Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 05/14/2012 - MINS 05 14 12 WS (Migrated from Optiview)Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 1 of 9 This summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media, and staff. It is not the intent to transcribe proceedings verbatim. Any reproduction of this summary must include this notice. Public comments are noted and heard by Council, but not quoted. This document includes limited presentation by Council and invited speakers in summary form. This is an official record of the Milton City Council Meeting proceedings. Official Meetings are audio and video recorded. The Work Session of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on May 14, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Mayor Lockwood presiding. Council Members Present: Councilmember Karen Thurman, Councilmember Matt Kunz, Councilmember Bill Lusk, Councilmember Burt Hewitt, Councilmember Joe Longoria and Councilmember Lance Large. Mayor Lockwood: • Work Sessions are an informal setting to update Council on business items. • No votes will be taken during these sessions. • There are two (2) items on our Agenda tonight. • Public comment is allowed that is germane to an Agenda Item. • If you wish to speak you are required to fill out a comment card and turn it into the City Clerk staff. • Public comment will be allowed for a total of 10 minutes per agenda item and no more than 2 minutes per person. • Public comment will be heard at the beginning of each Item. • Once the item is called, no other comment cards will be accepted. City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #1. 1. Update Regarding Transportation Federal Funding. (Presented by Carter Lucas, Public Works Director) Carter Lucas, Public Works Director: • Tonight, we wanted to go back through some of our federal funding projects. • We talked about this almost two years ago. • At that time, we talked about our High Priority Project funds (HPP). • These are funds that have been allocated to Fulton County to deal with congestion and projects near GA 400. • Those funds were turned over to the City of Milton when we incorporated. • They were allocated to a number of different projects. • That particular fund is being used for the project at 372 and New Providence, SR140 and New Providence, the Crabapple project, and the CTP. • The L230 funds are awarded by the ARC. • Since 2004, they have not had a call for projects. • This year they have done a call for projects on a limited scope. • Our discussion in 2010 started because we had an excess in funding in that particular account. • We had originally started with about $9.1 million dollars. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 2 of 9 • The allocations and funding left us with about $1.5 million that we were looking to apply to some other projects. • That original funding had six projects associated with it. • The CTP and three projects previously mentioned that we have underway. • Two projects at Freemanville and Providence and Bethany at Providence that were on the list but not funded under that. • So we looked at alternatives on how to fund that $1.5 million. • One alternative was to expand the Crabapple project. • When we originally started that project, it was the Mayfield/Broadwell project. • There was not a lot of definition to it but it had something to do with improvements at that intersection. • In that discussion, we wanted to assign some dollars to look at the overall Crabapple master plan and the transportation routes that were associated with that. • That is one of the things that we did. • We have been working on the northwest connector road which was part of the master plan. • That additional $1.5 million went toward that particular project. • One of the things we also talked about was the use of the HPP dollars to fund the roundabouts at 100%. • We have always had some discussion about GDOT's ability to fund those roundabouts at 100%. • It just wasn't possible with those HPP funds. • The funding for the roundabouts come out of the L230 funds so we weren't able to fund our local matches on the two roundabout projects with those funds. • We applied for some additional funds for the Crabapple project. • We looked at the Bethany at Providence which was originally a roundabout under Fulton County. • The Freemanville and Providence project which was originally a signal intersection under Fulton County. • Both of those projects started with some federal funds and were completed at least through preliminary plans until they stopped. • If you look at the presentation you have been given, the projects in grey are intersection projects and are locally funded. • So, the CTP has done a good job of addressing these intersections throughout the city. • The key intersections are: • Birmingham at Hopewell - we are getting ready to start into the design phase. • Cogburn at Bethany - we are getting ready to get underway with construction. • SRI 40 at Cox is one that the GDOT was working on. • Hopewell/Francis/Cogbum is one that we are working on locally and moving toward right- of-way acquisition. • Freemanville at Providence and Hopewell at Bethany are ones that we talked about last week that we are trying to work on the east/west connectivity. • Now that we have the school being built, which was not contemplated when the CTP was done, that intersection will be moving up on the list in the next year or two either through federal funding or local funding depending on what dollars are available. • The HPP funds were not permitted to be used at 100% for the roundabouts so we have proceeded with those projects with the 80/20 split we have been doing. