Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-02-2011 workshop minutes ".-, , city Council of Peachtree City Workshop Meeting Minutes August 2, 2011 The Mayor and Council of the City of Peachtree City met in a workshop session on Monday, August 2, 2011. Mayor Haddix called the workshop to order at 6:30 p,m. Other Council Members present: Vanessa Fleisch,'Eric Imker, Kim Learnard, and Doug Sturbaum. Staff present: City Manager Jim Pennington, Public Services Director/Stormwater Manager Mark Caspar, Police Chief Skip Clark, and City Engineer Dave Borkowski. The purpose of the workshop was fo discuss traffic concerns at Peachtree Parkway/Loring Lane (Kedron Hills) and the Dividend Drive pavement evaluation. Caspar began with an overview of how the transportation concerns of Dividend Drive and Cooper Circle were determined. Historically roads throughout the City were evaluated once every three years, resulting in a score between 1 to 100 to determine if the road needed to be repaved or overlayed. Normally anything with a score of 70 or below received priority and only selective milling was done if overlay had been done too many times. Caspar would like to begin prioritizing paving using road classifications as well. Higher priority would be given to collector and industrial-type roads. Typically residential or commuter traffic did not have as great of an impact on the road. The higher loads/volumes of the 18-wheeler and concrete trucks had a much greater effect of degradation of the roads. He felt that if a repair was needed and completed then staff could keep the road up. This would result in a better management of money. Dividend Drive was on the Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) list for the year as an overlay project, which just put Clsphalt on top but did not address the subgrade issues. Integrated Science and Engineering (Is E) and Piedmont Geotechnical were hired to evaluate the subgrade issue on this road beCause it was an industrial collector, had high traffic volume, a higher load, and this road was rated as the worst in the City at 59. Caspar stated that there was also a section of road on Cooper Circle that was degradated. This was the distribution area where trucks entered and exited. In addition, Sony would be coming on line at the end of the year so it was important to compiete the work prior to that time. Cooper Lighting shut down their distribution center two days a year in October so it would be important to coordinate the road closure with those dates to have a minimum disruption. Caspar added that ISE and Piedmont Geotechnical identified and evaluated pavement areas that showed distress. They looked at several possible solutions that would also allow for the Stormwater Department to look at the stormwater system underneath the roads to avoid additional repairs at a later time. r- There were 84 areas assessed on Dividend Drive. The findings ranged from moderate, damaged and full failure. Learnard asked that full failure be defined. Rich Gruel from ISE replied that full failure was basically the pavement separating, big cracks, ruts and large potholes. Caspar continued to state that issues were found on over 60% of the length of Dividend Drive. Thirty- eight core samples were also taken with only six of them appearing to be in good condition. Two samples were also taken from Cooper Circle and confirmed that the main stress was at the truck entrance. Caspar stated that, from the 40 locations tested, the areas varied widely. Seven locations were very weak, 10 locations were marginally weak and the remaining subgrade conditions were r- City Council Workshop August 2, 2011 Page 2 ranked as acceptable. Caspar wos surprised that in 23 of the 40 core locations, a stone base course was not encountered. Learnard asked who built the roads and how old were they. Caspar responded that staff had researched but had been unable to find when the road was overlayed. He also stated that an indicator of the age of the road was that Dividend Drive had been SR 74. There was an evidence of widening that had taken place. Caspar continued that, based on the data, three rehabilitation options were determined. The first option was to mill and top the road which would take off the existing asphalt and lay new asphalt. This would only be a cosmetic fix that would only last for three to five years. The second option was to cut and patch the road. This would involve saw-cutting the pavement. digging out and removing, then replacing with new material. This would provide a longer life of the patched area but the potential of weakening the surrounding areas might increase their weakening and require patching sooner. This would be a good option in a localized area such at Cooper Circle. The third and final option was a Full Depth Reclamation (FOR). During this process, the existing pavement would be milled and removed. The remaining asphalt, stone base and subgrade would be pulverized in place. A binder (cement) would be added depending on the condition. The mixture would be compacted providing a new roadway subgrade, which after the cement has cured, provided a new road surface. Casper went on to say that a new road would have a minimum life expectancy of 10 years. Sturbaum asked if this would be a stronger foundation for the heavy trucks. Caspar responded that it would be designed to have an adequate base to bridge the heavy loads. An example of an FOR was Redwine Road which was completed a few years ago. Casper stated that. based