My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2000 01 18
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2000 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2000 01 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:45 PM
Creation date
1/30/2004 10:31:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
1/18/2000
Original Hardcopy Storage
7B6
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2000 01 18
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
proposed lighting. Red dots on the map indicated twenty-one lights required for <br />intersections per the P.U.D. He stated there would be parking lot lights at every parcel. <br />Mr. Lee added fewer green dots to the map, as an alternative to the more numerous red <br />dots required by the P.U.D. He asked for Council direction on the lighting plan. <br /> <br />Mayer stated his concern that there are more users, in addition to the industrial users at <br />CTC, and the lighting should be sufficient for people to safely find their way through the <br />park. He suggested that the lighting should be in a consistent pattern. <br /> <br />Levihn asked about'the distance between each light. <br /> <br />Lee stated from 270 to 280 feet, alternating from side to side. <br /> <br />Tom Phare, Director of Public Works, stated that public service requires that the City <br />have a minimum standard, which is typical of a collector street. He stated he was <br />referring to the thirty-two feet high, steel pole streetlight. He thought there might be a <br />way to compromise by looking at mast arm steel poles at the intersections, and lights that <br />are not as bright, nor as tall for some of the spacing. <br /> <br />Levihn suggested that Jon Lee and Tom Phare work on the project together. <br /> <br />Howard stated his concern that since the park is being upgraded, he did not want a park <br />situation that looked substandard. He was concerned that a substandard lighting situation <br />would set precedent and prompt other such requests. He thought that the lighting is an <br />upgrade from what is currently existing in the park. <br /> <br />Sisk asked about the cost difference of the lighting between the red and the green plan. <br /> <br />Lee stated that red plan calls for twenty-one lights, and the green plans calls for nine. <br />The cost for twenty-one lights is approximately seventy thousand dollars ($70,000) and <br />the cost for nine lights would be thirty thousand dollars ($30,000). He stated that it was <br />not a money issue. <br /> <br />Sisk stated that the issue is the ability to illuminate the streets and not illuminating the <br />CTC center. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that all the parking lot lights would contribute to the overall lighting of <br />the park. He stated that CTC is an industrial park, and there would be very little traffic at <br />night. He added that the developer pays to put the street lights in, but after that the City <br />is responsible for the cost. <br /> <br />Tom Phare, Director of Public Works, stated that the recently adopted standards provide <br />for zero light space at the lot line. In that respect there is not a light space on the street, <br />but there will be lights in the parking lot, however those lights will not extend to the <br />street. <br /> <br />14 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.