Loading...
Full Agenda Packet CITY OF JANESVILLE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2012 7:00 P.M. Municipal Building Council Chambers (Room #417) 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Roll Call. 3. Requests and comments from the public regarding items on the Agenda not requiring a public hearing. 4. Discussion/possible action on City of Janesville sidewalk program including the 2012 Sidewalk Program, the Pedestrian Transportation Corridor Plan and proposed resolution number 2012-907. 5. Consideration of one or more motions to convene into closed session, pursuant to Wisconsin Statute Section 19.85(1)(g) for the purpose of conferring with legal counsel for the governmental body who is rendering oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted by the body with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved concerning an awarded sidewalk public works contract. 6. Consideration of one or more motions to reconvene into open session, pursuant to Wisconsin Statute Section 19.85(2) to continue discussions, deliberations, and potential actions (votes) concerning sidewalks, sidewalk resolution(s), public work contract(s), and related matters. 7. Motion to adjourn. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM April 19, 2012 TO: City Council FROM: Mike Payne, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: Discussion/possible action on City of Janesville sidewalk program including the 2012 Sidewalk Program, the Pedestrian Transportation Corridor Plan and proposed Resolution 2012-907. Summary Council members Jim Farrell and DuWayne Severson have requested the topic of sidewalks be discussed by the Council. A Special Council meeting will be held April 30, 2012 to discuss sidewalks. Below is a timeline of sidewalk related events taking place before the Council since the Pedestrian Transportation Corridor Plan (PTCP) was adopted by Council January 14, 2008. Items in bold have staff memos with attachments and Council meeting minutes included at the end of this memo to provide specific details of critical milestones. Timeline of Sidewalk Items with the Council Sept 6, 2007 – Council Study Session on Sidewalks - Jan 14, 2008 – Public Hearing, Amend CP # 70 – Sidewalks & Adopt PTCP - March 24, 2008 – Amendments to CP # 70 – Sidewalks - - Sept 8, 2008 – Prelim Sidewalk Resolution for ADA accommodation request - Oct 13, 2008 – Public Hearing, Final Sidewalk Resolution for ADA request - June 22, 2009 – Prelim Resolution for 2009 Sidewalk Program - July 13, 2009 – Public Hearing, Final Sidewalk Resolution, Contract Award Dec 14, 2009 – Staff seeks Council direction for 2010 Sidewalk Program - March 8, 2010 – Amendments to CP # 70 – Sidewalks - - March 22, 2010 – Prelim Resolution for 2010 Sidewalk Program - April 12, 2010 – Public Hearing, Final Sidewalk Resolution & Contract Award July 12, 2010 – Direction to staff to proceed with 5-9 miles of walk in 2011 - Oct 11, 2010 – Direction to staff on PTCP Implementation - - Oct 25, 2010 – Public Hearing then Council approves 2011 Sidewalk Program Feb 28, 2011 – Consideration of amendments to CP # 70 - Sidewalks - - March 14, 2011—Award of Sidewalk Contract - Feb 28, 2011 – Consideration of amendments to CP # 70 - Sidewalks Sept 26, 2011 – Public Hearing for 2012 Sidewalk Program - Oct 24, 2011 – Cont’d Discussion then Council approves 2012 Sidewalks - - Feb 13, 2012 – Award of Sidewalk Contract Background Historically all Janesville neighborhoods have had sidewalks. In the 1960’s and 1970’s suburban and rural developments began to gain popularity with larger lots, no sidewalks and sometimes no curb and gutter. At the same time, two and three car families became more common. Urban developers began to press for relief from sidewalk requirements likely to compete with the suburban and rural developments. In the 1970’s and 1980’s, Janesville planners prepared neighborhood plans for developing areas. These plans included proposed sidewalk routes which were intended to provide a basic level of connectivity from neighborhoods to attractions such as schools, parks, businesses as well as other neighborhoods. On local streets these were often on one side of the street while on arterial streets walk was planned on both sides of the street. Despite the existence of these plans, subdivisions were intermittently developed without sidewalks. In the 1980’s and 1990’s awareness of the problems of dependence on automobiles increased and efforts developed and grew to make communities walkable and more pedestrian friendly again. In Janesville the City Council had many discussions on how to make the City a more walkable community. In 1992 the City Council began to require sidewalks in new subdivisions following alignments designated on the neighborhood plans. In 2006 the City Council began to require walks on both sides of all new streets. In 2008 the Pedestrian Transportation Corridor Plan, which was primarily but not entirely a compilation