Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - Citizens Transportation Advisory Commission - Meeting Date: 5/12/2016 MINUTES CITIZENS TRANSPORTATION OVERSIGHT COMMISSION 5850 West Glendale Avenue Glendale, Arizona 85301 City Hall, Room B-3 May 12, 2016 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Schmitt, Chair Don Brazier James Grose Frank Johnson Marie Nesfield Jack Nylund Roberta Podzius Gus Woodman MEMBERS ABSENT: John Geurs,Vice Chair Jeff McAffee OTHERS PRESENT: Jack Lorbeer, Transportation Planning Manager Purab Adabala, Senior Transportation Analyst Patrick Sage, Transportation Planner Trevor Ebersole, Interim Public Works Deputy Director- Transportation Max Morales, Streets Superintendent David Beard, City Engineer Jack Friedline, Director of Public Works Alan Galicia, ITS Analyst Aaron Vix, Heinfield, Meech & Co. Larry Aldrich, BCA Watson Rice LLP I. Call to Order Chair Schmitt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Chair Schmitt introduced a new Commissioner, Marie Nesfield, who was sworn in at the April 26, 2016 City Council meeting. II. Approval of the Agenda Chair Schmitt called for approval of the agenda for the May 12, 2016 CTOC meeting. ACTION BY CTOC: Approval of the agenda for the May 12, 2016 Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission as presented. (Motion: Commissioner Grose; Second: Commissioner Brazier; motion carried unanimously) 1 III. Approval of Minutes from April 7, 2016 Meeting Chair Schmitt called for approval of the minutes. ACTION BY CTOC: Approval of the minutes from the April 7, 2016 meeting of the Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission as written. (Motion: Commissioner Woodman; Second: Commissioner Brazier; motion carried unanimously) IV. Call to the Audience No comments. V. Commissioners and Staff Updates Commissioner Woodman announced that there was no Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting in April due to lack of quorum. VI. Manager's Report Mr. Lorbeer provided a status update/information on the following topics: • North Glendale Park & Ride • West Phoenix/Central Glendale HCT Study • Myrtle Avenue Improvements • Grand Canal Multi-Use Path • Northern Parkway • Speed Limit Memo • Glendale Family Bike Ride Chair Schmitt commented that on Cactus Road, at 51St Avenue, the speed limit changes from 45 mph on the City of Phoenix side to 40 mph on the City of Glendale side. Chair Schmitt stated that drivers may not readily note the change and this could be viewed as a speed trap. Commissioner Podzius stated that by Arrowhead Elementary School, at Union Hills and 75th Avenue, the speed limit was 15 mph but was changed to 30 mph. Commissioner Podzius noted that some drivers go through this area at 50 mph. Commissioner Podzius asked staff to look into this issue. Commissioner Wood suggested that this is an enforcement issue and the police need to be involved. Commissioner Woodman also suggested that higher fines would keep more drivers from speeding in school zones. Chair Schmitt thanked Mr. Lorbeer for the report. VII. Glendale Pavement Management Program— Project Update Mr. Friedline, Mr. Ebersole, Mr. Morales and Mr. Beard gave a presentation on the Pavement Management Program, which included the following information: • Glendale Roadway Network • Managing the Network— Pavement Life Cycle Curve • Street Network Average Pavement Condition Index (PCI)—City of Glendale • Work completed during FY2014-2016 • Spending History and Proposed Funding • Plan Breakdown by Street Segment Type— FY2017-2021 2 • 10-Year Impact Mr. Friedline commented that staff has been working on this pavement plan for over a year and this presentation has been given to City Council as well. Mr. Friedline noted that City street maintenance crews can perform routine repairs; however, contractors are used for large projects. Mr. Friedline added that in the economic downturn, some employees were laid off who performed pavement monitoring and repair work. Mr. Friedline has requested two extra services workers and an extra dump truck for performing City-delivered pavement maintenance. Mr. Friedline added that a $7 million contract for mill and overlay bidding will be brought to the Council in June; however, bonds will also be required for much of the street reconstruction that needs to be performed over the next several years. Commissioner Nylund inquired if Council received a list of targeted streets. Mr. Friedline replied that the Council received the details in the pavement management plan. Mr. Ebersole explained the uses and life cycle of slurry