My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006 04-10 CC PACKET
GemLake
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
PACKETS
>
2000 - 2009
>
2006
>
2006 04-10 CC PACKET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/20/2026 8:35:05 AM
Creation date
7/20/2026 8:29:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Code
ADM 00500
Document
CC PACKET
Destruction
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
156
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Why are the four roadways being treated the same? Why can't we <br />on Tessier Road go with the "do nothing" approach (which the <br />vote indicated at the meeting with the 3 to 1 vote)? <br />BIG FOX- LITTLE FOX <br />- Age of roadway in the 35 year range (roadway life for this <br />type of road- 30 years) <br />- Roadway has no base and is in very bad shape <br />- 0 years remaining of roadway life <br />HAVEN LANE <br />- Age of roadway in the 35 year range (roadway life for this <br />type of road- 35 to 40 years) <br />- No base and 3" blacktop- bad shape <br />- 0 to 5 years remaining on roadway life <br />TESSIER ROAD <br />- Age of roadway 17 years (1989) (roadway life for this type <br />of road- 35 to 40 years) <br />- Good base and 3" to 5" blacktop- 3 potholes to fill [not <br />filled last summer- now after winter potholes are larger <br />then they should be if maintained correctly] <br />- 18 to 23 years (50% to 60%) remaining on roadway life <br />- Maintenance last 17 years--- less then 6 potholes filled <br />and seal coated one time <br />Why should we have to do the same repairs as the other three <br />roadways?? <br />39-70 Tess�eR� . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.