on the work needed, three rehabilitation cost options had been determined. The first option was for Dividend Drive to Paschall Road to SR 74 with a cost of $1,048.408. Option two was Dividend Drive to Paschall Road to SR 74 with the cut and patch at the cost of $835,607. Cooper Circle adjacent to the truck entrance at Cooper Lighting with the cut and patch would be a cost of $31,324. Option three was for Dividend Drive to Paschall Road to Kelly Drive for an FDR would be a cost of $190,179. Dividend Drive to Kelly Drive to TDK Boulevard for an FDR would be a cost of $787,316 and Dividend toTDK Boulevard to GA Hwy 74 for an FOR would be a cost of $451,209. There would be an additional $121,000 needed for required stormwater work at Paschall Road and Dividend Drive along with drainage system at TDK Boulevard that would be paid for from the Stormwater Utility. Caspar said staff recommended to cut and patch Cooper Circle and perform the FDR on Dividend Drive. He felt that these options would be the best time value. Casper stated that two large Dividend Drive contracts were previously brought before Council in the last two years. There was remaining money in the amount of approximately $150,000 along with other funds to offset the cost. He also stated that there was $2.418,288.59 left in SPLOST that was only allocated for road repairs and did not include line items for cart path paving. In addition, if the FDR proceeded with the full road, the total would be approximately $1.460,028 which included curbs, gutters and striping. Over $1,000,000 would be leftover for the 2012 list. The estimate for 2012 was below that estimate and roads would be looked at with the new process. He stated that FDR would not be needed for all road projects; it would be on a case- by-case basis. Sturbaum asked how long the project would take to be completed. Gruel responded that FOR -. would take a couple of days and would have no real impact to industry. In addition the road , could be used after it set, but would not be smooth until the overlay was completed. City Council Workshop August 2, 2011 Page 3 ~ Haddix stated that he was not a fqn of disturbing a structure or road and felt that the FDR was the right choice. Learnard asked to be reminded what FDR stood for and how deep did it go. Caspar responded that FOR meant Full Depth Reclamation and it was 12 inches deep. Sturbaum asked if staff would identify the industries affected like the UPS Distribution Center and the time. Caspar confirmed that when staff received the direction to move forward they would coordinate with anyone that would be impacted. Learnard asked with the rating system, what else could be expected with the road assessment. Caspar stated that a geotechnical evaluation would not be done on every road. Statf's intent was to not let the roads get to a rating like that of Dividend Drive. Once the road was in good shape, staff could keep it in good shape. Learnard inquired as to what the urgency was now, would this be a City liability in a week, a winter, when was it enough. Caspar responded that when an evaluation says full failure that should be enough. Learnard responded that she drove down Dividend in her tiny Honda and felt the road was fine. Caspar stated that if one was to walk behind a truck and felt the road moving that showed the problem with the support. Caspar stated that one would not want their home to be on a bad foundation and the same should be for a road. Borkowski stated that staff wanted to address this while the money was available. If the City waited five years from now to try to get another SPLOST, the road would be in worse condition and the cost to repair would be higher. In addition the Industrial Park was the City's economic engine and staff was hoping to keep the road good so that it could possibly spur development. r Fleisch asked if Sany would be using Dividend. Caspar replied that he did not know. Gruel stated that the failure point of a road was not the problem but what became an unacceptable road. Potholes could be filled frequently, but would result in additional costs and maintenance. Scott Edwards from Piedmont stated that if the repairs were not made sooner than later the subgrade would be damaged, which would result in the need for a full replacement. Imker stated that he had driven the road in both directions and found that the southern portion, which was between TDK Boulevard and SR 74, was not as bad off as the rest of Dividend Drive. He felt that the southern section could last another five years. Imker stated that he did agree that an FOR was needed for the Kelly Drive and Paschall Road section. The areas should be evaluated separately. He also felt that the repairs to Cooper Circle were no problem. Gruel stated that the roads were proken down in different groups because they had different design standards. TDK Boulevard to SR 74 did not have the amount of volume as the other roads and could be reevaluated. Council agreed that Cooper Circle was the most time sensitive issue and needed to go forward. Mary Giles asked if Sany had given any indication what route their trucks would take. She saw one on SR 54 West coming back towards Peachtree City. If these improvements were made, she asked if Sany would want to use that as alternate route from their plant as opposed to going up SR 74 and cutting across the 74/54 intersection. Imker stated that would not be an advantage for them. Giles asked if the volume and direction could be questioned. Haddix stated that