CCP 12-26-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I near County Road E; therefore, additional costs would be incurred to widen the street. It is , proposed to reconstruct the street to 32 feet wide with B618 concrete curb and gutter and storm sewer improvements. Any necessary utility repairs would be included as part of this project, as determined by the City's public works department. The existing utilities are an 8.inch sanitary sewer and a 6-inch watermain. I Pascal Avenue is a dead-end street running north from County Road E, approximately 800 feet I east of Snelling Avenue. It is 400 feet long and 21 feet wide. Pascal Avenue is in very poor condition, having a PCI rating of only 23. Its surface contains severe alligator and block cracking. It currently has a shallow bituminous curb and drains both to County Road 'E' and to I the developed lots to the north. The poor drainage presents a problem that should be corrected with B618 curb and gutter and a storm sewer improvement connecting to the existing storm sewer system on County Road E. The street would be reconstructed to a 32-foot width with a sand I subcut and draintile installed as needed (as determined in soil boring to be advanced at a later date). Pascal Avenue has a 6-inch watermain and an 8-inch sanitary sewer in its right-of-way. City records indicate that the watennain is not looped, although the loop could be completed with I the addition of about 50 feet of pipe. This could be added to the project, making it eligible for the City's utility funding. I McCracken Lane from Chatham Avenue to Snelling Avenue is a 34-foot wide street, 605 feet long. It has D4l8 curb and gutter and storm sewer system in good condition. The existing Ie pavement is in poor condition, with several patch areas, settlements, and extensive amounts of moderate to high severity cracking. Reconstruction would include a sand subcut with draintile installation and curb repair, as necessary. There is a 6-inch watermain and an 8-inch sanitary I sewer within the McCracken right-of-way. The costs associated with Alternate No.2 are presented in the following section of this report. I PROJECT COSTS I The following tables present the costs associated with each type of improvement and total costs for each alternate. Construction costs were determined using comparable construction cost data I from 1995 with a 32% overhead factor to include contingencies, City administration, engineering, legal, and fiscal expenses. I Alternate 1 Estimated Seal Coat Project Cost $23,000 I Estimated Alternate No.1 Bituminous Overlay Cost $94,000 Estimated Fernwood A venue Project Cost $305,000 I Estimated Alternate No. 1 Reconstruction Cost $389,000 t' TOTAL $811,000 I FEAS.520.068 -6- 52Q.068-1O