26.11.2012 Views

4 - City of Oxford

4 - City of Oxford

4 - City of Oxford

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

97768- IEFICNIMALUCINZ<br />

MINUTE BOOK No. 24, CITY OF OXFORD<br />

The answer to the other part <strong>of</strong> the problem with reference to maintenance<br />

<strong>of</strong> streets sounds perhaps formidable to begin with, but I believe if it is<br />

approached on a very logical basis, we can arrive at a solution which will be<br />

effective for <strong>Oxford</strong>. It is necessary for us to know what we have to maintain<br />

before it is possible to make any projection as to how it is to be maintained<br />

and what the costs <strong>of</strong> maintenance will be. On this basis, I would urge the<br />

street department to prepare an inventory <strong>of</strong> streets <strong>of</strong> <strong>Oxford</strong>, that such inven-<br />

tory include description <strong>of</strong> streets as to width and length and nature <strong>of</strong> sur-<br />

face and condition <strong>of</strong> surface. It is possible that some <strong>of</strong> this information<br />

may be available in relation to the efforts being made at updating the compre-<br />

hensive plan, but I believe this would be primarily an effort on our part alone<br />

to develop. It is desirable that this report should include also written recom-<br />

mendations from the <strong>City</strong> Engineer or street department regarding desirable fre-<br />

quency <strong>of</strong> improvement <strong>of</strong> surface on streets <strong>of</strong> different character, i.e., hot<br />

mix asphalt, cement, asphalt and slag, etc. It is suggested that the streets<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>Oxford</strong> be grouped in categories that would indicate need for immeidate re-<br />

surfacing within the years 1969 or 1970, those that would require re-surfacing<br />

within an intermediate time <strong>of</strong> 1971 or 1972, and those that would probably need<br />

resurfacing in 1973 or a later date. It is possible that there might be need<br />

for a category that would suggest change <strong>of</strong> type <strong>of</strong> surface for streets, possibl<br />

from asphalt and slag to hot mix asphalt.<br />

If the above study and classification is completed, it would be possible<br />

for us to project basic maintenance requirements in relation to present condi-<br />

; tions <strong>of</strong> streets, and it would also permit us to set up a plan <strong>of</strong> rotation <strong>of</strong><br />

streets maintenance. By doing this, we shouldbegin to maintain our streets on<br />

a preventive basis rather than waiting until there were enough complaints com-<br />

ing into <strong>City</strong> Hall with reference to a specific street to demand its repair.<br />

I would <strong>of</strong>fer another suggestion with regard to street department handling<br />

<strong>of</strong> problems or requests for solution to problems street related. I think that<br />

every complaint <strong>of</strong> request for aid regarding streets should be recorded in<br />

writing and that action taken or reply made should also be recorded in writing.<br />

Many <strong>of</strong> the complaints or reports <strong>of</strong> problems regarding streets I feel could be<br />

alleviated by the suggested program <strong>of</strong> preventive maintenance suggested previou-<br />

sly.<br />

I have some suggestions with regard to means <strong>of</strong> making it easier for a<br />

subdivider observe and comply with the suggestions <strong>of</strong> the subdivision. The<br />

! regulations suggest that the streets and services 'le installed to the specifi-<br />

cations required by or acceptable to the <strong>City</strong> Engineer. I most strongly urge<br />

81

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!