he did not remember the total but it was not a monstrous amount since part was by rail, straight truck, and normal travel. Giles also asked if an addition of a multi use path had City Council Workshop August 2, 2011 Page 4 ~ been discussed as well as widening the road. Borkowski replied that widening was not taking place, only the repair of the existing road. Haddix asked what the logic for repairing the whole road was. Gruel replied that there was enough damage to over half of the road. Cut and patch could be done but in the end the City would spend more money than doing an FOR. Gruel said that he would look at the findings again. Caspar said to recap -staff would clarify with Sany the route they would take to transport to and from their location. In addition, they would provide a cost assessment to provide a cut and path or overlay in the southern section. Imker replied there was no need to touch that area; just keep the good good. Caspar asked if he thought the best option was to leave it alone. Imker said keep it good with possibly a repave and go forward with Cooper Circle. Borkowski came forward to discuss Jraffic concerns at Peachtree Parkway and Loring Lane and Tinsley Mill on the north end of town. Also Ron Osterloh of Pond and Company, the consultants, was present. Borkowski stated that both Loring Lane and Tinsley Mill were on the original 2004 SPLOST list. The idea was to provide left turn lanes for southbound travelers to turn for level of service purposes. Borkowski stated that, in the 2010 Transportation Plan, Loring Lane was listed as. a major accident location. Eleven accidents took place at Tinsley Mill and 13 at Loring Lane with a predominance of those being rear-end collisions. He admitted that the volume did meet the design guidelines for turn lanes but he felt that the turn lanes would increase the speed on the Parkway where ~ drivers would not have to slow down. Borkowski stated that staff had worked with Pond and Company to come up with alternatives. An option was a paved shoulder for drivers to go around, an all way stop and a compact roundabout as a traffic calming fElature. Other typical options were narrowing the lane, or doing a combination of turn lane and traffic calming. Sturbaum asked how the visibility was for Loring Lane to turn left. Borkowski replied that trees had been trimmed in various locations along the Parkway and that he believed that site distance had been met for the posted speed limit. Borkowski showed various concepts and stated that, if a compact roundabout was used, it was typically 40 - 50 feet wide versus a traditional roundabout being 80 - 100 feet wide. There was also the consideration of median islands that could be landscaped with grass or small shrubs. Osterloh stated that locations would be chosen to slow down through traffic before reaching the intersection Borkowski also presented photos from a Gwinnett County location. Osterloh stated that he did not recommend any device that needed mowing. Borkowski stated that another reason of not installing left turn lanes on Peachtree Parkway was because that was designated as a scenic route. Staff has tried to preserve the character on the Parkway and preserve the green belts. A three-way stop could even cause significant backups during peak travel time. Imker asked if there were any numbers showing the success rate of the calming devices. _ Osterloh responded that there were national studies available but he would contact Gwinnett to see if they had accumulated any data. City Council Workshop Augusf 2, 2011 Page 5 ~ Sturbaum asked if signs would be installed to let the driver know what calming device they were approaching. Borkowski replied yes, advanced warning signs would be installed. Borkowski recommended the option of installing medians as a traffic calming device in the center of the road. Left turn lanes could be installed in the future if needed. The cost would be approximately $68,000. In addition, the funds could come from the SPLO$T funds which could be taken from the Redwine and Robinson Road intersection project. Currently $110,000 was budgeted for design. Sturbaum asked Chief Clark what the Police Department's response was to the options. Clark felt that traffic calming medians/devices were effective at first but once a driver became familiar with the road their speed would increase. Fleisch asked if signs would work but Clark responded that signs did not work once drivers become immune to the visual trash. A resident of Kedron Hills stated that he doubted turn lanes would work. He considered rumble strips but the homeowners would complain about the noise. Sturbaum asked if a traffic study had been done. It seemed that some issues were being addressed but not all. Borkowski stated that car baCkup had been checked and after a car turned it dissipated. A speed study had not been done. - (:^ ! Borkowski stated that he understood for a traffic calming device to work it required a physical correction to the path as well as visual constrictions having psychological effect. Staff would return at a later time with crash, speed reductions and speed studies to present to Council to coincide with the repaving projects. Imker asked, if the road was going to be repaved eventually, whether the project could wait until that point to determine if the project was necessary or not. Something to slow down traffic on the Parkway was warranted but not at this time. r= ~;:r Ih' mooll" 'dj'"m:zz.~Pi kt~ C,"'m~ M=k. 'o"'dl" S",~lp~ D~ H,dd~ M'yo; r-