seal and noted that a road could last 30 years with three separate applications of slurry seal at about the 7 to 10 year mark. Chair Schmitt agreed and added that larger cracks must be addressed immediately. Mr. Morales commented that not long ago the streets maintenance department had 46 staff and 27 pieces of equipment, and now there are only four staff members and eight pieces of equipment. Mr. Morales explained that even with those limited resources, staff last year filled 11,000 potholes. However, they are addressed on a reactive basis (i.e. residents call in to report potholes) as there is not enough staff to be proactive. Mr. Morales reported that last year staff completed 52,100 square feet of localized asphalt repairs and 4,000 square feet of concrete repairs. Mr. Morales praised the excellent job done by staff. Commissioner Nylund wondered if the department has considered partnering with a local college for interns for the paving projects. Mr. Morales replied that since the crew is working in traffic, there is a safety issue to the paving projects that would make using interns problematic. Commissioner Johnson asked for the phone number to report potholes. Mr. Morales provided the phone number for the Pothole and Maintenance Hotline (623-930-2670) and explained that calls are responded to within 24 to 48 hours. Commissioner Podzius suggested including the Hotline information in the city water bill that is distributed to all water customers in the city. Commissioner Podzius praised staff for quickly resolving issues which she reported at 75th Avenue south of Highway 101. Mr. Ebersole encouraged all residents to call the Hotline and report items needing attention. Chair Schmitt inquired about traffic control procedures while a crew is fixing a pothole or making an asphalt repair. Mr. Ebersole stated that crews use "arrowboards" for work at a location lasting less than 60 minutes; however, a lane closure is required for in-street work that lasts longer than one hour, which is the standard safety procedure per the Phoenix Barricade Manual and Citywide Barricade Ordinance. Commissioner Nylund stated that most citizens probably do not realize how many potholes are filled by only four staff members and suggested getting the word out on that accomplishment. 3 Commissioner Johnson inquired as to the party responsible for the ingress and egress ramps along the freeway (SR101). Mr. Morales explained that ADOT is responsible for the ramps. Commissioner Johnson commented that there are gaps where the street pavement meets the ramp pavement. Mr. Adabala suggested that this could be an issue with expansion joints, and noted that some expansion joints have been addressed but more work may need to be done. Chair Schmitt inquired if there were incentives built into the paving contract. Mr. Beard replied in the negative and stressed concerns regarding quality of the work versus a contractor pushing to meet incentives. Chair Schmitt stated that he had success with various types of incentive contracts and would be happy to meet with Mr. Beard to discuss options. Commissioner Brazier inquired if the surface of all streets will be the same once all of the improvements are completed. Mr. Beard explained that the type of work is performed results in somewhat different road surfaces because the materials processes vary. But generally the final surfaces should appear very similar to the public. Chair Schmitt inquired about any recycled asphalt policy (RAP). Mr. Beard explained that in a recent contract, the recovered asphalt for use in the RAP is owned by the City and is stored at the land fill to be used where possible. Mr. Friedline stated that the department uses all the millings it recovers. Chair Schmitt thanked staff for the presentation. VIII. Bell Road Corridor Regional Coordination Mr. Galicia gave a presentation on the regional coordination efforts for traffic management along the Bell Road Corridor. Highlights included the following information: • Coordinating Agencies • Prior and Ongoing Coordination Actions • Bell Road Coordination Committee • Bell Road Corridor Operations Plan • ITS Implementations—City of Glendale • Photos • Signal Timing Projects Mr. Galicia explained that the adaptive system can detect cars in real time and a real controller will manage the traffic signals. Mr. Galicia noted that the cost for the system is approximately $50,000 to $60,000 per intersection and therefore, only four intersections will be done at this time in Glendale due to budget constraints. Mr. Galicia added that due to use, Bell Road will still be over capacity; however, the adaptive system will help abate traffic congestion in real time. Mr. Galicia noted that if the system works successfully, more funds will be requested to install the system at the eight additional intersections along Bell Road in Glendale. Commissioner Podzius inquired as to when the installations would begin. Mr. Galicia replied that the project is slated for FY16-17. 