Wednesday, December 03, 2014
 
sponsored by

City to invest $78K in downtown beautification projects

Send a link to a friend  Share

[December 03, 2014]  LINCOLN - On Monday evening, the Lincoln City Council approved a motion to spend $78,928 for decorative lighting for the ongoing downtown beautification projects.

To date, the city has been able to implement new streetscape plans on the south side of Pulaski Street on the downtown courthouse square. The lighting purchase would include fixtures for that one block, plus fixtures that would be needed to complete future projects.

When the downtown revitalization steering committee proposed the renovation of the one block of Pulaski, they were instructed to keep their budget within the confines of the remaining dollars of the revitalization grant received from the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity. In order to do this, the committee had to cut out the decorative lighting they wanted for the project.

At the first workshop meeting of the City Council on November 12, city administrator Clay Johnson and Mayor Keith Snyder discussed with aldermen a means by which the city could pay for the lighting.

Snyder advised the aldermen that the agreement with the state to permanently close the Pekin Street railroad crossing at the depot will generate dollars for the city. In addition, Johnson said the city’s General Obligation Bond funds, which can only be used for capital projects could also be used to pay for the lighting.

The purchase, if made, would include lighting for all four sides of the square, plus for the block along the soon to be constructed Lincoln Grand 8 Theater. In addition, Snyder said the city was hoping to work with the county to add a fourth sidewalk at Scully Park, change some of the parking there to angle parking. The city would also then place the matching, decorative parking at Scully.

The original proposal was made for Metal halide lighting with a total cost of just over $63,000.

Questions were raised about why the city was looking at metal halide over LED. The immediate answer was budget constraints. While the LED may be the light of the future, the cost on that lighting would run about $20,000 more than the Metal Halide.

After some discussion, Johnson said he would put together some more comprehensive research on the two types of lighting and bring a report back to the council.

On November 25th, Johnson presented the comparisons to the council.

The cost of the metal halide lighting would amount to just over $63,000, and the cost of the LED would come to approximately $80,000. The life of a metal halide light is estimated at 15,000 hours or approximately three and one-half years. The life of the LED light is estimated at 50,000 hours or approximately 11.5 years.

Johnson said in comparing the energy savings of LED over metal halide, the city would earn back the difference in the cost of the two types of lighting in about eight years. The energy savings for the remaining life of the bulbs could then be considered money in the bank.

[to top of second column]

As the topic was discussed, Tom O’Donohue wondered what the future of metal halide lighting would be. He said that he was concerned about eventually ending up in the same situation the city found itself in with the downtown traffic control lights, in that modern technology would make the metal halide obsolete.

Johnson concluded that indeed LED was the way of the future for street lighting. Johnson also commented on the project-on-the-whole saying the city was creating a model for the future. He suggested they would want that model to be the best it could be.

O’Donohue also commented on getting it done right the first time so there would not be a need later to upgrade what is purchased now. He said he wanted to see the city invest in something that would work for the long term and not something that they knew would have to be fixed or upgraded.

Melody Anderson commented on the lighting from a financial viewpoint. She said that she felt the city should be looking at long term savings. While the LED is more expensive now, in the long run, this type of lighting would pay for itself in a relatively short period and then would save the city money in the future.

This week before voting on the lighting, Johnson said he had spoken with the vendor the city had chosen to purchase the lights from. Johnson had asked if the vendor thought this was the best price the city could get on the LED. As a result of that conversation, the vendor came down $1,200, bringing the exact cost of all the lighting the city will require down to $78,928.

In the end, the motion to purchase the LED lighting was made by O’Donohue with the second coming from Anderson. The motion was amended by Marty Neitzel to make a purchase foregoing the bidding process. The motion passed unanimously with seven members of the council present; Anderson, Michelle Bauer, Scott Cooper, Kathy Horn, Neitzel, O’Donohue, and Jonie Tibbs. Alderman Jeff Hoinacki was absent for the evening.

[Nila Smith]

< Top Stories index

Back to top