of the neighborhood plans, was adopted by the City Council. Neighborhood plans around the perimeter of the City were essentially created in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. All neighborhood plans were reviewed and approved by the Plan Commission. As developers proposed projects, their preliminary certified survey maps (CSMs) or subdivision plats were reviewed by the Plan Commission which may have adjusted sidewalk routes, especially if the street layout was affected. The final CSM or subdivision plat was then approved by the City Council. In 2010 the Council adopted a 7 year sidewalk implementation plan. The City Council directed staff to proceed with the installation of the planned unfunded sidewalk commencing in 2011, completing 5 to 9 miles of sidewalk construction each year until completed. The PTCP has always been accessible to the public through the City website as well as hard copies on display at City Hall and available at the reference desk at the Hedberg Public Library. As part of the sidewalk implementation strategy, Council supported the idea of making two passes through the City where higher priority sidewalk routes would receive sidewalks in the first pass through the City and the second pass through the City would completed all remaining sidewalk routes. The locations designated in the PTCP were prioritized and scheduled as follows:  Sidewalk Corridor Ranking To provide for orderly scheduling of the directed work, staff developed a ranking system which considered: 1. Development status 2. Land use 3. Proximity to schools 4. Traffic volume 5. Presence on a bus route Item 1 above considered streets with current conditions unsuitable for the installation of sidewalk. This involved streets primarily along the periphery of the City with rural cross sections, open ditches, prohibitive cross slopes or other major obstructions. This initial screening resulted in the recommended deferral of 17 of the original 63 miles of planned unfunded sidewalks. The remaining 47 miles of sidewalks were ranked using the following point system: 1. Zoning a. 0 points - Agricultural, conservation and mining (A,C & M) b. 1 point – Low density residential (R1 & 2) c. 2 points - Industrial (M1 thru 4) d. 3 points - Business or Office (B1 thru 6, BT and O1 thru 3) e. 4 points – Medium to high density (R3, R3M & R4) 2. School Proximity a. 1 point - Between ¼ and ½ mile radius b. 2 points - Within ¼ mile of schools 3. Street Classification a. 0 points - Local b. 1 points - Collector c. 2 points – Minor Arterial d. 3 points – Principle Arterial 4. On bus route a. 0 points - No b. 1 point – Yes  Scheduling Installation Approximately one half (25 miles) of the streets received a ranking of 3 to 7 (with 7 being the highest priority) and the remaining (21 miles) ranking 1 to 2. In order to achieve construction and management efficiencies while giving priority to higher ranked locations, a schedule was devised to group work in adjacent PTCP zones and to make an initial pass of the City completing the locations ranked 3 or higher and then a second pass for the locations ranked below 3. With this in mind the following schedule was developed: PTCP Rank Miles Year Zones 3 & 4 3 thru 7 5.68 2011 1 & 2 3 thru 7 5.19 2012 7 & 8 3 thru 7 7.58 2013 5,6 & 9 3 thru 7 6.89 2014 2,3 & 4 1 & 2 6.95 2015 1,6 & 7 1 & 2 7.56 2016 5,8 & 9 1 & 2 6.88 2017 Locations designated as deferred would be worked into the schedule as their status changes. Also, any gaps within a block where partial existing walk exists would be installed along with the locations ranked 3 thru 7 in the same PTCP zone.  Public Hearing To allow affected property owners time to comment on sidewalk orders and/or to fiscally plan for the cost of installation, a public hearing is held before the Council each fall prior to the scheduled construction year for those locations included in the following year’s program. All affected property owners are notified of the public hearing. Staff prepares a recommended list of locations based on the approved schedule with the intent of providing approximately six (6) months notice to affected property owners. The final list of locations to receive sidewalk installation orders is considered by the City Council following the public hearing.  Ability to Complete Work Privately Following sidewalk orders by council, all affected property owners are provided correspondence outlining their ability to conduct the work privately or have the City contractor complete the work. The correspondence includes an actual length of sidewalk and an estimated sidewalk rate if the City contractor completes the work.  