Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Streets And Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff outlines paving priorities: Waterman Avenue, University Parkway and corridor connections emphasized
Summary
Council heard staff’s explanation of proposed paving segments that prioritize Waterman Avenue, University Parkway and corridor connections to the 215 Freeway. Staff said work aims to repave continuous segments rather than isolated blocks and described local and state coordination for parts of the program.
City staff described a multi-segment paving plan that emphasizes continuous corridor repaving rather than patchwork repairs. Presenters explained why Waterman Avenue, University Parkway and corridors connecting Hallmark, State Street and Pearl Street were selected.
Staff explained selection criteria including: (1) corridor importance as an entry to the city, (2) existing pavement condition (heavy truck traffic and potholes), and (3) connection to state paving projects and other local improvements. The presentation noted portions of Waterman connecting to Highland and the 215 Freeway would be paved in coordination with state work; staff referenced an anticipated pavement program window of 12–18 months for some segments.
Councilmembers and residents expressed support for selecting longer continuous segments over single-block repairs. One councilmember described the proposed sections as a “gateway” into San Bernardino and urged that repaving reach into adjacent jurisdictions where maintenance is needed.
Clarifying details cited in the meeting: - Staff said some segments previously received paving and that the current work would complete gaps (for example, repairing from Malburning to Pearl Street was described as outstanding in the presentation). - Funding: staff mentioned a local financing availability figure cited in the presentation as about $7.2 million for selected projects, with approximately $1.2 million identified as locally available in the near term (figures from the presentation slide; councilmembers asked for schedules and funding details).
No formal council vote on specific street contracts is recorded in the transcript excerpt; staff asked for council input and said project schedules would be provided to the council.
