Agenda Packets - 2008/07/07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Based on the results of the CIP and TIF analysis, Council directed that Staff proceed to develop the Trail Segments 1 – 5 project with a revised scope. The revised scope was presented on June 9, 2008, which included: grading necessary only for the trail and to ensure drainage, trail construction, lighting, and basic turf restoration. Landscaping and other amenities were eliminated or reduced to a bare minimum. On June 9, 2008, City Council approved Resolution 7279, approving the Feasibility Report, ordering the Project with Revised Scope and Authorizing Plans and Specifications. On June 9, 2008 Council also directed Staff to review the lighting along the trail proposed in the Feasibility Report and to determine the possibility of further cost reduction by eliminating decorative lights and using standard fixtures along Trail Segments 1 – 5. Discussion: Based on the previous action and current direction of the City Council, Staff has performed a lighting analysis for Trail Segments 1 – 5, along with the associated cost estimates. A summary of the review is provided in this Staff Report. Decorative Lighting Options As was constructed on Trail Segments 9 & 10, the proposed lighting for Trail Segments 1 – 5 includes standard pole-mounted lighting for a majority of the project length, with decorative lighting provided at key locations, such as intersections. The Feasibility Report noted 11 locations where a decorative light fixture was proposed to be installed along Trail Segments 1 – 5. The proposed locations are shown in Attachment A. The decorative lights are more expensive than the standard lights. As estimated in the November 2007 Preliminary Report, the construction cost per light is approximately $1,800 for the standard shoebox lighting unit (Emco Shoebox) and approximately $4,300 for the decorative lighting units (Lumec Domus). Review of Decorative Lighting Locations Included In Report Staff looked more closely at the locations of the decorative lights proposed in the Feasibility Report, to determine if any could be eliminated. Intersection locations were reviewed first. The Report took the approach that decorative lights would be provided at full-access intersections, but would not be necessary at restricted access intersections. The restricted access intersections in the project area include Program Avenue, Quincy Street and Sunnyside Road. Therefore the Feasibility Report provided only standard lights at these intersections. Staff feels that if decorative lights are included in the project, the current layout at intersections is appropriate.