Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013.0108.TCWSM.Minutesz:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 1 of 24 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE WORK STUDY SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL JANUARY 8, 2013 * CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Mayor Kavanagh called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. in the Town Hall Council Chambers. Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor Kavanagh, Councilmember Yates, Vice Mayor Leger, Councilmember Brown, Councilmember Dickey and Councilmember Elkie. Town Manager Ken Buchanan, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire and Town Clerk Bevelyn Bender were also present. Councilmember Hansen joined the meeting at 5:40 p.m. AGENDA ITEM #1 - DISCUSSION RELATING TO THE PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN RESOLUTION AND SPECIFIC BUDGET TRANSFERS FOR 2012 IMPLEMENTATION. Town Manager Ken Buchanan addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and noted that this is the same presentation that the Council heard a couple of months ago with the addition of a resolution that was included in the packet to be placed on an upcoming agenda as a business item to consider a Pavement Management Program and some changes that need to be made in the existing budget and some structural items that are being recommended for the new fiscal years over the next eight years. He said that he is asking the Council and had recommended to the Council before and still continues to recommend that the Pavement Management Program be given the same priority as Public Safety. (Copy available on line and in the office of the Town Clerk.) Mr. Buchanan stated that they are in a priority based budget scenario now and they need to consider their priorities before they consider everything else. He added that staff will be talking more about this on the 24th of this month during a Budget Goal Session with the Council. He noted that the Pavement Management Program is funded with existing available funds and requests funding authorization over the next eight years totaling $9,700,000. He said that it asks that the Vehicle License Tax (VLT) becomes a Special Revenue for Pavement Management, which is $750,000 annually. He stated that it requires a reduction in operational budgets for Administration, Community Services, Development Services and HURF, the Streets Fund and the reclassification of one position from full time to part time as well as the reduction in force of five positions starting in the July 2013 -14 fiscal year. He further stated that it requires reduction of some recreation funding in Community Services and the transfer of the Economic Developme nt Tourism Initiative funding to the Downtown Excise Tax. Mr. Buchanan also informed the Council that it asks that the Contingency Fund be reduced from $300,000 annually to a funding level of $50,000 and pointed out that the Pavement Management Program is contingent upon the passage of an $8.2 million road bond for the reconstruction of Saguaro Boulevard. Mr. Buchanan commented that the Council has seen this proposal for the last three months and said he is reviewing it for the benefit of any citizens who might not have seen the previous presentation but asked them to let him know if they wanted him to review it in lesser detail. He said that there has been funding but it has been inconsistent in levels for pavement management (for slurry seals, crack seals, etc.) over the last 12 years and although they have put $9 million into that but again the funding levels need to be consistent and a little more available at a certain level so they can continue to try and stay on a 7 to 8-year maintenance rotation basis within each zone. Mr. Buchan stated that within HURF the Town barely has enough money to maintain the Town's 190 miles and it is there to keep the operations going but when you start looking at all the programs they have within HURF right now and what it pays for, they are looking at taking $250,000 from that and adding it on to the Pavement Management Program to come up with the $1 million. He reported that the HURF budget is approximately $1.3 million and has five employees with one vacant position. He noted that the Town has 68 acres of medians and the landscaping is contracted out to Artistic Landscaping. He added that the Town has 3.5 million square yards of asphalt, 390 lane miles of road, 66 miles of sidewalk, 362 miles of curb, 14 miles of storm drains and 407 catch basins. He said that they have z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 2 of 24 a street sweeping operation for the 390 lane miles and staff is recommending that that be outsourced in the 2013 -14 Fiscal Year. He discussed Traffic Signal Operations and advised that there are 1 3 street signals and they include operations and maintenance as well as Vehicle Maintenance (there are 39 vehicles/equipment to maintain). Mr. Buchanan informed the Council that historically studies have been done and the Stantec Report that was done in 2009 basically states that the Town has a fairly good rating but they need to maintain the roads at a consistent level. He said that right now staff believes that $1 million would go a long way towards remaining on a solid rotation basis with road maintenance and keep the roads in excellent condition. He noted that the Stantec Report stated that the Town has about a 67.1 quality rating out of a 100 rating scale and that placed the pavement in the "good to excellent range." He added that the Riding Comfort Index is 69.2. He said that he also wanted to stress that the reported noted that due to the age of the pavement degradation could accelerate without a proper and timely pavement maintenance program (thus the need for a proactive maintenance approach). Mr. Buchanan advised that they are looking at approximately $9 million over the next eight years to implement an aggressive maintenance program that includes the following: * Crack sealing process * Tire Rubber Modified Slurry Sealing process * Slurry Sealing process (Type II) * Micro-Surface Sealing process * Cape Sealing process (combination of slurry and chip seal process) Discussion ensued relative to Pavement Maintenance (Zones 1 -7) with 7 being the arterials such as Fountain Hills Boulevard, Palisades and Shea; areas that have structural issues that must be addressed (certain portions of the asphalt and sub-grade is failing and these areas are beyond pavement maintenance operations and need to be removed and replaced before any surface treatments can be effectively applied; the fact that the cost of the asphalt replacements are estimated at $782,000; the older roads are mostly in Zones 1-3; the first phase which will begin with Zone 6 in April - June 2013 in the northwest side of Town (383,811 square yards of crack seal and slurry seal and asphalt replacement at a cost of $867,000); July - September 2013 work Zone 7 will begin (Arterials Streets, combination of crack seal, TRMSS, slurry seal, cape seal and micro-surface on Palisades Boulevard, Fountain Hills Boulevard, Shea Boulevard and Eagle Mountain) - 665,910 square yards programmed at $1million CIP funds plus $1 million VLT/HURF for a total of $2 million; Fiscal Year 2014-15 Zone 1 - First Phase consisting of crack seal and slutty seal (712,026 square yards) and asphalt failure patch replacement for a total of $1 million; Fiscal Year 2015 -16 - Complete Zone 1 - crack seal and slurry seal (712,026 square yards at a cost of $1 million); Fiscal Year 2016 -17 - Zone 2 - Crack seal, slurry seal, 618,355 square yards and 10,920 square yards of asphalt failure replacement at a cost of $1 million; Fiscal Year 2017-18 - Finish Zone 2 and start Zone 3 - crack seal, slurry seal, 289,044 square yards and 4,770 square yards of asphalt replacement in addition to TRMSS on the new sections of Shea Boulevard at a cost of $1 million; Fiscal Year 2018-19 - Finish Zone 3 and start Zone 4 - Crack seal, slurry seal, 483,429 square yards and 613 square yards of pavement failure asphalt replacement in addition to TRMSS on Saguaro Boulevard for a total of $1 million; Fiscal Year 2019-20 - Zone 4 - Crack seal, slurry seal, 483,429 square yards at a cost of $1 million and Fiscal Year 2020-21 - Finish Zone 4 and start Zone 5 - crack seal, slurry seal, 307,301 square yards and 339 square yards of asphalt failure replacement at a cost of $1 million. Mr. Buchanan reiterated that the resolution contained in the Council's packets reflects this presentation and staff's recommendation and indicated his willingness to discuss this furth er with them. He noted that staff is seeking the following: * Contingency transfer from the General Fund (GF) to HURF $300,000 * Economic Development GF budget savings 80,000 * Information Technology Online Storage Project GF 8,000 * Highway User Revenue Fund 100,000 * Household Hazardous Waste Event GF 45,000 * CIP project - Saguaro/Palisades signal deferral 2014/15 256,000 * CIP Intelligent Transportation System Project Elimination 53,000 * CIP Contingency 25,000 $867,000 Mr. Buchanan advised that the $867,000 would allow staff to get started on Zone 6 beginning in April should the Council accept this proposal. He added that the Fiscal Year, as he ment ioned before, will require the transfer of the z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 3 of 24 Vehicle License Tax out of the General Fund as a revenue source to a special revenue fund for pavement management itself and will also require the following: * Adjust Budgets in Administration - Personnel Reductions (Court Clerk position, Finance position - part time - retirement) $585,000 * Appropriate tourism funding from the Downtown Fund * Reduce the Economic Development GF subsidy * Reduce Annual Contingency Funds * Adjust Budgets in Community Service ($60,000) - Personnel Reductions (One Parks Position * Operational program reductions * Adjust Budget in Development Services (HURF) $105,000 - Sweeping outsourced with contract, one position, Current Vacant Street Position, operational program reductions Additional discussion ensued relative to the proposed reductions/impacts in the Community Services Department, Administration and Court Departments, the Development Services Department and the HURF Department (reduction of staff and programs). In response to a question from Councilmember Dickey, staff advised that currently the Town carries $10,000 for abatement in the Code Enforcement budget and if staff comes upon a situation such as a green pool and there is no homeowner and the bank will not work with the Town, staff will contract with someone to drain the pool and take care of different things like that. Mr. Buchanan noted that the total eight-year project will cost $9,700,000 and reiterated that the Pavement Management Program proposal from Fiscal Year 2014-15 through 2020-21 is contingent upon a successful $8,200,000 Saguaro Bond Election in November 2013. He added that it is staff's recommendation that for this Fiscal Year (2012- 13), the Council authorize funding in the amount of $867,000 to get started in April, authorize staff to proceed in the 2013-14 budget to begin funding the Pavement Management Program with the dedicated revenue source of Vehicle License Tax and authorize staff to take the necessary steps to eliminate/reduce/transfer funds in Administration, Community Services and Development Services (HURF) beginning in the 2012-14 Fiscal Year (July) to adequately fund a Pavement Management Program with at least an annual $1 million appropriation. Mr. Buchanan indicated his willingness to response to any questions from the Council and/or to discuss the proposal in greater detail. Councilmember Yates thanked Mr. Buchanan for his presentation and said that tourism is currently funded through the General Fund and Mr. Buchanan confirmed that fact. Councilmember Yates stated that by transferring that, that would only be if the Council decides to fund that full amount (they could fund more, they could fund less, but that frees $103,000 to be used). Mr. Buchanan explained that the $103,000 will be taken out of the Downtown Excise Tax Fund. Councilmember Yates commented that in the event the Town doesn't use it or hypothetically the y raise or lower it all of it or any of it, it would have to come out of the Downtown Fund and asked if that is what Mr. Buchanan is proposing and Mr. Buchanan confirmed that was correct. Councilmember Yates referred to Economic Development and said that was essentially a full -time position but since they don't have anyone in that position staff is recommending that those funds be transferred as well and again Mr. Buchanan stated that Councilmember Yates was correct. Councilmember Elkie advised that he is certainly in favor of what Mr. Buchanan is recommending relative to putting the roads on a par with public safety as well as the proposal to use the Vehicle License Tax to fund this particular program. He noted that it has obviously taken a lot of creative number crunching to get to this point. He stated that Councilmember Yates had brought up something that he wanted to bring up as well. He said that with the Downtown Development Fund there has been a lot of discussion as far as what those funds can be used for. He added that if they are paying for tourism exclusively out of that fund, he would like to know if th ere are any legal issues that staff foresees associated with doing that. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 4 of 24 Town Attorney Andrew McGuire advised that in looking back, the manner in which the fund was established really wasn't as definitive as staff would like. He said that he really doesn 't think that there are any legal issues because really it was created by Council and Council can budgetarily decide each year how to allocate the funds. He noted that they don't have a fine set of parameters to know one way or the other but he thinks that it has been the staff's position and recommendations to the Council each year that those general parameters were to be followed so that the general purpose of the fund was met since there are no specifics on how the monies were to be spent. Councilmember Dickey commented that the Council discussed this at their October meeting and they looked at the minutes from 2000 (or whenever the particular meeting was) and there was a little bit of a list of what the Downtown Development funds could be used for including land purchases, parking, a linear mall and other vital interests for the Downtown area. She further stated that with the Council's discussion in October, many of the Councilmembers reiterated the idea of the intent of that and noted that she has the minutes of that meeting in front of her. She said that the Council used words like commitment and honor so she thinks that while maybe legally there is a way to use those funds not for Downtown, she thinks the Council also communicated a desire for those funds to be used for the Downtown because they felt that that was the intent was and that was their commitment. She added that given that, she is not sure about using Downtown funds, which are pretty area specific, for the entire Visitors or Tourism effort because that is for the Town as a whole. She said that beyond that obviously this community contract stuff has been hot every time they go through the budget so they talk about "if they fund these things anymore and if they do what is the level?" She stated that it seems like they have totally skipped that and have made quite a leap (not only would they be assuming $103,000, but assuming that will go on and continue thereafter). She commented that when they see these resolutions, which is not a customary way that they budget into the future, (they would say okay for this year we need $800,000 here's a resolution let's do it and maybe look onto what they would do next year) but in this resolution all of the sections say, "from now on." She said that this is a little different way of doing things and she is a little uncomfortable about it because when they talked about this when Mr. Buchanan proposed this the first time she specifically asked if they were committing to Pavement Management but these individual items, will they have the chance to go through them as they go through the budgeting process and the answer was "Yeah." Councilmember Dickey added that again, she is not having heartburn about this whole thing -- just bringing up the idea that this "continuing thereafter" budgeting by resolution is not done for anything else so she feels like they are binding themselves to how they are actually going to get this money to go into Pavement Management in a very detailed way - - the Downtown Development Fund discussion about what you use it for and last about that issue is the Economic Development discussion that they just had five days ago where she asked when they were done "Was part of the purview for that plan to be "what are we going to do, how are we going to pay for it, are we going to hire somebody in- house or whatever" and the answer to that was that they were going to wait and see how this all comes around to decide what they all want to do to implement it). She said that she feels like since Tourism was about a quarter of or maybe less than what the Economic Development plan had in it, maybe a fifth of it, that right now it feels like they are putting the cart before the horse because they are saying $103,000 to Tourism/Visitors before they ev en have the Economic Development plan where they were told, "Let's not even talk about how we are funding any of this stuff until we get some of this stuff back and we are going to have a Steering Committee and all those kinds of thing." She added that if she was to say any of this part of the resolution, when they come down to when they are voting and that kind of thing, that Section 7 is a part that she would like to see changed (Beginning with FY the 2013/14 budget and continuing thereafter, the Town Council hereby authorizes and directs the Town Manager to transfer the Economic Development Tourism Initiative appropriation to the Downtown Excise Tax Fund) by eliminating the words "continuing thereafter." Mayor Kavanagh said that she thinks that Mr. Buchanan has tried to give the Council a comprehensive plan projecting into the future for ten years and they haven't had any type of a plan here like this before. She added that she doesn't think that there is anything in the proposal that can't be changed at a future date but she thinks the problem is how does Mr. Buchanan get the $1 million that they need -- how does he get that money if he can't look at all the figures and put some numbers in there. She reiterated that she thinks what they have here is a good plan and if the Council wants to change something in the future there is nothing that says they can't do that but they have to start somewhere and they have to project in a certain way what they think (the best they think that their expenses are going to be). She noted that otherwise she doesn't see how they could have a really comprehensive plan. She stated that she would rather not pass things piecemeal, she would rather have a full plan and an outlook for the next ten years. She further stated that of course it would include the stipulation that any Council could change anything in the plan (by vote move money around if they thought it shouldn't come out of here or there). She pointed out that Mr. Buchanan and staff have z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 5 of 24 struggled to get this amount of money that can be used for their number one priority -- the road maintenance. She advised that she does not have a problem with the way it is set up knowing that if the Council decided to change it a t a future date they could. She reiterated that she would like to see a full plan and a good outlook for the Town's future as far as the roads are concerned, which is something they have never had before. Vice Mayor Leger said that the way the language is written in the resolution, he shares the same concern expressed by Councilmember Dickey. He added that he also appreciates what the Mayor said so he has a question about flexibility. He stated that the way the language is written it doesn't appear that there is flexibility and said that for example the appropriation from Downtown Tourism is a very specific number, $103,000, and along the lines of what the Mayor suggested regarding flexibility, he asked if there was a way that the Council could slightly change the language so that that is clear because right now the way it reads there are no qualifiers. He added that a future Council may be having a discussion about interpreting that just as they are having a discussion on interpreting how the Downtown funds should be used and that is really a quagmire because it is not well defined. He requested input from the Town A ttorney relative to this matter and said he is looking for some way to compromise on this. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire addressed the Council and stated that there are two issues -- the first is the direction the Council gives to the Town Manager in terms of bringing a budget back that meets the goal of prioritizing roads or road maintenance. He noted that that issue is what the resolution was directed at (giving clear direction to the Town Manager about the way he is proposing to create a budget that goes on from year to year to year instead of just one year at a time -- how to do that and getting the Council's buyoff on it). He explained that that is why the language is more directive rather than suggestive. He pointed out that the Council has absolute discretion at any time and even if they pass this resolution, if they wanted to modify it any time prior to the adoption of the budget they can do so. He added that they also have the discretion going forward and if there is a request to soften the language to recognize that discretion he thinks that that is something they could easily do before this comes back to the Council for action. He said that he just wanted to make sure that the Town Manager's plan for getting there for this fiscal year and going forward was put in front of the Council so they clearly see what was being proposed. Vice Mayor Leger commented that that is what he is suggesting -- that they create that flexibility so that if future Councils look at that there will not be line drawn in the sand. He stated that he had a question about one of the programs in Community Services. He also thanked Mr. Buchanan and staff for their work and added that he knows that some of what is being recommended is painful, particularly with respect to staff cuts and program cuts. He noted that they have been constantly cutting and it is getting to the point where he is starting to get concerned about the viability of their organization but they do what they have to do to manage through the crisis. Vice Mayor Leger pointed out that as far as Ballet Arizona staff is recommending minimizing the funding by $7,000. He asked what level of funding the Town provided for Ballet Arizona last year. Mr. Mayer responded that last year, if his memory serves him correctly, the request was for $10,000 and the Town provided that. He noted that the amount was up from what had been budgeted in the past but the Town was able to meet their request last year. The Vice Mayor stated if they were at $10,000 and now they are proposing to cut that amount by $7,000, will that impact the viability of that event and is there is chance that without providing the funding the Town could lose this event. Mr. Mayer replied that there is that potential but he thinks that as staff shared with the Council last time, one of their goals is to see if they can find additional sponsors for that event. He pointed out that in the past the funding has come from the Town for the most part so the goal is to find additional sponsors and although staff doesn't know if they will be able to close that gap completely, they certainly have some time to work on it. Vice Mayor Leger commented that for those who have attended that event over the last three years, the crowd has been asked how many people were from out of Town. He reported that 25% to 30% of the attendees were from out of Town and said that that is tourism and he hopes that going forward if they are going to be flexible with respect to the transfer of Downtown funding and using it in the Tourism budget that either they talk about that event being part of their Tourism contract and/or are willing to supplement that cut by going to the Downtown fund in order to preserve that event. He added that he will keep that in mind when the Council learns about this event continuing because he thinks that is a big hit. He said that he can understand the other things and doesn't have any angst about them but they just z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 6 of 24 had a long discussion about tourism and there is a direct correlation there. He stated that they don't have a lot of data showing that the $103,000 they spend goes specifically into dollars but intuitively he believes in tourism and funding it but there are numbers here and he thinks they need to think twice about cutting that $7,000 or find another way of getting the money. Mayor Kavanagh asked if the Council would know in advance if the amount that the Town is going to be donating will be adequate and have the opportunity to try and raise money with sponsors like they did for the Movie in the Park and Mr. Mayer responded yes. Mayor Kavanagh noted that they also talked about the Homecoming Parade and the Tailgate Park and looking to the school to pick up some more of the expense instead of leaving it up to the Town since it really is a school event and they should be picking up more of the expenses. She added that then again sponso rs on that end very often come forward (to support the school) and many members of the business community might step up to help them. She said that the same goes for the Teen Program and the Sock Hop. In response to a question from the Mayor about the Sock Hop, Mr. Mayer advised that it is a shared activity between Seniors Services and Recreation. The Mayor reiterated that she sees an opportunity for sponsors to step up to the plate and help in areas where they have a particular interest. She stated that beyond the business community they might be able to get parents to step up for the Parade, the Tailgate Party and the Teen Programs. She added that as long as the Council will know in advance they could always allocate the funds necessary to keep the more popular programs going. Councilmember Brown commended Mr. Buchanan and staff on their hard work and said there has always been much discussion on how the Town can maintain their streets. He stated the opinion that the Council needs to be more open minded and he sees some cuts for the Ballet and others down the road but added that he truly believes that the economy is going to come back and they will find funds maybe even in FY 2013-14 and certainly FY 2014-15 to go ahead and replenish some of the funds that they are taking away from organizations/programs to maintain the roads. He noted that the number one item on the management program is to give Pavement Management the same priority as Public Safety and if they are going to do that they are going to have to sacrifice a little bit now to save their roads keeping in mind that better times lay ahead for the Town. Mayor Kavanagh concurred with Councilmember Brown's remarks. Councilmember Dickey discussed the reductions in force and said that sometimes they remove a position from the chart and then trying to get it back is a hardship. She asked what will happen with the positions that are targeted for removal (would those positions still remain?). Mr. Buchanan replied that the positions would be eliminated. Councilmember Dickey stated that they are reducing the FTE count for the Town and asked what the advantage is in doing that rather than just not filling those positions. She noted that they talk about the Sign Ordinance and they have more Development Services' needs around Town and they are talking about cutting staff. She referred to some of the things that Councilmember Brown just said about things picking up and said that they could find themselves saying they don't have the staff and they don't have the positions. Mr. Buchanan asked Councilmember