) No. 2 - Interruption of continuous traffic; 2) No. 8 Combination of warrants; 3) No. 9 Four hour volumes; and 4) No. 11 Peak Hour Volume. In general, the Nall Avenue corridor will likely experience increasing amounts of traffic after the Nall Avenue widening is completed, and 123rd Street traffic has increased since it has been opened between Metcalf and Nall. Mr. Shields explained that the traffic signal at 123rd Street and Nall Avenue is estimated to cost $110,000 and will be funded through City funds. The City will incur ongoing expenses for routine and emergency maintenance, as well as other operating expenses for electricity, modernizations, and capital replacement. He said that energy costs will amount to $4,000 per year, and maintenance costs will amount to $3,000 per year.

11 Page 11 Mr. Owens moved to recommend to Council approval of the design and construction of a new traffic signal at 123rd Street and Nall Avenue. Mr. Kobach seconded, and the motion carried by a vote of 4 to 0. Director of Public Works Bob Lowry announced that Committee member Michael Lally informed him that he would be out of town on October 25, which is the date for the next Public Works Committee meeting. Therefore, a change has been requested that the meeting schedule be changed from Wednesday, October 25, to Tuesday, October 24, The Committee members agreed to the change. CONSENT ITEMS: The Council Consent Agenda items are Nos. 2, 3, and 4. ADJOURNMENT: At 9:05 p.m., Chairman Loudon declared the meeting adjourned. Minutes transcribed by Barbara Potts. Byron C. Loudon, Chairman