Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Infrastructure Sidewalks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tables Highland Street sidewalk amendment after cost, utility and data gaps
Summary
Tri-County technical committee tabled a proposed Highland Street sidewalk amendment after presenters and members flagged large cost increases, previously unknown underground utilities and missing pedestrian-use data; the project team was asked to return with unit-cost breakdowns, student/pedestrian counts and clarified match commitments.
The Tri-County Regional Planning Commission technical committee on April 10 tabled a proposed amendment to fund construction of a Highland Street sidewalk, citing unresolved cost increases, utility conflicts and missing usage data.
The project team, represented by engineer John Cherry, said the estimate moved from a conceptual design to a full design after a new survey and geotechnical work revealed unexpected conditions. Cherry said the survey “revealed quite a few things that were not known previously,” and described a specific utility concern: “they don't have adequate information either about the line. They don't know the depth. They actually don't know the size because it's transite.” That uncertainty, Cherry told the committee, likely requires relocation or additional investigation and contributed to a higher construction estimate.
Committee members pressed for clearer itemization of cost growth. Kirk, a committee member, summarized the concern bluntly: “we're already triple the original estimate, half a million dollars to 1.8,” and asked how the increased funds would be provided. Staff and presenters confirmed that the TIP would fund construction phases while earlier design costs are borne by the municipality and school district; they also said the school has offered $50,000 toward the project.
Members asked for a written breakout separating pure inflation from newly discovered costs (walls, utility relocations, site work), per‑unit pricing for pervious concrete, and a final estimate of likely pedestrian and student users. Presenters agreed to supply a clearer comparison of the original estimate versus current costs and to provide finalized counts of students or anticipated pedestrians as a follow-up.
After an extended exchange, the committee determined it did not have sufficient information to renew its prior recommendation. Chair Andrew Bombberger proposed tabling the item so the project team could answer outstanding questions and coordinate with the township and school district; the motion to table carried by voice vote.
Next steps: the project team will produce the requested cost breakdowns and user estimates, re-engage with school and township officials on match commitments, and may return to the technical committee for reconsideration. The committee also offered to convene a small subcommittee to review the materials before the coordinating committee acts.