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 3 of 9 • In order to move that to the L230 funds, these projects would have been delayed significantly and we did not want to do that. • We looked at the Crabapple project and we increased that funding to account for the northwest connector route. • We are still showing approximately $1 million HPP funds remaining. • As we work through construction, some of the local matches we are required to maintain because of the way GDOT calculates construction costs, some of that money is becoming real when we actually get to construction. • We have about $340,000 in excess local funds that we will be able to reallocate. • At this point, we are going to leave those dollars in those particular projects until we get through right-of-way acquisition to make sure those were budgeted appropriately. • We will be looking to get a final allocation on that $1 million, as well as, some of the additional local matches that we have. As we get closer to construction and get a finalized number on where we are as far as any additional funds that may be available in those accounts to allocate to other projects. • The other called for projects that we have recently received from ARC is for L230. • As I mentioned, it has been since 2004 since they have had a "called for" project on that. • It is a limited scope on this particular one so they really wanted the cities of North Fulton to get together and find some projects that would benefit the region. • Sara Leaders has been working on that so I will let her tell you about that process. Sara Leaders, Transportation Engineer: • For the past month, we have been working with the other North Fulton cities as ARC released this "called for" projects. • They have asked each county and North Fulton as a group to prioritize the list of projects for that area. • They are going to award a limited number of projects per county so they have said to limit the projects to about twenty for the whole area. • They are anticipating a future "called for" projects over the next couple of years so there will be a chance to prioritize the list again with the North Fulton cities. • We don't know if they will keep the criteria or dollar amounts for each program the same or the methods for selecting the projects. • For this first round, they are looking for projects that are shovel ready or some type of study that can be completed in about a year and a half from the award of projects. • North Fulton would have one prioritized list that we would submit to ARC. • There are four different funding programs: • Bike and Pedestrian • Freight: Operations and Safety • General: Operations and Safety • Transit • These projects can be infrastructure or studies but need to be able to be completed in a short time frame. • You have a map from the CTP in front of you. • I wanted to point out that the green lines are the minor arterial road classifications in the city which will be our higher volume roadways. • As you can see, most of the projects that are underway are along these routes. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 4 of 9 • The red circles are the projects that we have identified as potential projects for federal funding. • This map came out of ARC's program criteria for the L230 funds. • This shows the ARC's classification of roadways. • As you can see, there is a circle at the Hwy. 9 and Bethany intersection. • South of Bethany and Bethany Bend are classified as regional thoroughfares. • Hwy. 9 north of Bethany is a level 3 thoroughfare. • The other two projects are considered on minor roadways. • So, I would like to review the three projects we have identified for the use of federal funds. • Out of the LCI project, the idea for a supplemental study came out of the recommendations. • We started looking at potential improvements for Hwy. 9 at Bethany and through the LCI process we weren't able to really define what improvements we needed there so we thought this would be beneficial. • Freemanville at Providence was started by Fulton County and those dollar figures are what came out of the approved concept. • It is currently proposed as a traffic signal. • At that time, the criteria for roundabouts was different. • Most likely now, this area would meet the criteria for a roundabout. • It has an approved concept and environmental. • It is in the preliminary plan stage but would need to be reevaluated based on the new roundabout guidelines. • Bethany at Providence is in the same stage of planning. • It has an approved concept and environmental and those are the dollar figures that were in the concept report through Fulton County. • We have been working with the North Fulton cities, and based on the criteria for the "called for" projects, we feel like our best approach for getting a project selected is to first go after the concept study for Hwy. 9 at Bethany, secondly go after Freemanville at