|
PRESENT: | ||
|
Mayor Williams Councilmember Daniels-Cohen Councilmember Grimes Councilmember Male Councilmember Schultz Councilmember Seamens Councilmember Snipper |
City Manager Matthews City Clerk Carpenter Deputy City Manager Ludlow Police Chief Ricucci Police Lieutenant Bowers Public Works Director Braithwaite | |
Mayor Williams noted that the Council would be meeting on Tuesday, January 17 due to the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday.
Pat Loveless, Maple Avenue, encouraged more community participation in meetings and events. He suggested that youths be invited to meetings and also suggested that Council permit people to call in to the meetings.
Evelyn Adler, Garland Avenue, requested that trash and recycling cans be installed at the corners of Carroll Avenue and Garland Avenue and Garland Avenue and Flower Avenue. Ms. Adler also noted issues with standing water near her home that resulted from construction of the new music building on the WAU campus, and issues with noise from the building ventilation system.
Catherine Tunis, Larch Avenue, commented on the sidewalk process. She noted that sidewalks have been a bone of contention in the SOSCA neighborhood. Ms. Tunis said there is no demonstration of the need for new sidewalks and advocated for low cost, non destructive alternatives, such as reducing the speed limit. She urged the Council to recognize the petitions submitted by Elm Avenue, Larch Avenue, and Auburn Avenue opposing sidewalks.
Mary Rooker, Larch Avenue, largely agreed with Ms. Tunis. She commented that allowing residents a block away to request a sidewalk on a neighboring block, and requiring only 30% of the residents to support sidewalks, could allow an active minority to easily overrule the majority. She also commented that, as a bicyclist, she did not support narrowing streets to install sidewalks.
Mr. Grimes announced Midwinter Play Day scheduled for February 9, from 6-8 p.m. at the Community Center. Donations of materials are needed. He noted that teens are eligible for community service hours through Play Committee events. Information is available at takomaplays.org.
Mr. Snipper supported installation of the trash and recycling cans requested by Ms. Adler. He noted that there is a pothole on Flower Avenue near Wabash Avenue. Since Flower Avenue has not yet been turned over to the City, we need to get SHA to do the repair. He also noted a water leak on Kennebeck Avenue near Flower Avenue.
Mr. Snipper reminded folks that there would be many opportunities to volunteer in the City and the County on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.
Ms. Daniels-Cohen reported that she visited three practice venues of the City’s Winter Basketball League on Saturday. She noted that 100 coaches, volunteers and parents are supporting the program. It is a good partnership between the Recreation Committee and the Recreation Department.
Ms. Daniels-Cohen recognized the memorial service held for Walt Rave. She commented that she was humbled to have crossed his path. Ms. Daniels-Cohen also noted activities for Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and the February 9 Play Day event.
Mr. Male referenced comments made by Mr. Loveless regarding meeting participation. He noted that comments submitted to the City Clerk do get distributed to the City Council.
Mr. Schultz asked for an update on the City’s negotiations with SHA regarding Rt. 410.
Ms. Matthews said that a series of draft agreements have gone back and forth between the attorneys. Some progress is being made and she may ask the Mayor to schedule a closed session to get direction from the Council.
Mr. Schultz announced a meeting on January 12 where Montgomery County Planning will present the latest draft of the Urban Design Guidelines for the Takoma/Langley Sector Plan. He also announced a public meeting on January 26 with Chief Ricucci and the Prince George’s County Hyattsville District Commander regarding recent crimes in the Ward 6 Langley Park area.
Ms. Matthews announced that Solar Solutions has begun installation of the solar panels on the Community Center. The contractors will continue on to Public Works once the Community Center work is completed.
Chief Ricucci announced that he will be holding a public Compstat meeting on January 24, at 7 p.m. in the Auditorium. He invited the Council and residents to participate.
Mr. Snipper made a motion to adopt the minutes of December 12, 2011 and January 3, 2012. The motion was seconded by Mr. Seamens. The motion carried.
Scott Windley, Accessibility Specialist with the U.S. Access Board, made the presentation. He described the various laws and regulations that apply to the City in this area. As a staff member with the Access Board, he develops guidelines that the Access Board reviews in the area of right-of-way access.
Mr. Windley made a number of points, including:
- The ADA Title II standards, which apply to state and local governments, set forth basic requirements. The standards provide guidance to measure compliance and offer safe harbor for designers who follow the standards.
- If a locality receives requests from individuals, it is better to address the issue if possible.
- The Department of Transportation investigates compliance issues in the right-of-way; the Department of Justice is charged with seeking compliance.
