Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Streets Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews $1M–$4M cost estimates for Redwood and Chestnut paving; annexation raises legal and stakeholder issues
Summary
Staff presented scaled cost estimates for paving Redwood and Chestnut roads — from a limited asphalt overlay (~$1.1M) to a full-build option (~$4M) — and warned that annexation could trigger complex property-owner and assessment issues.
City staff presented updated cost estimates for improvements to Redwood and Chestnut roads, showing a range of options and costs and underscoring legal and stakeholder complications tied to annexation.
Staff said a full-build option that included shaping, proper base, curb, gutter, sidewalks and utilities would be in the neighborhood of $4 million (including contingency, legal administration and engineering). An approach limited to placing an asphalt mat over the existing surface — without subgrade work, fabric or additional gravel — would reduce costs to about $1.1 million, staff said; removing contingency from that narrower option still left costs close to $955,000.
Staff cautioned that the simpler asphalt-only option would not address known frost heave and subgrade issues on both roads, and that heavy truck and bus traffic would likely shorten service life. Unit-price comparisons with a recent core project suggested the annexation study’s asphalt estimate ($110/ton) was within the general ballpark but that current unit prices have varied and may be higher.
Council members and staff also discussed annexation implications. The roads border rural-platted parcels; staff identified roughly 16 private property owners whose deeds extend to the middle of the road and who would need to be engaged to obtain right-of-way control. Staff warned the annexation process can be contentious and could make some parcels eligible for forced annexation if they become surrounded; that possibility concerned council members and nearby property owners.
A citizen stakeholder indicated willingness to convene property owners, school representatives, the township and the county to discuss options; staff said they were open to stakeholder meetings and to reviewing other cost estimates if they were provided.
No formal action to fund or begin construction was taken at the meeting; councilmembers asked staff to continue stakeholder outreach and provide any additional cost estimates for comparison.