Providence and then lastly, Bethany at Providence. • To go back to the HPP projects, we would wait to see if one or more of our L230 projects received any funding and as we work through the Crabapple project to get the detailed cost estimates associated with that and then make any adjustments to the funding that is allocated for each phase of that project, then look to put the additional HPP funds to the two intersections. Carter Lucas: • We expect to hear from the ARC in July of this year regarding the L230 funds on whether or not we were able to fund the Bethany Bend/Hwy.9 study. Matt Kunz, Councilmember: • Is this when we can offer ideas for other projects as well? Carter Lucas: • We just wanted to come back to you after a couple of years and, from a staff standpoint, as we attend some of these meetings and they start to call for projects, our plan is to follow the approved plans, the CTP and any other LCI studies that may be out there and then bring them back to you just to make sure we are all on the same page. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 5 of 9 Lance Large, Councilmember: • Is the Bethany Bend/Hwy. 9 intersection study high on the list to at least do a study of possible realignment? Carter Lucas: • That is correct. • With the relatively short project duration that ARC placed on this particular "called for" projects, we felt like that was probably our best bet to be able to get that approved. Bill Lusk, Councilmember: • You mentioned the northwest quadrant of Crabapple. Carter Lucas: • The northwest connector road? Councilmember Lusk: • Yes. How about plans for the northeast and the southeast portions? Carter Lucas: • They are certainly in the master plan but not funded at this point. • We looked at both of those and the northwest connector was probably the most bang for our buck as far as transportation improvements and so we really focused our efforts on that. • The northeast connector is one that has the potential for some environmental issues with the historical house that sits at the end of Charlotte Road and so there would be extended delays in working with that permitting process. • After we finish the northwest connector project, that could certainly be an area that is looked at in the future. Councilmember Lusk: • What are your plans as far as timing? Carter Lucas: • The northwest connector goes to construction in 2014. • Once we get through the concept design and get a better handle on construction cost estimates so we know exactly what our excess funding is, that is when we would come back around and try to reallocate those funds. • Our initial thought on that would be to move them to current projects such as the Freemanville at Providence or the Bethany at Providence. • Since the northeast is federally funded, you encounter so many environmental issues and processes to go through that if you have local dollars to fund the project it is a much faster process. Karen Thurman, Councilmember: • I know we have money coming from different sources and we have to be careful which money we use for what because of the different rules related to it. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 6 of 9 • If the transportation TSPLOST passes, will it have some of these restraints to it or will it be more open about how we spend the money? I would really like to see an overall list of all the projects that we would like to get done. Carter Lucas: • The TSPLOST money is not considered federal dollars and so that money will be treated like local funds. • One of the projects that we have identified for this funding is the SRI 40 widening. • The remainder of the projects will be done through our discretionary funds which we could be seeing up to $750,000 per year. • At that point, we will be able to use that money as we see fit. • We are working right now on trying to put together a list of projects that would be suitable for that funding. • We would like to get some feedback from you tonight. • Since we have this option to do this, we can: • Use that money every year and focus on the intersection improvements. We can look at all the intersections and get them into design and construction as best we can. • Split that money up and do some intersection improvements, bridge projects, or trails. • It really just depends on how we want to use those dollars locally. • We would like your thoughts on this tonight. Councilmember Kunz: • I'm glad you mentioned the trails because I was wondering if this money had to be used just toward intersections because it would be nice to have trails and riding areas especially for the cyclists in this area. Another dangerous intersection is Hopewell and Redd Road. It is the same type of problem as Birmingham Road and Hopewell. Also, the Hopewell and Bethany area. Carter Lucas: • The Hopewell and Bethany area has been identified as an area that will move up from a concept design stage to try and address that east -west connectivity. Mayor Lockwood: • Are you asking us to look at different options then have staff come up with the final list of options? Carter Lucas: • That is correct. • We have a list of projects that cover all the different things that we can include. • The list is by no means a final list. • It can be changed at any time. • Because those discretionary funds are so important for a community like us, we don't have a lot of projects on the main regional list, it will be important for us to get that potential project list out there so people can see what improvements can happen at a local level not just on the regional level. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 7 of 9 • We were hoping to get a potential list of projects put together prior to the vote so we can demonstrate that there will be a lot of improvements locally not just under the whole regional aspect of the tax. • If we want to mix up that list, we can put that list together. • If we want to focus on one project and just try to fund the others locally that is also an option. Mayor Lockwood: • Do you want us to give you ideas of projects? Carter Lucas: • Not ideas of projects just if you want to see them all as intersection projects or a mix of intersection, trail, and bridge projects then we will put the list together. Mayor Lockwood: • Okay, I just wanted to understand what you were asking. Councilmember Thurman: • I personally think intersection improvements; moving traffic is what affects people the most. • If you would ask people what they are the most concerned about, most people would say they are concerned about intersections and traffic more so than bridges. • I think we would be better off funding the bridges through our own means and using this money for intersection improvements. • Let our citizens know that this money would be used for intersection improvements over the next ten years and this is what they would be. Carter Lucas: • Intersection improvements are certainly more visible projects. Councilmember Lusk: • I wouldn't minimize bridge projects. • There are several bridges out there that are marginal. Councilmember Hewitt: • Speaking of intersection improvements, when is our first round -about supposed to be functioning and will it be at Providence and 372? Carter Lucas: • The first one will probably be Hopewell/Francis/Cogburn. Councilmember Hewitt: • You know, I am not a fan of round -abouts so I would like to see one functioning before we put them in each intersection that has been proposed. Mayor Lockwood: • I am hearing that there are a lot of votes for intersections? Is there anything else anyone would like to recommend? Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 8 of 9 Carter Lucas: • Okay, we will push this in the direction of intersection improvements. City Clerk Gordon read Agenda Item #2. 2. Discussion of Assembling and Activating City of Milton Public Facilities Authority. (Presented by Ken Jarrard, Esq., Jarrard & Davis) Ken Jarrard, City Attorney: • As you know, in 2007 the City of Milton was granted a Public Facilities Authority. • However, you do not have an active Public Facilities Authority. • An issue has occurred that has triggered the need for your Public Facilities Authority to become active. • When we were renegotiating the lease for City Hall, an issue arose regarding the multi-year lease. • According to Georgia law, municipalities cannot enter into multi-year leases. • Commercial landlords do not like one year leases. • However, we can get help from our Public Facilities Authority to help us with this situation. • In other words, your Public Facilities Authority can enter into a lease with the landlord instead of the city since the PFA is not bound by the same restrictions as the city. • The PFA can enter into a sub -lease by way of an IGA through the City of Milton. • However, your PFA does not have the ability of the council to serve as the PFA. • In other words, you would need to appoint yourself to become the membership of the PFA. • This is quite common in Georgia. • So, my request is that you agree to appoint yourself to the membership of the PFA. Mayor Lockwood: • You indicated that this membership would be good for as long as a person is in office. What happens if someone gets elected that does not want to be a member of the P FA? City Attorney Jarrard: • You are authorized to appoint yourself to the PFA but you are not required to be a part of the PFA. • If an elected official does not want to be a part of it then he or she does not have to. Mayor Lockwood: • Is there any additional personal liability to elected officials as part of this membership? City Attorney Jarrard: • No. Lance Large, Councilmember: • Will the PFA meetings be separate from the council meetings? City Attorney Jarrard: 0 That will be up to you and will depend on how we set up the by-laws. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, May 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm Page 9 of 9 Councilmember Lusk: • So, the city is only allowed to go into a one year lease agreement but the PFA can go into a multi-year lease contract. What if the city decides they want to get out of a multi-year contract? Can the PFA get out of a multi-year lease agreement? City Attorney Jarrard: • No, you cannot break a lease agreement. Councilmember Lusk: • Are the PFA meetings subject to the open meetings act? City Attorney Jarrard: • Yes. Mayor Lockwood: • Is everyone on board with this? All Councilmembers: • Yes City Attorney Jarrard: • Okay, then I will proceed. After no further discussion, the Work Session adjourned at 6:58 p.m. Date Approved: June 4, 2012. Sudie AM Gordon, City Clerk