Dickey what her question was and Councilmember Dickey questioned whether the positions are being removed from the Town's Organizational Chart and said that if they are she would like to know the reasoning behind that. She questioned whether they are just eliminating them from actually being filled so that the Town is not spending the dollars on them right now. Mr. Buchanan advised that staff is recommending that the positions be eliminated and Councilmember Dickey asked Mr. Buchanan to explain the advantage or necessity behind doing that. Mr. Buchanan explained that there will not be any money to fund those positions so there is no point in ha ving them there (why would they be there?). z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 7 of 24 Councilmember Dickey commented that perhaps she is not being clear and stated that it is hard to add back eliminated positions once they are not on the Town's Organizational Chart any more (it's hard politically, the Council has to vote on it, they have to create the position and the description of it again and all of that). She asked if they are saying now that they are prepared for this Town to have 48 FTEs or whatever their FTEs will be from now on unless they take action to add them back in. Mr. Buchanan responded yes and said that if the Council remembers, during the Budget Session they went through and staff had the Council certify this. He added that this is per the Code -- the Council determines what the Town Manager can and cannot do and the Council certifies the positions that are there as far as the functions of the budget. He noted that they plan to continue that in the future (the Council will see each position and its function and this is something that the Council can talk about during the budget process). Councilmember Dickey advised that staff is proposing to make a Human Resources' position part time and asked if that is something that they want to do forever or just something that they are doing now to get through what they need to get through now with the funding they need. She questioned whether it would be possible to keep some of these positions in place so that if they do end up needing more people (to look at plans for example when people start building houses again or they need more Code Enforcement staff and things like that) they will not have to add the positions again. Mr. McGuire stated that with respect to positions that are on the Organizational Chart, like the Human Resources Director, those positions will remain on the Chart and will not be changed in terms of their position; they will only be changed in terms of the type of position (full time to part time). He added that with respect to any other positions that are going to be part of a reduction in force, it really isn't consistent to leave them on the Organizational Chart after they have been reduced unless the action is considered to be a temporary reduction in force and he doesn't know that that is the case here. He said that what he thinks is being recommended is that the positions be removed from the Organizational Chart as well as part of a permanent reduction in force. He noted that if the Council would like to make it temporary, then the more appropriate course of action would be to leave them on the Organizational Chart with direction to the Town Manager that those positions should be left vacant for some period of time. Mayor Kavanagh commented that as it was explained these positions, if necessary, could be put back in by the Council or a future Council. She added that she understands what Councilmember Dickey is saying but if they look into the future they may actually need to add different positions, for example if the Ellman property gets developed and they could need someone with engineering expertise or additional staff in the building inspection area. She noted that as long as they know that they could or a future Council could vote in whatever positions are necessary at the time, she doesn't have any problem with doing it this way as long as Mr. Buchanan , as the Manager, assures the Council that the ship stays afloat and they have enough personnel to cover what they have now. Vice Mayor Leger reiterated that he appreciates the work that Mr. Buchanan has done on this and said that the entire Council has had a chance to talk about this over the last few months. He stated that he knows how painful it is to cut staff and pointed out that they already have an organization that has gone from one size to another size and they have a very lean organization. He noted that it is now becoming "anemic" and that has long-term implications. He added that once again they are in a crisis situation and they are hopeful that revenue will pick up so they will make the tough decisions. Vice Mayor Leger said that with respect to the rationale for making this decision, he would like to know if this was based on a decrease in the workload or does that mean someone else will be picking up more responsibilities (i.e. the position in Finance -- is that due to a decrease in the workload and they don't need another person or will this action place more responsibility on the shoulders of another employee?). Mr. Buchanan informed the Vice Mayor that the decisions were made based on a variety of factors and one of them was workload and another was shared responsibilities from existing staff who will share in some of those responsibilities. The Mayor asked Mr. Buchanan if in his opinion as the Town Manager he feels that everything can be covered with the staff that they have now. She said that some of the positions are vacant already and will not be filled. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 8 of 24 Mr. Buchanan advised that when the Town went from 88 to 44 positions they were "anemic" at that time. He said they are struggling right now and he is struggling with what he has to do in trying to make ends meet on a daily basis ten hours a day and it is a challenge for everyone and wi ll continue to be one in the future but they have to deal with the existing funds that they are going to have. He added that every city in Arizona has this problem especially as far as pavement management and noted that the City of Phoenix reduced their programs and now the Town is trying to create one. He stated that that is what he is trying to do and they have to rearrange and consider priorities. He said that he wished he had found that "silver bullet" that made everything nice and they had been able to maintain all of the levels of service that they could but they can't on this one when there is $13.5 million in the General Fund and $6.5 million of that is Public Safety and he has to find $1 million out of the other $6 million. He noted that that is what they did and it is going to be painful. Mayor Kavanagh commented that she also appreciates how much Mr. Buchanan has encouraged the volunteer program, which has stepped up quite a bit. She noted that they have a couple of volunteers who are working right at Town Hall and one of them is helping out almost every single day like a full -time job. She said that she thinks they have been pretty good at tapping some of their residents who have knowledge and background in important areas and they can supplement quite a bit with their volunteers. She added that they have been building that program up and they need to reach out more to their residents and stated that they have quite a few retired people who have incredible backgrounds and are looking to help out. She stressed the importance of continuing to reach out to them and reiterated that this has helped out a lot at Town Hall. She pointed out that she is at Town Hall every day and sees how hard the staff works and she knows it is not easy sometimes. She noted that they do the best that they can and commended Mr. Buchanan and the staff because she knows they have put in a tremendous amount of time and effort on this particular project. She added that it has been quite an ordeal to make the numbers work for them as far as pavement management and stated that they have all done a fantastic job. Mr. Buchanan stated that from what he has heard, the Council wants some of the language in Section 7 to be massaged. The Mayor noted that that was Councilmember Dickey's comment and asked if she wanted to respond first. Councilmember Dickey said that she would like Mr. Buchanan to contact a couple of the members from the Strategic Planning Advisory Commission (SPAC) who are going to be working on the Economic De velopment Plan because it is not only going to be taking that amount and giving it to tourism, it is also taking it away from a possible source that they may have been thinking about. She noted that they would bring it to the Council of course but the ide a of how to fund Economic Development and maybe looking at the Downtown Excise Fund, what they are anticipating over the next few years and what the ending balance is. She said that for them to be able to say that they have that in their power, in their tool box, and to say that maybe they would look at that as a whole because obviously some of the tourism is Downtown specific (like the Vice Mayor said about the Ballet or some of the other things). She reiterated that when she reads those minutes and reads their own minutes from only a couple of months ago, it's pretty specific that that money is for the Downtown so again she thinks she would rather have that part, the $103,000, sort of out of the picture with this particular thing except for maybe a quick fix on one because she doesn't understand why they are making a commitment to fund something that they haven't made a commitment to fund. Councilmember Hansen stressed the importance of keeping in mind the tourism component of economic development. She stated that attracting visitors to Town is one of the few ways they have to increase the amount of the sales tax dollars that are coming to the Town. She pointed out that for many years the particular tax was referred to as the Downtown Fund/Economic Development Fund and that was one of the justifications for using part of that money to pay for the Economic Development Director when they had that person. She said that she is not uncomfortable with using that money because the more tourism can attract people to the Town the larger that fund will become. She stated that to touch on the idea of the resolution, she sees a lot of benefit in this and although they haven't done it before it is one way of showing the Council's commitment to the Pavement Management Program. She added that she sees it as a fluid document and probably something that would be looked at every year in conjunction with the budget because as Councilmember Brown said, each year the economy can fluctuate and it might become a little bit more flush so that some of these things could perhaps be shifted around and put back in. She further stated that maybe tweaking some of the language, like "continuing thereafter," which makes it sound permanent would be good. She added that maybe it should just be "continuing until budget adjustments are made" or something like that. She noted that then they are z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 9 of 24 making a commitment but there is still that flexibility to keep the document relevant based on the Town's economy from year to year. Councilmember Elkie advised that he doesn't have any heartburn about the Economic Development/Tourism issue being paid out of the Downtown Excise Tax Fund because when you look at where the Excise Tax Fund is funded it is from the sales tax dollars so it is going from one pot or another and is not that significant. He added that he agrees with some of the comments that were made as far as the language ap pearing to be that they will be "continuing thereafter" and said that he thinks that future Council should have the discretion and the prerogative to decide how they are going to fund economic development and how those things are going to go forward so as far as the language doesn't tie the Council as far as amounts because the amounts could go down or up and future Councils should have that discretion as far as what they are going to do with those monies. He further stated that he does believe that some adjustment should be made to the language in Section 7 as discussed. He added that with respect to Section 9 (Beginning with the FY 2013/14 budget and continuing thereafter, the Town Council acknowledges that the total of the reductions to be recommended by the Town Manager......) that is an acknowledgment by the Council of the Town Manager's recommended reductions so he doesn't think that that is as much of an issue. Councilmember Elkie asked Mr. Buchanan to explain from a budget/dollar standpoint the difference between having a position that is unfilled (the Town is not accepting applications for it) but is still in the organizational chart and eliminating that position altogether. Mr. Buchanan responded that in their process nothing, it just doesn't r eflect it because if it is eliminated it is not placed on the Organizational Chart. He added that if the Council wanted to leave the position on the Chart and just say "Unfilled" or "Frozen" it could be left in there in that way. He pointed out that the Council adopts the Organizational Charts every fiscal year (or should). He said that they did it this last fiscal year. Councilmember Elkie stated that with the staffing being "anemic" right now (and he hopes in the future that will change and they will be able to fill and replace the positions that are being eliminated) they could, as discussed, remain on the Chart as long as that doesn't pose any issue -- the positions would be classified as "Unfilled" or "Frozen" or some other designation describing that fact. He said that he agrees with many of the comments that were made and it is more difficult to add positions. He noted that if the positions were already there then they could "Unfreeze" them so to speak, reopen them and accept applications. Mr. Buchanan informed the Council that he did it because it has been the practice in the past -- when the 44 positions were eliminated, they were eliminated. Vice Mayor Leger stated that he could go either way with it -- he's