Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council authorizes work on Richwood Avenue after debate over chip seal vs. full reconstruction
Summary
After debate over cost and longevity, the council amended a staff recommendation and authorized budget authority for a full reconstruction estimate for Richwood Avenue, directing staff to return with geotechnical results and a refined estimate.
Fountain Hills council voted to authorize budget authority for a full reconstruction of Richwood Avenue after a lengthy debate over whether to use a chip-and-cape preservation treatment or pursue full rebuilding.
Street Superintendent Jeff Pierce told the council that a chip/cape approach (micro mill, crack sealing, chip seal and cape) was estimated at roughly $740,000 and has an expected service life of seven to 10 years. A full reconstruction, Pierce said, would have an estimated life of roughly 30 years but would require geotechnical investigation and additional planning; staff provided a preliminary reconstruction estimate (about $935,000 to $1.1 million) to frame the discussion.
Council members questioned the trade-offs. Some favored reconstruction for longer life and fewer repeat costs: "I'm still a supporter of reconstruction," Councilmember Watts said, noting a longer service life can deliver more value despite higher upfront cost. Others urged adherence to the BOSS/RAS data-driven selection process and warned against direct-selecting streets outside the previously prioritized list.
The council amended the motion to pursue reconstruction with geotechnical exploration and authorization for the funds necessary to proceed to design and solicitation; the amended motion passed by roll call (vote recorded as 5–0 for the amended reconstruction authorization). Staff said they will return in February with geotechnical results and final cost estimates and that choices about procurement (direct select, cooperative agreement, or public solicitation) would follow further analysis.
The council emphasized the item was intended to be in addition to previously programmed work driven by the pavement-management software and that some feeder roads in the neighborhood have already been addressed. No final construction contract was executed at the meeting; the action authorized the next step (reconstruction budgeting and geotechnical work).