Billing for Work Completed by City Contractor Property owners are given until May 31st of the year following notification to complete private installation of ordered sidewalk. Any sidewalk not installed by the property owner will be installed through a contract bid by the City with the cost thereof billed to the property owner. Cost this year on the City contract is $29.90 per linear foot. A typical 80 foot wide lot with 15 foot driveway would cost about $1,950. That cost can be paid over 5 years. Last year we heard of private contractors installing sidewalk for less than $20 per linear foot which would cost about $1,300 for the same typical lot. Reasons for the City contracted price being higher than privately installed walk include: 1. Statutorial requirements for public contracts such as prevailing wage rates, bonding requirements and minimum insurance thresholds 2. Included costs for retaining walls and tree removal which are incorporated into the rate 3. Administrative costs which are included in the rate 4. Private contractors generally pursue the least complicated sidewalk locations (meaning no tree removal, significant grading, or retaining walls) Once invoiced following sidewalk installation by the City contractor, the property owner is given three (3) payment options. 1. They can pay the invoice in full by October 31st 2. They can have the invoice rolled over onto their property tax bill and incur no interest. 3. If the bill is over $250 they can elect to use the five-year payment plan and incur interest charges. The interest rate is currently 3% for sidewalk.  Tree Conflicts Sidewalk specifications indicate the back edge of sidewalk should be one (1) foot inside the right-of-way. A typical street has 70 ft of right-of-way, 36 feet of pavement, 5 feet of sidewalk and 10 feet of (grass) terrace. Over the last several years, City staff has been very flexible with sidewalk alignments and allows meandering sidewalks to minimize the impacts to trees. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, 8.4 miles of sidewalk were installed and approximately 100 trees were identified as a conflict for standard sidewalk alignment. More than 70% of those tree conflicts were avoided by realigning the sidewalk or trimming tree branches to provide 7ft of clearance. Some of the trees removed prior to sidewalk construction were in poor condition and property owners requested they be removed even though there was no conflict of space with new sidewalk installation. When trees are removed to facilitate sidewalk installation, the affected property owner does not pay additional costs above the City sidewalk billing rate. The City sidewalk billing rate includes tree removals when necessary. When removing a tree or trees is unavoidable, the City has a process to allow property owners to purchase a tree or trees and install them in the front yard area with the City reimbursing the affected property owners up to $250. This process was established to help concerned property owners take the initiative to replace trees with appropriate streetscape trees if desired.  Retaining Walls In some instances, retaining walls may be required to install sidewalk for several reasons including: affected property owners not allowing grading back onto private property, utility conflicts, property owners believing a retaining wall adds aesthetic value to the property curb appeal, etc. In 2009, 2010, and 2011, one (1) small retaining wall only a few courses high was installed. In 2012 there are several potential retaining walls along the west side of N. Wright Road south of Ruger Avenue and one (1) fairly significant retaining wall required at the northeast corner of Skyview Drive and N. Wright Road. When retaining walls are necessary, the affected property owner does not pay additional costs above the City sidewalk billing rate. The City sidewalk billing rate includes tree removals when necessary. City Manager Recommendation: The City Council has two issues before it tonight. 1. The first issue is relatively straight forward. The City Council can determine whether it wishes to form a committee to evaluate the sidewalk program moving forward. The three options that I see are: Initiate the formation of a committee to evaluate the sidewalk program. o Continue to move forward with the current 7 year plan. o Determine forgo the installation of future unfunded sidewalks. o 2. The second issue before the City Council is a little more complex. The City Council could approve the attached resolution which is proposed by o the Citizen Committee. This would establish forming a committee and including the 2012 program in that evaluation. By doing this, the City Council likely would delay sidewalk work to the 2013 year at the earliest. The City Council could move forward with the 2012 sidewalk program. o The City Council could delay the order to install sidewalk by 30 to 45 days but o continue with the 2012 sidewalk program. The City Council could request that the City Manager amend the current o contract for the 2012 sidewalk program to only included funded sidewalks or cancel the contract. One particular concern I have is the precedent this would potentially set of one Council cancelling a previous City Council’s approved contractual agreements. Attachments: - Proposed Resolution