4 IX. Go Program Audit Mr. Adabala introduced Aaron Vix, Heinfield, Meech & Co., and Larry Aldrich, BCA Watson Rice LLP, who presented the findings of the GO Program Performance Audit for FY2012-2014. Mr. Adabala announced that the agenda item was originally slated for action at the May 12 meeting. However, a few management responses to audit questions are pending, and therefore this item was presented for information and discussion only during that meeting. Mr. Aldrich and Mr. Vix presented the following outcomes of the Five Major Audit Tasks 2012-14: • Task 1: Are Project Commitments to Voters Being Met? o Recommendations GO Transportation Program Management should consider delaying those projects or services not specifically identified in the 2001 Ballot Measure to be completed within five years in order to move completion of the promised projects forward. Federal, State or regional matching funds should be part of this consideration. • Task 2: Is the CTOC Meeting Voter Commitments? o Observations ■ The CTOC is meeting its legal requirements and is effectively serving the public interest. ■ The CTOC provides and important focus for transportation issues and projects that could not be provided by the City Council or other body. ■ The members have widely varying backgrounds bringing a depth of perspective to their deliberations. ■ The CTOC provides an important role in ensuring original voter commitments are being met and that future program and project changes are consistent with the original intent of the ballot measure. • Task 3: Summary of the City's Financial Audits o Observations ■ Overall, the financial health of the GO Program looks strong with adequate fund balance to support the programs and projects planned. Revenues versus expenditures, budget versus operating revenues and other financials for FY2011- 12 though FY2013-14 were displayed. • Task 4: Is the GO Program Addressed Fairly and Accurately in the City Financial Practices? o Observations ■ The City does not have written policies detailing the process for allocating interest among the participating funds. (It was noted that this has been resolved for FY2015 and forward.) ■ The City's Cost Allocation Plan did not follow cost allocation methods as recommended by GFOA's Cost Analysis and Activity Based Costing for Government. • Task 5: Is the 25-Year Program Financially Balanced and Based on Reasonable Estimates? o Observations ■ Revenue financial projections are reasonably stated. ■ The cost estimates and underlying assumptions are reasonable. ■ Other financial factors such as interest rates, bonding levels and inflation rates are reasonable. ■ The planned activity level is reasonable. 5 ■ The process by which the Schedule of Activity is adjusted in keeping with the intent of the voters. ■ The 25-Year Program is consistent with regional programs. The floor was opened for questions or comments. Commissioner Nylund inquired as to the level of sales tax revenues. Mr. Adabala stated that sales tax revenues have been increasing since the economic downturn and is near the past highest level. X. Future Agenda Items Commissioner Nylund commented that there is still an issue with homeless sleeping at bus stops, which he mentioned at the last meeting. Commissioner Nylund felt that this was an enforcement issue that needed to be addressed. Commissioner Woodman asked if the City was going to consider the installation of red light cameras. Mr. Lorbeer will follow up on the question as part of an upcoming meeting. Specific future agenda items requested by commissioners included: • Chair Schmitt requested an update on the Flashing Yellow Arrows. • A request was made for a field trip to the Glendale Transportation Management Center. XI. Next Meeting Time The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in Room B-3 in City Hall. XII. Ad'ournment Th- eeting was adjourned by consensus at 8:23 p.m. Tom Schmitt, Chair SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS Please contact transportation staff at (623) 930-2940 at least three (3) days prior to the meeting for special accommodations. Hearing impaired persons please use the Arizona Relay Service at 1-800-367-8939. 6