Serving Waitsburg, Dayton and the Touchet Valley
WAITSBURG – After hearing from Anderson Perry Project Manager Eric Zitterkopf, the Waitsburg City Council opted to stick with plans for just one sidewalk on the Main Street Bridge replacement.
The council was faced with the options of deciding between a one-sidewalk or two-sidewalk design now, or paying an additional $18,000 for two separate sets of plans and deciding later.
The original design plans submitted by Anderson Perry show one sidewalk, which is how the bridge plan currently stands. At community input sessions held earlier this year, citizens expressed a desire to have sidewalks running along both sides of the bridge.
Zitterkopf told the council that plans, which are 70% complete, could be adapted now to include a second sidewalk. However, if the council wanted to make the final decision down the road, a second set of plans would cost an additional $18,000 because the changes affect the overall alignment of the bridge.
“We initially thought it would be pretty simple to do an additional set of plans, but it essentially changes everything. Every sheet changes,” Zitterkopf said. “I need you to decide one way or another, or if you want both sets of plans, it will cost,” he added.
The proposed second sidewalk would run down the west side of the bridge and would add about $20,000 to the constructions costs. Construction is slated for the summer of 2017.
Council member Karen Gregutt asked if the bridge, as designed, is wide enough that a second sidewalk could be added at a later date. Zitterkopf said that it could, with some adjustments to the curbing and possible roadwork.
Council members said that, at this point, a second sidewalk would go nowhere, since there is nothing of interest located to the west of the bridge. They also commented that a wider bridge is safer and easier for large trucks to cross.
A motion was made to move forward with the Main Street Bridge replacement as proposed, without the addition of the second sidewalk. All but KC Kuykendall voted in favor of the motion.
Reader Comments(0)