presented by Citizen for Sensible Sidewalks Committee - Sept 6, 2007 meeting – Council study session on Sidewalks - Jan 14, 2008 meeting – Public Hearing, amend CP # 70 – Sidewalks & adopt PTCP - March 24, 2008 meeting – Amendments to CP # 70 – Sidewalks - Dec 14, 2009 meeting – Staff seeks Council direction for 2010 Sidewalk Program - March 8, 2010 meeting – Amendments to CP # 70 – Sidewalks - July 12, 2010 meeting – Direction to staff to proceed with 5-9 miles of walk in 2011 - Oct 11, 2010 meeting – Direction to staff on PTCP Implementation - Feb 28, 2011 meeting – Consideration of amendments to CP # 70 - Sidewalks - Sept 26, 2011 meeting – Public Hearing for 2012 Sidewalk Program - Oct 24, 2011 meeting – Continued discussion then Council approves 2012 Sidewalks - Council Policy #70 – Sidewalks - Current Sidewalk Map of Zones 1 & 2 affected in 2012 л¼»­¬®·¿² Ì®¿²­°±®¬¿¬·±² ݱ®®·¼±® д¿² ó Ʊ²»­ ï ¿²¼ î ̸·­ ³¿° ·­ º±® ·²º±®³¿¬·±²¿´ °«®°±­»­ ±²´§ ¿²¼ ·­ ­«¾¶»½¬ ¬± ³±¼·º·½¿¬·±² º®±³ ¬·³» ¬± ¬·³» ¼«» ¬± ½¸¿²¹·²¹ ½·®½«³­¬¿²½»­ò ߺº»½¬»¼ °®±°»®¬§ ±©²»®­ ©·´´ ®»½»·ª» ¿² ·²ª·¬¿¬·±² ¬± ¿ °«¾´·½ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» §»¿® °®·±® ¬± ·²­¬¿´´¿¬·±²ò ׺ §±« ¸¿ª» ¯«»­¬·±²­ô °´»¿­» ½¿´´ ±® ª·­·¬ ¬¸» Û²¹·²»»®·²¹ Ü·ª·­·±² ¿¬ éëëóíïêðò Ý·¬§ ±º Ö¿²»­ª·´´» Ý·¬§ ±º Ö¿²»­ª·´´» ÛÒÙ×ÒÛÛÎ×ÒÙ Ü×Ê×Í×ÑÒ ÛÒÙ×ÒÛÛÎ×ÒÙ Ü×Ê×Í×ÑÒ ìñîðñîðïîå ÞòÞòô д¿²²·²¹ Í»®ª·½»­ Ù×ÍÄЮ±¶»½¬­ÄÛ²¹·²»»®·²¹ÄÍ·¼»©¿´µ­Äîðïî Ю±¹®¿³Ä л¼»­¬®·¿² Ì®¿²­°±®¬¿¬·±² ݱ®®·¼±® д¿² ©·¬¸ ο²µ·²¹­ Ʊ²»­ ï îò³¨¼ î ï Ì®¿·´­ Í·¼»©¿´µ Þ«·´¬ ¿­ ±º ìñïçñîðïî Í·¼»©¿´µ­ Þ·µ» Ì®¿·´­ ο·´®±¿¼­ Û¨·­¬·²¹ Í·¼»©¿´µ ó Ù®»»² ο·´®±¿¼ д¿²²»¼ Ú«²¼»¼ Í·¼»©¿´µ ó Ы®°´» п®µ­ ú Ñ°»² Í°¿½» Ý·¬§ Í·¼»©¿´µ ¬± ¾» Þ«·´¬ п®µ ݱ²­¬®«½¬·±² Ю·±®·¬§ ͽ¸±±´ α«²¼ ï øîðïî÷ Ù®»»²¾»´¬ α«²¼ î øîðïê÷ ݱ«²¬§ ̱©²­¸·° п®µ Ý·¬§ Ô·³·¬­ Þ±«²¼¿®§ Ý·¬§ ±º Ö¿²»­ª·´´» l ððòïîëðòîëÓ·´»­ ï ·²½¸ ã çíç º»»¬ ðîìðìèðçêðÚ»»¬ 23 April 2012 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF JANESVILLE RECONSIDERATION OF PTCP RESOLUTION NO. 2012-907 A Resolution for delay and reconsideration of the installation of certain sidewalks. WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Janesville has adopted a Pedestrian Transportation Corridor Plan (PTCP) directing the installation of standard concrete sidewalks in front of parcels of land located in zones 1 through 9, described therein, over a time period of seven years; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2011-834, the Common Council directed that sidewalks be constructed in Zones 1 and 2 in front of various parcels of property described in items numbered 1 through 15, incorporated therein; and WHEREAS, the Common Council further directed that the City of Janesville construct such sidewalks in front of all such parcels of property where standard concrete sidewalks have not been constructed as of May 31, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Common Council has determined that various factors, including the state of the economy in the City, questions as to whether certain sidewalks included in the PTCP will be used substantially or are required in order to ensure public safety and otherwise, require that the May 31, 2012 limit on the time available for owners of such parcels of property to construct sidewalks be delayed to a time sufficient to allow a study group, task force or other agency to be created by the Common Council, upon recommendation of the City Administration, to conduct a review of the PTCP and to recommend such modifications thereof as may be appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Common Council of the City of Janesville that: 1. The May 31, 2012 limit as to the time available for owners of parcels of property in Zones 1 and 2, and in all other Zones affected by the PTCP for construction of concrete sidewalks be delayed until a time to be determined by the Council in the future, sufficient to allow reconsideration of the PTCP by an agency to be created by the Council. 2. Construction of any sidewalks by the City of Janesville, included in the PTCP, be delayed until such reconsideration can be completed. 3. The City Administration is directed to make a recommendation to the Common Council, in due course, as to the composition of a task force, study group or other agency which, in its estimation, would be capable of conducting a review of all aspects of the PTCP and making recommendations for appropriate modifications thereof with such agency to include, among others, a sufficient number of members of the public who may be affected by the PTCP and to provide written notification to the owners of all parcels of property which may be affected by the PTCP prior to the commencement of its review. ADOPTED: Motion by: Second by: APPROVED: Councilmember Aye Nay Pass Absent Dongarra-Adams Farrell Eric J. Levitt, City Manager Kealy Liebert ATTEST: Severson Steeber Voskuil Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Proposed by: Councilmembers Farrell and Severson Prepared by: Attorney James H. Fowler, III