Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 10/30/2009 *PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at the Workshops,Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council. nib GLEND�,E MINUTES OFF THE GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP SESSION Council Chambers —Workshop Room 5850 West Glendale Avenue October 20, 2009 1:30 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Manuel D. Martinez, and Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet, Yvonne J. Knaack, and H. Phillip Lieberman ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City Manager; Craig Tindall, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City Clerk 1. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: ARRA TRANSPORTATION FUNDING UPDATE— 30 MINUTES CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Jenna Goad, Intergovernmental Programs Administrator; Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager; and Jamsheed Mehta, Transportation Director This is an update for the City Council regarding current transportation topics being discussed by the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and the Valley Metro Regional Public Transit Authority (RPTA). Actions taken by the MAG and the RPTA have an impact on the City's public transit and street transportation programs. One of Council's goals is to provide high quality services for citizens. Quality public transit service and street transportation programs are provided in Glendale through funding from the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and GO (Glendale Onboard)Program. In February 2009, Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) federal stimulus package. Through ARRA, transportation funding was provided to both the MAG and the RPTA for freeway, transit, and local street projects. Funding was originally allocated by the MAG Regional Council and RPTA Board of Directors in March 2009. 1 Glendale secured $6.05 million in ARRA funding for "shovel-ready" street transportation projects through an allocation by the MAG. At this time, Glendale expects to fully utilize its share of the ARRA funds. However, other cities may have project bids coming in lower than expected and some projects may not be able to obligate in time. Therefore, some ARRA funding may be freed up for use on other street transportation or transit projects. Per federal requirements, the funding must be obligated by March 2010. Depending on the amount of available funds, Glendale will identify projects that will be ready to be obligated within this short turnaround time. ARRA Funds for Glendale street transportation projects will benefit pedestrian-bicycle connectivity, provide for pavement preservation, modernize traffic signals and provide signal/ITS connectivity, and provide lane markings on arterial roadways. Various public meetings were held to gather citizen input in developing the plans prior to the elections for both the GO Program in 2000 and the RTP in 2004. Any additional ARRA funds received by the City could be used for additional street transportation projects or to support transit services. Staff is requesting guidance from Council to continue working with the MAG and the RPTA to allocate any unobligated ARRA stimulus funding in a way that is most beneficial to Glendale. Ms. Jenna Goad, Intergovernmental Programs Administrator, introduced this item. She stated that in February 2009, the President and Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) federal stimulus package. A total of$299 million was provided for the Maricopa County region, of that amount, $129 million went for freeway projects here in the valley. Additionally, $105 million was allocated for local transportation projects and the remaining $65 million was designated for transit projects. Mr. Jamsheed Mehta, Transportation Director, stated that MAG's distribution of the recovery funds for freeway improvements included the Union Hills traffic interchange, segments of I-17, I-10 and US 60, in the west valley. In addition, for local transportation projects, MAG decided to split the $105 million by population share of the jurisdiction involved, with a minimum guarantee of at least 1/2 million for small cities. Glendale received $6.05 million from MAG for local transportation projects including, traffic signals, ITS projects, pavement preservation and markings, and for the multi-use bridge at Loop 101 & 63rd Avenue. The city of Glendale also received $728,575 directly from ADOT for Old Roma Alley improvements. Councilmember Clark remarked that she was very interested in the transit portion and asked if any funding would be allocated for bus stops. Mr. Mehta explained these projects had to be capital projects of significance. He stated the projects had to be "shovel-ready"; therefore, bus stop projects were not considered because of their long time frame. Councilmember Clark asked if these projects were not considered because they had not been developed in advance and would not meet the three year time frame. Mr. Mehta stated she was correct. 2 Vice Mayor Martinez asked for additional details on the Loop 101 and the Union Hills project interchange. Mr. Mehta indicated this project was tied to the Beardsley Connector project, also an ADOT project. He stated this project will impact Loop 101 from approximately east of 75th Avenue and south of Union Hills. They will also widen the existing bridge for additional thru and turn lanes. Councilmember Goulet inquired if any of the funding could go to existing or reduced projects or was this strictly for new projects. He stated it made sense to keep existing projects moving instead of constantly breaking new ground. Mr. Mehta asked Ms. Goad to explain. Ms. Goad indicated that at the time the funding was passed, it did have to be used for capital projects; however, after it was passed, there was additional clarification that it could be used to support transit operations. Mr. Mehta continued his presentation. He discussed the $6.05 million from MAG for local transportation projects. He reported on traffic signal modernization, pavement presentation projects and pavement marking projects around the city. He indicated that areas of the pavement markings will be done in plastic, therefore extending the marking life for five years. He also provided information on the pedestrian bicycle project over Loop 101. Councilmember Clark inquired about what would be done to the old traffic signals. Mr. Mehta explained that revamping the old system did not mean a break-down of the infrastructure, but rather changes to the computer system to modernize it. Vice Mayor Martinez asked if the pavement preservation markings had been identified. Mr. Mehta stated the areas were Glendale Avenue, 55th to 56th Avenue and Litchfield Road from Northern Avenue, south of Missouri. He noted the list of projects uses up the $6.5 million. Vice Mayor Martinez remarked that if any funding was left, he would like staff to look at 75th Avenue, north of Utopia. Mr. Mehta stated it was still a possibility it could be done because of the unobligated funding left. Councilmember Clark asked what was being accomplished at the Old Roma Alley that was so expensive. Mr. Mehta indicated it included paving the entire length of the alley from Glendale Avenue north, to Glenn Drive. In addition, it includes removing all utilities and placing them under ground, adding benches and integrating it with the existing shaded passageway that connects 58th Avenue to the alley way. Mayor Scruggs asked who was responsible for keeping the pedestrian walk-way clean. Mr. Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager, stated it was the responsibility of the Glendale Field Operations Right of Way Division. Mayor Scruggs asked how often Glendale staff visited the walk-way. Mr. Reedy said he would find out. Mayor Scruggs stated it was important to keep these walk- ways clean in order to attract tourists and show-off the city. Councilmember Lieberman inquired as to the fountain in the courtyard that had not been used in years. He suggested fixing the fountain and adding night lights to enhance the area. He also inquired about the bridge at Loop 101 and its status. Mr. Mehta explained that there had been many delays; however, it was now at a point where designs were complete and were going out for bids. He noted that ADOT had approved the plans. 3 Councilmember Frate commented on GO funds being replaced by federal funds. He asked if staff had any project plans for the extra GO funding. Mr. Mehta explained that this replacement of funds had come at a good time when funding was low because of the economy. He added this gave them the opportunity to balance the 25 year program which affects the bond rating. He noted that as soon as there was any savings, it was used to obtain a good bonding rate. Ms. Goad continued with the presentation. She stated all funding must be obligated by March 2010. She explained that across the valley, construction bids were coming in below what was expected due to the favorable bid climate, as well as some projects not ready to be completed by the deadline. Therefore, MAG estimates $10-30 million left unobligated and RPTA estimates theirs to be $5-10 million left unobligated. She indicated this funding needed to be reallocated in order to meet the deadline. Mr. Mehta stated that Glendale staff was getting ready to identify projects that were "shovel- ready" and quick to maneuver though the review process. He explained they will be focusing on three types of projects for this funding. Unobligated funding can be used in Glendale for additional signals/ITS equipment, reduce local match or transit operations and maintenance. Mayor Scruggs asked how long the funding will last if used for transit operations. Mr. Mehta indicated they will be taking one-time savings from the capitol side and putting it toward the existing budgeted operations side and possibly for other projects. Mayor Scruggs noted she believed some of that money would be used for existing bus routes. Mr. Mehta indicated that existing bus routes were already funded. Mayor Scruggs asked for clarification if this one-time money will be used to fund on-going projects such as bus operations. Mr. Reedy clarified that what they were doing was using one-time federal money to substitute for GO transportation money for only that year, thus, freeing up money for small projects that were one-time expenses. He added this was a flexible way to accomplish projects not "shovel-ready" with the city's own money. Councilmember Clark agreed it was a good strategy. She noted she would like some of this money to go to bus shelters, especially in west Glendale. She also suggested some GO funding go to repair more streets. She explained it was the one thing everyone notices and complains about. She added she could not think of another greater direct benefit to the citizens of Glendale than seeing streets repaired in some way. Ms. Goad stated that MAG and RPTA have not yet determined how these funds will be allocated. She said they will formally vote on their preferred priorities for this funding next month. Mayor Scruggs asked Ms. Goad to explain and clarify the vote that will take place at MAG and RPTA to dispel any rumors. Mr. Goad stated the MAG Transportation policy committee will be meeting tomorrow to vote on an item to instruct staff to look into priorities for how this funding could be obligated. She noted there were four different categories put forth, including giving money back to the local jurisdictions and transit projects. The RPTA meeting will be held on Thursday for information and discussion only. Councilmember Frate inquired as to the status and results of a street overlay survey that was done by the city. Mr. Reedy indicated he believes the study was almost complete and the report 4 was being finalized. He added that once the report was completed, they will be bringing it to Council. He stated it was going to be a challenge to figure out how to implement the findings with the current funding. However, the sophisticated analysis has given them a very clear picture of the exact quality of each road way segment. Councilmember Frate agreed. He remarked that this will give them a clear picture of the conditions of the street, He believes money will be better spent when having all the data available to be able to make good and informed choice. Vice Mayor Martinez asked if they will be setting new priorities once the analysis was competed and if so, will that move some projects down the list. He noted this might cause some concern for the areas that had been waiting a long time for repairs. Mr. Reedy remarked he was sure that Council would want to address the areas that were most in need as per the survey. He indicated that some projects will need to be moved down the list simply because of the current economy. Mayor Scruggs commented that as projects were being delayed because of funding problems or higher priorities, staff should keep the Council informed. They in turn can keep their constituents informed on what the city has decided and why. Councilmembers may also decide on how funds can be used in their districts. Mr. Reedy agreed. He stated staff will be working with the city manager to bring this back to Council once the study and reviews are completed. He noted that any decisions made prior to this study will have to be re-evaluated. In addition, the city would have to see how much money was available and how to use it to the best advantage. Mayor Scruggs remarked that it sounds like this dilemma had two parts to it. One was the projects that will have to be delayed because of no available funding. The second part is the analysis of the study results. She suggested staff inform the Council of any projects that were being delayed because of no funding. Council will wait to be told about the projects being delayed because of the study when it comes to them for review. Mayor Scruggs commented it was nice to know there was some additional money available with the unobligated funds. As there are no other agenda items, Mayor Scruggs adjourned the public workshop. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m. 5