gone through scenarios where they have added positions, like the Economic Development position, because the Council thought there was a need for economic development. He noted that it took probably three years to make that happen and said that it is often difficult to get a position back into the Organizational Chart once it is completely taken off. He referred to this year's budget, Page 363, a page in the budget called Schedule of Authorized Positions and pointed out that since he has been on the Council every year they have had this schedule, which lists all of the positions in the organization. He commented that just glancing down the schedule there are a number of positions that are in the schedule but have a zero for the FTE. He asked if that was a possible solution to the concerns that have been raised -- simply continuing to do what they have done historically, which is to carry the position but just have a zero for the FTE as indicated on Page 363. Mayor Kavanagh advised that she believes the Council has determined that this is a fluid document that can be changed at any time. She stated that they also have to take into consideration the fact that they don't know whether the Ellman project is coming in or what kind of development the Town is going to be seeing in five years. She said that they might not need a part-time position in Finance and unless crime goes up dramatically they might not need a full - time position in Court. She noted that they know they have the flexibility to change, add or take away and she thinks this is just a sound plan that can be changed when they want. She further stated that this is a way to look into the future and give some direction as to which way they want to go. She added that she doesn't want to speak for Mr. Buchanan but she thinks this is the way it's set up -- it gives them some future direction and is not saying that five years from now if they need another Building Inspector it is going to be hard to get that position because the Manager will clearly say that with the new development coming in we need this new position. She pointed out that that is pretty much the Town Manager's job, to decide if they need certain staff levels in each department. She said that she would z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 10 of 24 like to go by his expertise as to what they need and don't need a s far as the staff level goes knowing that at any time they can change it. She stated that this is a good plan and she would rather work with a plan that shows they have some direction for the future rather than piecemealing things every single year. Vice Mayor Leger said that perhaps they are going to have to bring this to a vote because he thinks that there are two or three different discussions going on. He reiterated that he has no angst with the program that has been put together and is solidly behind it. He added that they are simply talking about some other organizational concerns and there would be no harm done in leaving positions on the Organizational Chart with a zero in them. He noted that they have done that historically and then they eventually dropped them. He stated that he has heard several Councilmembers advocate for that so perhaps the way to resolve that is at some point in time they may have to take a vote. Vice Mayor Leger further stated that he had a discussion with the Town Attorney earlier and he said that staff could simply tweak the language and that would not take away from the plan or what has been proposed but it has been a concern of several of the Councilmembers. He added that he is looking to push the plan forward and creating compromises and none of the proposed changes change anything that the Town Manager has proposed nor do the changes question his judgment. The Vice Mayor noted that he is not questioning the Manager's judgment at all. Councilmember Brown asked if it would make sense to say "through Fiscal Year 2020-21" instead of "continuing thereafter" since that is how far out this plan will actually take the Town. Mr. Buchanan advised that it is an annual appropriation and pointed out that this is a resolution and can be changed with a 24-hour notice. He added that it is not an ordinance, which could also be changed, and it does not have to be voted on by the public. He stressed that it is only a guide that tells him and the staff that $1 million is being put on top and added to that $6.5 million for Public Safety. He said that everything else will be budgeted for as they can. Councilmember Brown reiterated that he believes Mr. Buchanan and staff have done an incredible job and thanked them for their efforts. He commented that it is a shame that they didn't have this 20 years ago when they started putting the streets in. Mr. Buchanan stated that he believes this Council and past Councils have done a very good job. He added that he knows that they do complain about a couple of their streets but there are other towns in this State that would kill to have the Town's streets because they are in pretty good shape. He noted, however, that they have to maintain them and referred to the slide of Zone 1 and said they don't want all of those red dots in any of those zones. He said that the longer they put off maintenance the more red dots they are going to get and the more money it will cost to repair the roads. Councilmember Brown agreed that past Councils have done a great job but none of the Councils, Town Managers or staff presented a plan that is solid for ten to twelve years. Mayor Kavanagh concurred with Councilmember Brown's comments. Councilmember Dickey referred to a Pavement Management Plan from 2010 and reported that the Town has spent in excess of $9 million over the past eleven years and now they are talking about spending $9 million in nine or ten years. She said that they did what they could and the one caveat they had when they first started talking about pavement management was that this isn't what they are going to do and this is their discussion later -- a bond -- because they talked about how this is contingent on that. She noted that past Councils have faced that same dilemma (large scale repairs that were needed) and yet she believes they spent close to $1 million a year if you average d it out, except for during the recession. She reiterated her request that the Town Ma nager think about the Economic Development Plan and what they discussed, how Tourism is a fifth of it and if they get $290,000 coming in to the Downtown Excise Tax Fund, he is saying that $103,000 of that is going to go to Fort McDowell, the Visitors Bureau, the Chamber or whoever is doing it at the time. She said that he is taking a tool that is for Downtown and paying something in whole for the whole Town (part of Lori Gary's salary came from there so she thinks they need to keep that in mind when trying to figure out how to spend Downtown Development excise funds or however they want to say it). She noted that the intent was clear at that meeting if not legally binding. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 11 of 24 Mr. Buchanan advised that staff had to go with the fact that this year's budget was $103,000 for Tourism and he doesn't know what it will be next year but they had to put that number in so they could show that that is the amount. He stated that the number could change in July (he doesn't know what it is going to be). Mayor Kavanagh commented that as they discussed, once they take money from one place they have to take it from another place to pay for it. She said that balance has been the big challenge -- where could they go in the budget to fill the holes and get the money they need for the Pavement Management Program. She pointed out that this was just one way of doing it and if they don't take the $103,000 out of the Downtown Fund and they still want to fund Tourism, which she agrees is extremely important, then they have to find someplace else to get the money from. Councilmember Elkie noted that the sense he is getting from tonight's discussion and previous discussions about this is that this Council wants to solve this problem and have the funding taken care of from this point forward. He added that the two most important things that are being proposed and they are discussing are allocating the Vehicle License Tax toward Pavement Management Program fund and putting Pavement Management on a par with Public Safety. He said that future Councils can make their budget changes and resolutions so these are the two most important things and if they are able to accomplish them then that will be quite a bit. Mr. Buchanan informed the Council that this item will be on the agenda of the J anuary 17th meeting (a resolution for consideration). AGENDA ITEM #2 - PRESENTATION BY RESIDENT GEORGE WILLIAMS RELATED TO ROUNDABOUTS. THIS ITEM WAS ADDED AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBERS BROWN, DICKEY AND YATES. Mr. Williams addressed the Council and said that several of the Councilmembers have asked him to discuss roundabouts, traffic circles and rotaries and the differences between the different devices or intersection controls, as well as safety, capacity, public reaction and pedestrians. He noted that they are a variety of different circular intersections and all have different characteristics with different designs and functionality. Mr. Williams highlighted a PowerPoint presentation (Copy of which is available on line and in the office of the Town Clerk). He noted that there is a difference in performance between the different options and added that the rotaries back east are not what they consider to be roundabouts (roundabouts are a type or subset of circular intersections and a traffic circle is a generic term basically meaning not a roundabout). He explained that roundabouts are not traffic calming circles and briefly discussed the following: * Primary and secondary design features * Safety: Few vehicular conflict points * The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's U.A. Roundabout Safety Report * The NCHRP Report 572 - Roundabouts in the United States * Fewer pedestrian conflict points Mr. Williams advised that current international research shows that modern roundabouts improve vehicular and pedestrian safety compared to conventional intersections. However, their effects on pedestrian safety in the U.S. remain unsubstantiated. Complicating this problem is a scarcity of pedestrian accident data at roundabouts, especially at intersection locations that were constructed as roundabouts and could potentially provide critical before/after accident statistics. He noted that they have been trying to focus on best practices and most of those have occurred over the last ten to twenty years in the United States (very few pedestrian and bicycle accidents on roundabouts). Mr. Williams noted that the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has reported that roundabouts generally are safer for pedestrians than traditional intersections. In a roundabout, pedestrians walk on sidewalks around the perimeter of the circulatory roadway. If it is necessary for pedestrians to cross the roadway, they cross only one direction of traffic at a time. In addition, crossing distances are relatively short and traffic speeds are lower than at traditional intersections. Studies in Europe indicate that on average converting conventional intersections to roundabouts can reduce pedestrian crashes by about 75%. Single-lane roundabouts, in particular, have been reported to involve substantially lower pedestrian crash rates than comparable intersections with traffic signals. Mr. Williams discussed public reaction and noted that at the beginning the comments tend to be negative because a lot of comments are based on misinformation/lack of education. He said that over time the reactions tend to become z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 12 of 24 positive ones. He discussed Saguaro Boulevard and Avenue of the Fountains and expressed the opinion that there are a lot of reasons to consider a roundabout at that location, including: * Safety * Capacity (More than double the capacity of an all way stop and similar or better capacity than a signal * Major initial cost is asphalt and concrete (most of which must be replaced with resurfacing project anyway) so cost difference is minimal * No long-term signal costs (staff, electrical, equipment replacement) * Aesthetics and opportunity for large signature art element * Would not block the view of the Fountain like signal poles would Mr. Williams also discussed the reasons for placing a roundabout at Saguaro Boulevard and Palisades Boulevard, which were the same as listed above with the addition of the fact that the Town already needs to replace the signal at that location and budgeted around $400,000 for that work, which would likely cover the cost difference to convert to a roundabout (although based on a previous presentation that may be moved out of the budget for this year). Mr. Williams discussed various funding mechanisms and potential funding through the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and their committees; the benefits of requesting funding for a comprehensive plan rather than a specific piece and various websites that will provide additional roundabout information. Mr. Williams indicated his willingness to respond to any questions from the Council. Mayor Kavanagh noted that staff will be doing a presentation on this as well and requested that the Councilmembers keep their questions within the scope of the information presented by Mr. Williams. Councilmember Dickey thanked Mr. Williams for his presentation, advised that he is a resident of the Town and touched on his background in this particular area. She noted that Peggy Fiandaca, who is with the Partners for Strategic Action and was part of the Economic Development Plan, had planned to be here this evening but was unable to attend. She said that Ms. Fiandaca wanted everyone to know that she is a resource as well and has provided input to the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and other entities regarding these roundabouts. She commented on MAG and other possibilities for funding and asked Mr. Williams whether they reimburse