- The ADA is a civil rights law that masquerades as a building code. It does not require sidewalks; however, if you provide a sidewalk, it must meet the requirements.
- The Access Board is seeking comment on a proposed rule providing guidelines for pedestrian facilities in the right-of-way.
- Information is available at www.access-board.gov.
Mr. Windley contrasted the cost of making capital improvements that provide access to transit stops with the cost of providing paratransit services. Making capital improvements will save money.
Mr. Windley responded to questions from the Council.
Regarding triggers for improving existing sidewalks, Mr. Windley said that if you are working with a sidewalk, it needs to be fixed. The improvements can be transitioned into the existing sidewalk. There is not an expectation that a jurisdiction redo a whole sidewalk.
There is an ongoing obligation to provide access. Where a sidewalk is deteriorating or spotty from point A to point B, do a plan to spread the cost over time. Once you have a facility, you have to maintain it, including doing snow removal. If a complaint is filed about a sidewalk along a State highway, both the City and the State may share the responsibility for fixing it. Complaints may be made to the Department of Transportation or the Department of Justice.
Alterations to sidewalks should not be made that decrease accessibility below the minimum requirements.
Safe Routes to School Program requirements may go further than ADA requirements. Access to school bus stops is not covered by the ADA but may be covered by Safe Routes to School. The program may generate a need for sidewalks that the ADA does not.
In the event of a sidewalk with a utility pole in the middle of it, the problem cannot always be fixed. It may require the purchase of right-of-way to get a route around the pole. You should know the problem is there and have a plan to fix it at some point.
If there is a sidewalk on only one side of the street, ensure that everyone has to cross the street to reach it, not just people with disabilities. If there are complaints, the City would need to show it’s tried to comply and that it is aware of the problem.
Regarding bus stops, if the City has provided a bus stop it is discriminatory to not make it accessible. Shelters are not required. A pad and an accessible path to the pad may be needed.
Regarding sidewalks that end and continue further on, the City may want to fill in the gap, but it may not be required. The Department of Justice can be satisfied if there is ongoing work to make improvements and a certain percentage of funds devoted to ongoing effort.
The width of sidewalks required will be increasing to four feet, but other obligations may apply. SHA requires five foot sidewalks, while other standards may require four feet. Safe Routes to School may require wider sidewalks.
Mr. Windley noted that sidewalks serve all users. A sidewalk on at least one side of a street is not a bad idea. He noted that he spends 95% of his time as a pedestrian and sidewalks make it easier.
Chief Ricucci explained that the purchases would include one hybrid, two Chevrolet Impalas that would serve as vehicles to be used on the street but not marked as patrol cars, and an SUV that would be for use by a K-9 officer.
Mr. Seamens asked if hybrid vehicles could be used as patrol cars.
Chief Ricucci responded that he is reviewing the option each year and does not yet feel that it is a cost effective option at this time.
Mr. Grimes asked if the State of Maryland contract would provide the lowest cost.
Lieutenant Bowers responded that he had checked multiple vendors and found that the prices are about the same. Negotiating a lower price would be difficult given the small number of cars purchased by the City.
Motion to adopt Single Reading Ordinances 2012-1, 2012-2, and 2012-3 Authorizing the Purchase of Police Vehicles. Moved by Councilmember Snipper, seconded by Councilmember Seamens. (VOTING FOR: Mayor Williams, Councilmember Daniels-Cohen, Councilmember Grimes, Councilmember Male, Councilmember Schultz, Councilmember Seamens, and Councilmember Snipper)
Ordinance 2012-1, Ford Fusion Purchase (attached)
Ordinance 2012-2, Ford Interceptor Purchase (attached)
Ordinance 2012-3, Chevrolet Impalas Purchase (attached)
The Council discussed its appointments.
Mr. Grimes noted that he intends to continue as an elected member of the Old Takoma Business Association. His term runs for two more years. He indicated that there is precedent as past members of the Council have participated with the Thunderbolts and the Folk Festival. He clarified that he is not representing the Council in any formal way with his activity in OTBA.
Mr. Grimes commented that seniority leading to precedence in appointments versus alternates makes sense to him.
Mr. Williams said that his sense is that it may be more of an issue when new folks get more familiar with the COG committees. He said the chief elected officer is usually the representative to the COG Board of Directors.
Mr. Male suggested that it is important to evaluate each year what the Council is trying to get done, which may take precedence over seniority or other things.
Mr. Snipper pointed out that a lot of the COG committee work is information sharing and COG staff really sets the agenda. The Transportation Planning Board is one where votes do matter.