if the project is done and have it as part of a Walkable Community or something like that. She said that ADOT put something out today about Walkable Communities. Mr. Williams replied that it depends on what the particular program is but typically most of the programs are reimbursable. He added that there are a variety of different programs available and most are reimbursable. Councilmember Elkie also thanked Mr. Williams for his presentation and said with respect to Avenue of the Fountains and the Saguaro Boulevard intersection there has been some discussion about a single or double lane roundabout at that location. He asked Mr. Williams if he could speak to that issue (benefits/negatives). Mr. Williams advised that he briefly looked at the report that was done by the consultant and actually wound up calling him. He said that he would recommend the single-lane roundabout and stated that he thinks the capacity will be there, not only at the intersection. He added that it facilitates the pedestrians and the Downtown uses much better in the connection between Downtown and the Park. He noted that one of the things that wasn't discussed very much in the study is the overall capacity in the system and whether that be on La Montana, Fountain Hills Boulevard or Palisades, but in general those streets have much more capacity if need be. He said that as far as Saguaro, he doesn't think they will be at the point where they will exceed the capacity but the system as a whole has the capacity he thinks to absorb bypass trips by people who wouldn't have wanted to go down there. Councilmember Yates stated that he knows Mr. Williams cannot provide a hard bid on something like this but aside from this one, apples to apples, he knows that Mr. Williams has built and/or designed several roundabouts. He asked what the determining factor was -- the safety issue or was the cost differential so excessive that it kind of leans that way and then the safety factor is obviously the bonus -- or is it the other way around? z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 13 of 24 Mr. Williams responded yes and said that they try to factor in all of those things when they look at associated costs. He added that they try to look at the long term maintenance costs, the initial costs, the benefits to the public as far as safety, capacity, fuel, etc. He noted that in general some of the ones he has been involved with and even with some he hasn't been involved with it varies. He said that some of them are high accident locations that have a lot of accidents and this is one of the best tools in the toolbox from an engineer's standpoint. He advised that twelve year s ago he was discussing roundabouts and he had some negative things to say about them -- but if you get beat over the head long enough with the numbers as an engineer you start to look at it and say alright. He emphasized that roundabouts, as an intersection control, is one of the tools they have to increase safety. He further stated that anytime you are rebuilding an intersection with all of the associated long-term costs, the roundabout is favorable because you don't have to do all the signals, long-term maintenance, etc. Councilmember Hansen asked Mr. Williams his thoughts on the fact that Saguaro Boulevard is a truck route and he advised that it depends on the design vehicle. He said that he believes the design vehicle for the Town has a Wheel Base 50 Feet (WB-50) although he thinks they would want to accommodate a WB-67, and they could do that with these approximate designs (contained in the presentation). He noted that he picked the sizes based on the Cactus Road Corridor sized roundabouts, which has a freeway and trucks coming through despite the fact that it is not designated as a truck route. He added that he thinks the trucks can be accommodated very easily from a size standpoint and from a fuel/noise standpoint, since you would not be breaking them all the way down to zero and then taking them all the way back up to 35 (just slowing down to 15 or 20 miles per hour), the fuel usage is better. Mayor Kavanagh discussed pedestrians crossing and bicyclists. She advised that she has done some res earch on line and it seems as though bicyclists are beginning to stand up and say that they are not happy with roundabouts. She added that they believe that it is safer for them to ride their bikes in a traditional intersection. She said that as far as pedestrians, right now the Town has stop signs rather than a signal and every car has to stop. She noted that there are also crosswalks for people but stated that with roundabouts there are no stop signs -- just the speed (35 miles per hour now and it would go down to 15 miles per hour). She commented that they have to assume that people are going to lower their speed when they are going around but as they approach the crosswalk, it's basically up to the driver to stop if someone wants to cross -- there are no other ways for a person to get across the street. Mr. Williams said that was correct in some ways and noted that not everyone stops at stop signs so again they are depending on the driver to stop but there are no geometrics. He added that with a r oundabout they physically have to slow down to stay on the roadway. He said he would separate the pedestrians from the bicyclists and advised that with pedestrians the studies show that they are safer (there is very good data on this). He further stated that when you look at Avenue of the Fountains and Saguaro Boulevard long term, he does not believe that a four -way stop will handle the traffic. He pointed out that studies between a four -way stop and a roundabout are very close as far as safety and he would certainly not say that a roundabout is safer than a four-way stop but he also wouldn't say that a four-way stop is safer than a roundabout. He noted that capacity wise for the same number of lanes, the roundabout has more than double the capacity. Mayor Kavanagh advised that she understands what Mr. Williams is saying about a single lane and it would be a big step to go to a single lane there. She added that she is still very concerned only because of the history of that intersection and the drivers in Town. She pointed out that they had nothing at first and then they had a flashing light, which didn't work and they finally had to put stop signs up. She said that she is hesitant as to whether people will actually stop for someone in the crosswalk. Mr. Williams commented that that concern has been brought up numerous times -- Fountain Hills is not alone -- but time after time what the studies are showing is that people will yield. He stated that it is the same principle as the flashing yellow light on Saguaro Boulevard where there are no geometrics that would require them to stop. He noted that they have found out that when people are required to slow down, people are much more willing to stop. Mayor Kavanagh said that a flashing light is a little more "in your face" (yes you have to stop because someone is crossing). She added that people are more aware and do slow down when they see the light flashing. She thanked Mr. Williams for his presentation. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 14 of 24 AGENDA ITEM #3 - PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION RELATED TO THE INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE SAGUARO BOULEVARD AND AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS INTERSECTION. Mr. Buchanan informed the Council that approximately a month ago, the Council requested that a study be conducted on this when they talked about the median project and Development Services Director Paul Mood is ready to present his findings. Mr. Mood addressed the Council and referred to the Intersection Analysis Study that was done in 2011 for Saguaro Boulevard and Avenue of the Fountains. He noted that in December 2010, the Town contracted with Aztec Engineering to analyze various intersection configurations for that location. He noted that a member of their team was also a nationally recognized roundabout consultant as well. He said that they looked at slightly modifying the existing three-way stop condition and the other premise that they worked under was to follow the Downtown Vision Plan (DVP). He stated that the DVP calls for narrowing Saguaro Boulevard from El Lago to Parkview down to one lane with on-street parking. (Copy of the presentation available on line and in the office of the Town Clerk.) He advised that they looked at the following alternatives: * Existing 3-way stop * 3-Way stop with single lane and on-street parking * Traffic signal with single lane and on-street parking * Single lane roundabout with on-street parking * Dual lane roundabout with on-street parking Mr. Mood noted that when they got into the on-street parking, they found they could only do it on the park side of Saguaro on the east side because on the west side they have a big elevation difference and there is a large SRP duct bank that runs down the west side of Saguaro. Discussion ensued relative to the various documents that the consultant reviewed as well as the study methodology. Mr. Mood noted that the cost estimates are preliminary and based on the consultant's schematics. He said that they include 20% contingencies and allowances for extra work so they will be higher once they get into the design and actually bid it out. He pointed out that the five-year crash data showed that there were eleven accidents at the intersection and one in 2012 was listed as a pedestrian accident but when they reviewed the report it was actually a special events traffic control person in the middle of the intersection that was bumped by a car (no ticket or citation was issued). He added that they went back to early 2000 and did not see any pedestrian accidents and it has stayed at approximately two accidents a year at that intersection. Mr. Mood informed the Council that the traffic volume data that was collected in 2011 was roughl y 13,000 vehicles per day going through the intersection (1,100 were trucks). He reported that when the consultants took that out for twenty years to 2031 the numbers roughly doubled. He discussed some old traffic data from 2006 that showed the traffic volume at 17,000 vehicles per day through that intersection so that has gone down as development has decreased. He referred to the existing intersection configuration and noted that it is approximately 90 feet to cross Saguaro and across the Avenue of the Fountains is about 130 feet from ramp to ramp. He said that when you get over to the park side it drops off pretty quickly because of the drainage channel on the other side. He stated that no matter what they do they can get people across the intersectio n but they still either have to go north or south for quite a distance to get into the park. Mr. Mood discussed the 3-way stop with the dual lane is what is being included in the bond proposal right now and they would extend out the medians in each area. He added that they also have reconstruction of the fountain that they are not touching with the current median project and will have the Town Clock out there. He advised that they are roughly estimating $150,000 for all of that work and reiterated that th e amount is a little bit on the conservative side. He discussed various levels of services and stated that the morning peak is from 8:00 a.m. until 9:00 a.m. and the afternoon peak is from roughly 4:15 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Mayor Kavanagh said that the major difference here is that they are narrowing the intersection to shorten the turning room for the vehicles and now the crosswalks will go across the medians so that as people cross they have a place to stop before they go the rest of the way (making it safer for pedestrians). z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 15 of 24 Mr. Mood explained that all of the drainage for the Avenue of the Fountains from up past the Post Office channels towards the center median and runs down to that intersection. He referred to a slide that depicted the on-street parking and stated that when they were doing the study they looked at some different crosswalks (one at Paul Nordin Parkway where the Holiday Inn is and one at Parkview). He said that then they narrow it down to one lane and show approximately 30 parking spaces on the east side of the Avenue. He pointed out that the DVP also calls for pedestrian lighting (something similar to what they would see on the Avenue right now) and stated that if they are going to have parking there then they would need some lighting as well. He advised that the cost estimate for this is $563,000 and again that might be a little elevated because it is just very conceptual. Mr. Mood further discussed the 3-way stop (single lane), including the on-street parking, and stated that the intersection really gets narrowed down and they are looking at making some more modifications to the median from the U-turn down to the intersection. He said that this would work with the current traffic counts but in 20 years it would get overwhelmed so staff would not recommend this for the long term. He also discussed the traffic signal (single lane) and noted that it has the same configuration and if the Council wanted to do the traffic signal first they could put the conduit in for a future traffic signal. He stated that it would work in the future however the cost is much higher and they are looking at over $900,000. He stated that the Council should also consider the fact that there are signals at El Lago and Palisades so they would be putting three signals pretty close together. He added that if they did go this route they would want to make sure that they either put conduits and fiber in or some radio communication between the signals to make sure they are talking to each other as far as timing. Mayor Kavanagh asked about fire trucks going through if they went down to single lane and Mr. Mood said that he would be discussing that later on in the presentation. Mr. Mood commented on the single lane roundabout and getting it down to one lane with on-street parking. He noted that the consultant is showing that roundabout pushing into the park property with the sidewalks, etc., so if this is what it wound up looking like they would be doing retaining walls for all of the sidewalks. He reported that this would work through 2026 but 15 to 20 years out the consultant was showing that the northbound peak movement could get into a lower level of service (Level F). He added that the consultant also mentioned that if they put a roundabout out there, people may start changing their traffic patterns going around Panorama to bypass this intersection or go up El Lago or La Montana. He reiterated that it could work into the future but until it is there they don't know. (Cost estimate: $853,000.) Mayor Kavanagh commented that the slide shows it going slightly into park and asked if that presented any problems. Mr. Mood replied that staff would have to check because the park was built with some Federal funds and is not supposed to be used for anything other than a park. Councilmember Dickey stated that the smaller one the Council previously saw appeared as though it didn't encroach as much. She asked if any of it could be moved further west. Mr. Mood responded that this is the smaller one and what the consultant is showing until they actually get into the design and look at all of the constraints (difficult to tell at this point in time). He added that there is a possibility bu t he is putting his trust in the consultant and the roundabout person. Councilmember Yates commented that he realizes that the estimates are elevated but asked if the majority of this cost is due to the fact that retaining walls would have to be built (additional work). Mr. Mood replied that there are some big unknowns there -- the pushing into the park and a staff concern is all of the drainage coming down the Avenue. He stated that if they can't drain it properly and they need to do storm drains then they will have to look at the big SRP duct bank that goes through that intersection and there is a Sanitary District sewer there as well. He noted that they could be relocating some utilities. Councilmember Yates said that the consultant's estimate doesn't include those drainage items so what in Mr. Mood's opinion would cause this to jump up to close to $1 million. Mr. Mood responded these are estimates and that they are going all the way from showing mobilization, erosion control, traffic control, earth work, sub-grade prep, redoing sidewalks, drainage improvements, pedestrian lighting, etc. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 16 of 24 He added that staff would recommend that they light this intersection as well. He stated that traffic signals would have lighting and in the roundabouts staff would recommend lighting the intersection as well. He said that the 3-way stop can be left as is. Councilmember Elkie asked if it was a definite that it would have to go into Fountain Park in order to put a roundabout there and Mr. Mood advised that it is not a definite at this point in time. Councilmember Elkie said that he wanted to be clear on that because it seems as though they have all of these road blocks in front of them. Mr. Mood stated that to go back to early 2010, the same discussion took place with the same presentation and at that time they said that they didn't have a design done. He recommended that when they go through the bond that they analyze everything and bring back some preliminary designs on different options for the Council to consider. He noted that that was the route they took in the last bond process as well. He added that this time staff is recommending choosing an alternative first and sticking with it. Mr. Mood continued with his presentation and discussed the dual lane roundabout ($954,000) and stated that it would handle the capacity fine into the future. He said that the consultant also suggested that they could design a single lane roundabout that could be expanded to a dual lane in the future if capacity did become an issue. Mr. Mood informed the Council that as far as conclusions, every option would work except for the 3-way stop that is reduced down to a single lane. He stated that all of the pedestrian issues seem to work right now and they haven't had a true pedestrian accident in ten years and minimal traffic accidents. He said as far as emergency vehicles, he spoke with the Fire Department and they have no issues right now with the 3 -way stop and the dual lanes because traffic can move over or go through the intersection. He noted that the Department would have issues if it was a 3 -way stop with a single lane (boxed in on each side, by the park and by the median and they would have to wait for everybody to go). He further stated that the Fire Department likes the traffic signal because they can do the pre -emption and control it. He added that they didn't seem to have much concern about the single lane or dual lane roundabout, just that people would have to queue out of it to see the truck coming behind them. He said that as far as aesthetics, with the 3 -way stop they will have basically the same condition that they have today and obviously with the traffic signals there will be poles, mast arms and lights on the signals. He added that with the single lane roundabout they do have the center island that they can landscape or place some art on and stated that staff does recommend that the intersection be lighted. He noted that as far as the costs, the numbers are from the preliminary cost estimates and for staff the "biggest bang for the buck" is the 3-way stop existing conditions with minor improvements. He said that as far as the 3-way stop single lane they don't want that as an option unless it is plumbed for a future traffic signal. He noted that it is better to budget for unknowns upfront rather than have to come back to the Council and ask for more money. Mr. Mood indicated his willingness to respond to questions from the Council. Councilmember Dickey referred to the Aztec Report and noted that under utility impacts for single lane roundabouts it says "minor utility impacts" so it looks like it is a little less than what appears here. She said that she knows Mr. Mood mentioned drainage but if they don't have to encroach that much, that might not be one of the issues. She asked if Mr. Mood knows how much they spent on the Aztec Report/Study and Mr. Mood replied just under $20,000 and that included having someone go out there all day and getting all of the traffic counts and data. Councilmember Dickey commented that when they did that it was to prepare them for putting together the bond and knowing the different options that they had and Mr. Mood agreed and stated that in the last bond proposal in 2011, staff budgeted for the worst case scenario and when they went to the different groups they told them that that was what they were doing and if the bond passed the Council would decide which options they wanted to go with. Councilmember Dickey pointed out that at the end of the Aztec Report, their conclusion was that based on the understanding that the Town would prefer slower speeds and a more pedestrian friendly environment; the single lane roundabout was recommended although there are other options to look at. She referred to the 3-way stop dual lane option and asked if that means they cannot have on-street parking and Mr. Mood replied that is correct. Councilmember Dickey said that in talking about the Downtown Area Specific Plan and all those ot her things, that precludes the parking and perhaps they can talk a little bit more about this. Mr. Mood advised that in the next presentation staff will talk about Saguaro and the numbers he is showing for that do not include on -street parking and z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 17 of 24 just include minor improvements to the existing freeway stop. He stated that if the Council would like to make a change he will have to redo his numbers. Mayor Kavanagh asked if there was a possibility, if it was determined that a traffic signal is needed in the future and they did this road, of going with Option A, the $150,000 fix, that they could prepare it for the future. Mr. Mood responded that it is fairly easy to throw two conduits in each direction when they are digging up the road (not a big added expense). Councilmember Elkie requested that Mr. Williams come forward and said that he had some questions about the intersection and the need to perhaps encroach into the park. He asked Mr. Williams to speak to design and/or potential available options. Mr. Williams advised that he didn't have the specific numbers in front of him as far as the size of the intersection and if he did he could probably give a much better answer. He stated that in general to fit the type of vehicles that he thinks the Council would want to fit through there, they would need something like a Cactus Road. He noted that the diameter of 108th Street & Cactus Road is about 110 feet and the other queue at 104th Street and 100th Street are 120 feet and that is outside curb to outside curb. He stated that full sized 18 wheelers can run through there. He added that when he spoke to the consultant they discussed this a little and he was not trying to stay out of the park -- he just looked at it and said "this is an ideal situation" and I think you could shrink that a little bit based on my conversation with him and based on overlaying (that 120-foot diameter is what the yellow circle on the slide represents). He said he thinks they could get it quite a bit smaller but he again he does n't have the numbers in front of him right now. He indicated his willingness to get a copy of the report and get back to Councilmember Elkie with more detailed information and Councilmember Elkie said that that would be great. Mr. Williams provided some costs for various Scottsdale projects. Councilmember Dickey commented that the larger discussion is are they saying that they don't want the parking. She asked how they are looking at this because it has multi levels of getting traffic through, having it be traffic calming, fitting in with the Downtown Area Specific Plan, etc., and the picture certainly shows a roundabout there. She stated that as they look at this, there is no easy answer, but basically they need to keep in mind that they are doing a project and are looking at maybe having that be a park area. She added that if they have the time at some point she would like to talk to the Council about the ULI. She noted that they have pieces of advice and studies and a lot of places pointing to what she thinks they want to do there which is a median park, safe pedestrians, slowing traffic so people stop and shop and maybe making it look nice. She referred to the top 100 places in the U.S. and noted that number one is in Illinois and it is their roundabout so they are looking at mundane traffic but they are also looking at a project so that should be kept in mind as they move forward. Councilmember Elkie stated that sometimes it is easier to start with what you don't want rather than what you do want and there has been discussion about a number of things. He said that maybe sometime in the future some Council will decide that they need or want a traffic signal there and his understanding from all the comments that have been made is that there is no immediate desire to put a traffic signal there so he would recommend that staff take that option out of the picture altogether. He added that barring any further information maybe the dual lane roundabout should be removed because there has been discussion and he believes agreement about the need for on-street parking and the dual lane roundabout might be too oversized for that particular intersection. He suggested that they look at the three- way stop dual lane, the three way stop single lane, which would provide for on-street parking and then perhaps the single lane roundabout. He indicated that he would like to narrow the discussion down to just those t hree items and go from there. Mayor Kavanagh advised that her first consideration right now is looking at the costs because there are certainly huge differences and they just talked about where they were going to get $100,000 from and how they were going to move money around just to arrive at that amount. She noted that she has discussed the bond with many groups and one thing they have said about the bond is that they want a basic bond with no extras. She added that if this is included in the bond and the cost is close to $1 million she thinks that would put passage of the bond in jeopardy. She said that she is just not convinced right now that the Town has a traffic congestion problem and stated that she believes they have more of a safety issue (getting people across the street). She commented that they can find things on both sides (pros/cons) if they do research and basically roundabouts are to move traffic. She stated that she understands that there z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 18 of 24 are probably a lot of intersections that have had quite a few crashes and they have signals and it was just the best alternative they had and they probably did see a great reduction. She said that she looks at their intersection and it just seems like it is an awful lot to do with a lot of uncertainty as to whether this will actually work. The Mayor further stated that in the presentation they just saw there were statements that said the data on whether this is going to be safe is not really in yet and whether it would be safe for bicyclists is already in question. She commented that they have been trying to encourage "Mountain to Fountain" and more bicyclists coming through Town. She urged the members of the Council to go on line and look at some of the videos from the cyclists groups and see what they are saying about the points of contact and that roundabouts are more dangerous for them. She added that there are also articles on line that talk about disabled and visually impaired people and noted that visually impaired people cross the street by using sound and roundabouts make it much more difficult for them to navigate across the street because the sound doesn't stop. She stated that several articles have mentioned the fact that roundabouts are difficult for children to cross the intersection and they have a