Councilmembers will serve as follows:
COG Board of Directors: Bruce Williams (member); Terry Seamens (alternate)
Transportation Planning Board: Reuben Snipper (member); Seth Grimes (alternate)
Air Quality Committee: Tim Male (member)
Region Forward Coalition: Tim Male (member)
Human Services and Public Safety Committee: Terry Seamens (member); Reuben Snipper (alternate)
Climate, Energy and Environmental Policy Committee: Fred Schultz (member)
Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee: Bruce Williams (member); Kay Daniels-Cohen (alternate)
Takoma Park Volunteer Fire Department Board of Directors: Bruce Williams and Kay Daniels-Cohen
The Council discussed its goals for use of the sustainability dollars.
Mr. Williams supported development of an action plan with an external focus. Efforts would be put into working with the community to have a broader impact.
Mr. Grimes suggested pulling ideas from the Task Force on Environmental Action (TFEA) report and other sources. The contractor would consult with the Council, create and implement plans.
Mr. Male agreed with an external focus. The energy piece of the TFEA agenda has the potential for the most impact, saving both the City and residents money.
Mr. Grimes suggested that the person should have expertise in prospecting for grants.
Mr. Schultz commented that someone would need to evaluate the work of the consultant on a daily basis. He is concerned about staff capacity to do that.
Mr. Snipper supported hiring a firm or contractor to pull together the TFEA material and develop an action plan, with short, medium and long term time frames, and indicate needed budget and staffing. He also supported the external focus and Mr. Male’s suggestion to focus on energy.
Mr. Seamens clarified that in building the proposal, the focus would be on TFEA recommendations to be implemented by residents or businesses. Staff would develop proposals for implementing the TFEA recommendations within City government.
Mr. Male did not support developing a plan to implement the TFEA recommendations, but instead develop a way to operationalize a piece of the report. The Council would provide a subset of areas to work on. Additionally, if funds are available later, the Council may wish to fund something recommended by the staff.
Mr. Snipper noted that many of the proposals in the TFEA report are externally focused or would be initiated or operated by the City. Some of the ideas could be implemented right away, such as preparing educational material. An action plan would not be an impediment to going ahead. It would maximize our efforts to have a time line, staffing resources needed and outcomes. The plan would allow the City to be organized in what to pick and move forward.
Mr. Male said that Council could also ask the staff to put out a request for bids to produce an implementation plan to build a public private partnership to encourage energy conservation and alternative energy use. Other specific ideas would be a carbon audit or composting plan. He urged that the Council be as specific as possible to get a better product.
There was discussion about whether to limit ideas to those in the TFEA report and whether the Council should review the report to select priorities.
Mr. Male recommended moving forward with having staff develop an RFP for a contract to develop an implementation plan with the TFEA recommendations that are focused on energy and buildings, but not limited to those recommendations, and to request staff to see if a carbon audit could be done separately or adding in other things that could be implemented within the budgeted amount.
Ms. Daniels-Cohen agreed with Mr. Male and Mr. Snipper. She said she wants the biggest bang for the dollar and measurable specific goals within a limited time frame.
Mr. Grimes suggested adding transportation into the mix, such as optimization of traffic signals and roadway configuration items.
Mr. Schultz said he was not sure about adding that in, but instead supported Mr. Male’s proposal.
Ms. Braithwaite noted that the City does not control the signals and, consequently, we may be asking someone to advise us about something we have no control over.
Mr. Male suggested that, if there is additional money, have staff identify specific transportation items that can be funded.
Mr. Seamens supported Mr. Male’s ideas, except for how the priorities were selected.
Ms. Matthews commented that there seemed to be general consensus around what Councilmember Male proposed, but that the Council does not wish to shut off other possibilities. She suggested that she work with a subcommittee of the Council to develop a draft RFP that would address projects that are externally focused and behavior changing. This would be a contract over $10,000 and so would be voted on by the Council.
The Council supported having Mr. Male and Mr. Snipper work with the City Manager to develop the RFP.
Mr. Williams noted the Sustainable Maryland Certified program that the Council had signed on to. He asked where this effort would fit into that.
Ms. Braithwaite indicated that a Green Team for the program would consist of a staff member, a Councilmember, and two community representatives.
Ms. Matthews noted that points toward the program can be obtained without a Green Team.
Ms. Daniels-Cohen offered to follow up on the Green Team idea.
Due to the lateness of the hour, the item was deferred to January 17.
Mr. Male commented that if the Council was willing to reopen the process discussion next week, he would be interested in exploring expanding the survey area to a one block radius and only counting votes of those who respond to the survey.
The Council adjourned for the evening at 10:53 p.m.