park there and a lot of the children go there. She said that children's judgment is not as good as adults and they have trouble judging when it is safe to cross. She added that that is one of the reasons why the flashing light was put in over at the school. She referred to statements made during the presentation relative to the fact that pedestrian safety in the U.S. remains unsubstantiated. She advised that she is not trying to be really negative -- it is just that they have had this intersection before where there was nothing there and people did not stop in the intersection and then they had a flashing light and people still didn't stop. She said now they are saying if they reduce the speed they have to count on people to actually stop an d she does not think that they are going to stop based on the past history of the intersection. Mayor Kavanagh advised that she also has concerns about where the money is going to come from. She expressed the opinion that adding another $1 million to the bond would put the bond in jeopardy and pointed out that they pledged to the people that it was going to be a bond just to fix the road and now they are adding something that was in the last bond and which a lot of people didn't like (it was just one facet that caused people to vote against it). She further stated that she would also be concerned if they decided to use CIP money because a lot of that has already been designated -- they need money for Fire Station #2, there are two park projects that are $700,000 each, mill and overlay has to be done on portions of Shea and there is no money for that yet, as far as the Ade ro Canyon Trailhead she hopefully sees a future designation of funds to build that and that will cost a lot of money. She also pointed o ut that there may be a number of unforeseen projects that might come up. She stated that she would be hesitant to spend the money because she has not been convinced that that intersection, which is a 3 way, not a 4 way, has stop signs now (not traffic signals) and does not have a history of traffic crashes warrants this. She added that if they were talking about the intersection over by the Post Office she might be a little more inclined to go along with it because of the history of the crashes at that location. She noted that they also have to talk about the connectivity and she knows the Swaback Plan talked about roundabouts but they also started to talk about bridges to get the people across the roundabout or moving the pedestrian crosswalks way down one way or the other. She added that there was also a big discussion on whether people would actually walk down one way or another to use the crosswalk. She said that she just has a lot of questions and she is sorry to be so negative but they are talking about an awful lot of money. She stated that as far as the single lane, she thinks they really have to take into consideration the fact that the Fire Department already has an issue with that. Vice Mayor Leger commented that he is not advocating any solution at this point in time, he is still studying the solutions. He referred to the booklet from Aztec and noted that there is actually a concept plan in there that does show the bicycle lane and others going into the park. He said it is hard to tell from looking at it to what extent it goes in to the park but it looks like it is a pretty good cut, whether it is the single lane or the double lane. He added that with respect to bicycle safety, unlike other roundabouts this one does have a bicycle land and it is the bicycle lane that would be intruding into the park. He pointed out that a separate group did the concept plan (MTJ Engineering) and that is one the back of their report. He discussed the estimated costs for the single lane roundabout and expres sed the opinion that they are extremely inflated and unrealistic. He added that if they looked at the budget, they appropriated $800,000 in CIP money for the median project. He said they know that there is $2 million plus (not counting this year) in the Downtown Development Fund so they are not "stealing from Peter to pay Paul" -- they have appropriated those dollars for the median project and they are not going to use them. The Vice Mayor further stated that he too is concerned about the bond and he has advocated a way to reduce the cost of the bond. He said that whether they are spending $150,000 and doing the simple solution or doing a more expensive solution, why don't they carve that out of the bond as a separate project and they can reduce the bond and z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 19 of 24 pay for this either out of excess in the Downtown Fund or with the $800,000 that is in the CIP. He advised that these scare tactics (if we do this or we don't do that) are making him feel as though he is being held hostage by this bond. He added that they have a handful of people who have been verbal about it and they have had a very small percentage of people in the surveys who opposed it. He said that their infrastructure is failing and they are looking for solutions. He noted that he is not an advocate of roundabouts; however, listening to this discussion there is other information there. Councilmember Elkie agreed that some of the discussions they have had before were about not tying this project to the bond and he completely agrees with that. He said that if they can use the $8 million figure that has been discussed exclusively for Saguaro he thinks that is the best way to go. He pointed out that as far as costs, they are "putting the cart before the horse" because they do not have hard numbers and it was mentioned several times that those are conservative numbers (a little more than it would actually cost). He agreed with the Vice Mayor's comment that the two experts could pare the project/cost down even more and said that Mr. Williams advised that roundabouts run in the $200,000 to $400,000 range (actual constructed roundabouts). He stated that it was mentioned that roundabouts are a safety concern for bicyclists and noted that the only comments made about this came from the dais and not from staff. He added that as far as the Fire Department, they do not have an issue about safety and Mr. Mood advised earlier that the Department does not have a problem with placing a roundabout there. He advised that he is favor of a single lane roundabout and believes that it would add some aesthetic appeal, would connect the Downtown to the park, provide a real sense of place for the Downtown and it goes along with everything the Council has been given (studies, etc.). He said that right now with the 3-way stop when he is traveling northbound and is turning west to go onto Avenue of the Fountains, even in his car he has some concerns because probably seven out of ten times the traffic that stopped across from him decides to go anyway and not wait for him to turn. He further stated that as a pedestrian, crossing four lanes of traffic the way that it is right now, is a real issue. He added that people are not always going to pay attention to the stop signs and sometimes will not see someone in the road and that is how accidents happen. He noted that there have been two accidents a year at this intersection and he thinks their residents are smart enough and can handle a roundabout. He advised that he is not in favor of spending $1.4 million and he certainly believes that they can get that cost down. He also reiterated that it should not be tied to the bond. Councilmember Yates said that ironically they are having discussions on how they can get to some real hard numbers in front of them instead of some "shots in the dark." He stated obviously $150,000, if it is the pat h of least resistance and the best financial way to go, sounds good but if it doesn't meet all of their needs as far as the Swaback Plan and everything else then they are just putting good money after bad. He agrees that they should carve this out as the Vice Mayor suggested and then they have a "not to exceed" budget based on what they may have left over in their own funds. He added that they could go through the process and either put it out for bid or he knows now that they have the ability to do some concept plans internally and then put those out to bid even if it's a rough bid or a "not to exceed" bid they will then have some hard numbers. He agreed with Vice Mayor Leger that there is a lot of "fluff" in the numbers before them and expressed the opinion that none of them have enough information to make a valid decision. Councilmember Brown stated that he sees some value being added to the Downtown area by having some angle d parking on Saguaro. He said that he has driven down Cactus Road at all different hours (even close to rush hour) and it is amazing how quickly people can get through the intersections. He added that everybody slows down and he has never seen an accident on any one of the three roundabouts and they are built for four streets, not three. He said he sees a lot of plusses having a single lane roundabout in the Downtown and it will add to the aesthetics, make the area safer and make the traffic flow simpler, easier and quicker through Town. Councilmember Hansen advised that they are looking at spending $1.5 to $1.8 million on the median and she thinks to miss the chance to add to this (Saguaro) would be really missing the boat. She said if they are going to improve th e median she thinks it is a necessity to follow suit with that intersection and to narrow down Saguaro between the points noted in the report. She expressed the opinion that the only way to slow traffic down and make it more pedestrian friendly is to narrow Saguaro Boulevard and now is the time to do it. She added that she agrees with Councilmember Elkie's comment about it being easier to take out things that they know they wouldn't want to consider and she would really hate to see traffic lights at that intersection as well as leaving it the four lanes that it is right now. Mayor Kavanagh commented that she thought she heard this evening that the Fire Department did have an issue with single lane and Mr. Mood responded that they have a problem with a single lane with a stop sign. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 20 of 24 Vice Mayor Leger said that if they take into consideration the numbers in the Aztec Report, which he thinks are a little high, there are some further decisions that can be made if the Council wants to go with a single lane rou ndabout. He stated that for example just using their numbers it is $853,000 for a single lane roundabout with the configuration changes (curb, etc.). He added that then, when they do the on-street parking just on one side of Saguaro Boulevard, they added a cost of $500,000 plus so they would have to ask themselves the question how much value is there in those thirty parking spots if they went in this particular direction. He noted that for safety reasons they talked about parallel parking. Mr. Mood advised that he believes the majority of the cost was the lighting and they were showing the pedestrian lighting on both sides of Saguaro (parking on one side but lighting on both). Councilmember Hansen agreed that the costs appear to be a little bit high but said that she has long been a proponent of having parking on the park side of Saguaro Boulevard. She noted that if they want people to stop but don't allow them to park on Saguaro that does not give off a very business friendly attitude. Vice Mayor Leger commented that he doesn't disagree but mentioned it in terms of cutting costs. Councilmember Dickey reminded the Council to look at the Downtown Area Specific Plan because it talks exactly about that -- the parking -- and this was the goal. She added that here they are potentially doing a very good project so this is the right time to talk about trying to do that and getting some parking and creating some Downtown space that they have been talking about. She said that she can't imagine the actual cos ts being anywhere near to what is before them and noted that she did a lot of research on ADOT and in other states and it seems that other states are doing roundabouts for around $450,000 so she is not totally sure what the big disconnect is but they have to be sure that they are checking that out. Mayor Kavanagh pointed out that Mr. Mood stated that the costs have a lot of extras in them and there is a lot of "wiggle room." She asked Mr. Mood not to be conservative and to advise what he believes a single lane would actually cost (the absolute best scenario) She questioned whether he really thinks it could cost $200,000 to $400,000 to build this entire project. Mr. Mood asked if the Mayor was talking about carving out El Lago to Parkview and said there was $300,000 worth of asphalt and curb alone in the Saguaro project from those limits so they would have that cost. He added let's just say the best case scenario with the roundabout (and if they don't have a lot of utilities or drainage issues) would be $300,000, so now they are at $600,000 and if the on-street parking with all the lighting is $200,000, then they are at about $800,000. He noted that he talked about the median project and the CIP money going away but added that with the Manager's presentation for Pavement Management he also has to go back in and add $1 million for Zone 7 because that was $1 million of the Vehicle License Tax, one year HURF, supplemented by $1 million of the CIP. He explained that there are a lot of "moving parts" that he has to go and look at. He further stated that if they don't do lighting on the median and if the Council's direction is to use that money, that frees up some money. He pointed out that they also had a project in the CIP that was $250,000 a year from Downtown money for four years and that was for streetscape for the theater or if the large vacant piece develops. He advised that he has already dropped that back down to $200,000 a year for two years so between that project and the median project all of the D owntown Fund is reserved. He added that there are going to be a lot of "moving parts" as far as the Council's priorities with different CIP projects as well. Councilmember Yates said that Mr. Mood is saying that the $1.5M bid included the asphalt work from Parkview to El Lago in the estimate before them and Mr. Mood replied no, it does not. Councilmember Yates stated that the $1.5 then was just for the design, construction, and lighting of the roundabout. Mr. Mood concurred and added that he agrees that the number is high. Councilmember Yates reiterated his suggestion that they come up with a concept plan or something basic that they can put in front of someone and get some hard numbers on. He agreed with Councilmember Hansen's comment about not missing the boat as far as this project. Vice Mayor Leger asked what the projected balance of the Capital Fund at the end of this fiscal year was. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 21 of 24 Deputy Town Manager/Finance Director Julie Ghetti advised that she did not have the exact numbers but would say worst case, it would be around $8 or $9 million. Councilmember Dickey commented that she is not sure why they wouldn't keep the asphalt between El Lago and Parkview in the bond. Councilmember Yates advised that that was not included in this bid (not included in the $1.5 million). In response to a question from Councilmember Dickey, Mr. Mood stated that they could theoretically keep the asphalt in the bond and said that when the engineer does his drawings and puts his bid documents together he is going to have to specifically carve out the roundabout and on-street parking and it can start to get a little convoluted because they are all tied together. Mr. Mood advised that when they design the project they will want to hire one engineering company that des igns it from Shea to Fountain Hills with everything in-between. He said that when he goes through the next presentation that might answer some questions and clarify some things. Mayor Kavanagh thanked Mr. Mood for his presentation and input. AGENDA ITEM #4 - PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION RELATED TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF SAGUARO BOULEVARD. Mr. Mood addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and noted that the Council saw this presentation at a Work Study Session a few months ago so he would quickly go through it (Copy available on line and in the office of the Town Clerk). Mr. Mood advised that the Town contracted with RAMM Geotechnical Engineering in 2012 to take core samples in order to determine the actual pavement thickness and sub-grade profile of Saguaro Boulevard from Shea Boulevard to Fountain Hills Boulevard. He reported that unfortunately they found out that Saguaro is in worse shape than they thought. He explained that there is typically between 1" and 2" of asphalt over 2" to 3" inches of sub-grade and typical standards are 4" of asphalt on 6" of sub-grade. He said that due to the condition of the road, the engineer is recommending that they take Saguaro down 10", remove everything and then come back up with 6" of base course and 4" of asphalt. He noted that there is also the opportunity that some of that material can be worked and used as sub - grade material if it is structurally sound so there could be some cost savings there. Mr. Mood stated that when they looked at the Saguaro Boul evard construction they just did a basic project and from last year's bond project they took out any crosswalks and sidewalks and what they have left is the following: * Engineering design and construction oversight * Asphalt reconstruction (full depth) * Drainage improvements (Palisades Boulevard and Desert Canyon Golf Course areas) * Valve and manhole adjustments * ADA ramp modifications as required * Curb repair and replacement * Striping and pavement markings * Avenue of the Fountains Intersection 3-way stop modification * Traffic signal replacement at Palisades Boulevard (CIP Fund) Mr. Mood also discussed the project coordination and stated that the estimated cost of design and construction is $8.6 million with $400,000 for the traffic signal coming out of the CIP Fund. Mr. Mood reviewed the Avenue of the Fountains Intersection Improvements and explained that the intersection of Saguaro Boulevard and Avenue of the Fountains will be modified to provide increased pedestrian safety. He added that reconstruction of the existing water feature is anticipated to be included in the project. He also discussed Saguaro Boulevard Drainage Improvements and referred to photographs of Saguaro Boulevard near the Desert Canyon Golf Course. He informed the Council that the inlets to various drainage structures on the west side of the street are undersized and do not allow for proper drainage. He stated that the Saguaro Boulevard Reconstruction estimate z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 22 of 24 includes design and construction of properly sized drainage structures to prevent standing water, which is not only a hazard to motorists but accelerates deterioration of the asphalt and sub-grade. He referred to a photograph that showed southbound Saguaro Boulevard from Palisades Boulevard to Parkview Avenue after a rainstorm in October 2010 and noted that due to the lack of storm drains in the area the water drains to a catch basin south of Parkview Avenue, which then flows into Fountain Park. He said that the reconstruction estimate includes design and construction of proper drainage structures and storm drains in this area to prevent standing water. Mr. Mood further discussed the projected tax rate impact on residential properties (for an $8.2 million bond) for five year, seven year and ten year paybacks and referred to chart that depicted the approximate interest that would be paid for the various payback periods. He stated that once this has been paid off, staff is going to have to go out for another bond to fix more roads. He added that while the Pavement Management Plan does slurry seal at $1 million a year, the Stantec Report also talked about $2.8 to $3 million a year to do some mill and overlays in that plan as well so this bond program is their mill and overlay program. Mr. Mood informed the Council that if the bond does not pass then staff's plan is to take CIP money (anywhere from $1.5 to $2 million) and they would mill and overlay the worst parts of Saguaro. He pointed out that that would not touch the sub-grade and said that they might do some minor drainage improvements and then they would come back and micro-surface or chip seal/slurry seal the whole length of the road. He noted that there is approximately 170,000 square yards of asphalt out there and when you multiply that by $4.00, $5.00 or $6.00 a square yard it adds up quickly. Mayor Kavanagh thanked Mr. Mood for his presentation. Councilmember Elkie asked if there are any restrictions on the use of the bond monies (is it tied to how quickly they pay off the bond?). Town Attorney Andrew McGuire requested clarification on the question and Councilmember Elkie asked if they have to spend all of the money before the residents pay off the debt. Mr. McGuire replied that he doesn't believe that they are even required to expend all of the bond procee ds (they have authorization up to a certain amount by the voter authorization and from that they budget however much they are going to issue and the Council makes that decision based upon what they need for the budget, which can be diminished by other sources of money that is put into it). He added that then that expenditure is put under one issuance or in step issuances. He stated that the amount they issue is not necessarily tied to the voter authorization other than that is the maximum amount. Councilmember Elkie said if the bond does pass, he would be more inclined to do a five year payback schedule because of the difference in interest between five and ten years ($1.7 million difference). Councilmember Dickey stated that that is what she was wonderi ng about because it sounds like they are saying once they pay one off they will probably have to go out for one. She asked if there would be an overlap if they did go with the ten years (would they need to go out for another bond before this one would be paid off?). Mr. Mood responded that it depends on whether the roads hold up. Councilmember Dickey commented that she doesn't know whether it would be easier for the citizens to deal with a smaller amount over a longer period of time or a larger amount over a shorter period of time like Councilmember Elkie discussed, which saves money in the long run. She added that she is not opposed to going with the longer term (citizens would pay less). Discussion ensued relative to Mr. Mood's comment regarding the Pavement Management Plan and the fact that it does not include any mill and overlay and the Vice Mayor's statement that from reviewing that plan, that in addition to the slurry seal, etc., it does include reconstruction of specific areas in those zones that require reconstruction; Mr. Mood's response that the Vice Mayor is correct but a lot of those areas are 20x20 patches or 50x10, the areas that they cannot effectively put a coating over; the Vice Mayor's comment that as they cycle through the zones they will take the worst pieces and reconstruct them and his assumption that the next time they cycle through that zone they will do the same thing; Vice Mayor Leger's statement that it is not accurate then to state that the Pavement Management Plan does not include any mill and overlay or reconstruction because more is going on in areas; Vice Mayor Leger's comment that it z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 23 of 24 was stated the proposal staff has brought forward as a solution for Avenue of the Fountains would cost the Town $150,000 (ballpark) and if they were to go with the bond as proposed and go with the intersection improvement as proposed, and it was a stand-alone project, they could then carve out about $150,000 from the bond so once again he is looking at reducing the cost of the bond and if they do that then they start changing the chart and realistically five years might start looking a little better (for payback) if they can get the amount down under $8 million (the Vice Mayor's statement that everyone is brainstorming on this); and Mr. Mood's re sponse that if the Council decided to take the fountain out they could save that amount. Mayor Kavanagh commented that getting back to what Councilmember Elkie had said between the 5, 7 and 10-year paybacks and also referencing what Councilmember Dickey said, Mr. Mood had advised that right after this bond they would have to go into another one for another road so if they went with the 5 -year payback, would there be some sort of a grace period in the middle (can they wait a little before they go into the n ext bond and give the taxpayers a little break or it is still a question of jumping right into a new bond?). Mr. Mood advised that they honestly could be doing work on Palisades in the Downtown area right now, Fountain Hills Boulevard out to the middle school, Shea from Palisades to the Scottsdale border and then Shea eastbound from Palisades to Fountain Hills Boulevard as well. He said those are the other roads that they would want to work on and the geotechnical engineer also did core samplings on the Downtown portion of Palisades and Fountain Hills Boulevard from Palisades to the middle school and they found very minimal asphalt and sub -grade profiles there as well. He stated that they are recommending full reconstruction. He further stated that what the Pavement Management Plan does is they would look at going in and patching or milling/overlaying the worst parts of those roads and putting some slurry seal or micro-surfacing over the top to extend the life of those roads out five, seven or eight years. He added that then the next time they go out for a bond hopefully they can fix those roads. Councilmember Dickey advised that the other way to look at it is if it goes longer there may be more people livin g in Town and, as with what happened with the School District, when more people came the amount people wer e responsible for paying was less although it didn't change the amount that had to be paid back (just spread out over more people). Mayor Kavanagh said that possibly Ellman will happen and Mr. Mood stated that if that occurred, there would be an influx of construction sales tax and have a lot of one-time money to go and fix some roads. Councilmember Dickey asked if there will be coordination with any existing sidewalk plans and will there be any changes in parking decisions along Saguaro Boulevard that go along with this project. Mr. Mood responded that there are no sidewalks in this other than fixing whatever ADA issues need to be addressed and all the sidewalks that were in the CIP previously have been taken out. He said as far as parking he is not sure what area Councilmember Dickey is referring to. Councilmember Dickey clarified that she wanted to know if they were planning to change any of the r ules about parking if they repave Saguaro (the area near Saguaro Woods)? She noted that people are not allowed to park there now and she wanted to know if staff was anticipating any changes as far as where people can and cannot park. Mr. Mood advised that he would anticipate that the regulations would remain the same. Councilmember Dickey asked if there were any plans to use rubberized asphalt and Mr. Mood stated that that would add about $500,000 to the project. Mr. Buchanan informed the Council that staff will place these items on an agenda for discussion and direction (all three of them together). AGENDA ITEM #5 – ADJOURNMENT. Councilmember Yates MOVED to adjourn the meeting and Councilmember Elkie SECONDED the motion. The Work Study Session adjourned at 8:15 p.m. z:\council packets\2013\r130207\130108wsm.docx Page 24 of 24 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS By __________________________ Linda M. Kavanagh, Mayor ATTEST AND PREPARED BY: ______________________________ Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Work Study Session held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills in the Town Hall Council Chambers on the 8th day of January, 2013. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 7th day of February, 2013. __________________________________ Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk