HomeMy Public PortalAbout2018-07-12 packetNotice of Meeting & Tentative Agenda
City of Jefferson Public Works & Planning Committee
1) Introductions
Thursday, July 12, 2018
7:30a.m .
John G. Christy Municipal Building, 320 East McCarty Street
Boone/Bancroft Room (Upper Level )
TENTATIVE AGENDA
2) Approval of the June 14, 2018 Committee meeting minutes
3) New Business
1. Potential Capital Improvement Projects (David Bange):
a . Monroe Street Corridor Highway 50 to Woodlawn
b . Traffic Control at the Intersection of Industrial and Jaycee Drive
2 . Amendment to Schedule Y regarding the Intent to Disconnect notification fee
(David Bange)
3. 2018 Annual CDBG Action Plan (Jayme Abbott)
4. Cardboard Recycle Bin Removal (Jayme Abbott)
5. Solid Waste Code Discussion of One and Two Family Residences (Jayme
Abbott)
4) Other Topics
5) Citizen opportunity to address Council/Staff on Stormwater and Other Public Works
Issues
• Stormwater Pipe next to the Building at 225 Flora Drive off of Christy Drive (Jim
Wisch)
6) Adjourn
NOTES
Individuals should contact the ADA Coordin ator at (573) 634 -6570 to request accommodations or al ternative fo rmats as
required under the Americans with Disabil ities Act. Please allow t hree business days to process t he request.
Please call (573) 634 -6410 with questions regarding agenda items .
MINUTES
JEFFERSON CITY
PUBLIC WORKS AND PLANNING COMMITTEE
Boone/Bancroft Room
Committee Members Present:
Ken Hussey
Ron Fitzwater
David Kemna
Mark Schreiber
Laura Ward
Staff Present:
John G. Christy Municipal Building
320 East McCarty Street
June 14, 2018
Matt Morasch, Public Works Director
David Bange, City Engineer
Britt Smith, Operations Division Director
Don Fontana, Stormwater Engineer
Mark Mehmert, Transit Division Director
Sonny Sanders, Director of Planning and Protective Services
Eric Barron, Planning/MPO Manager
Alex Rotenberry, Transportation Planner
Matt Schofield, Fire Chief
Ryan Moehlman, City Counselor
Steve Crowell, City Administrator
Brenda Wunderlich, Administrative Assistant
Attendance
3 of3
3 of3
3 of3
3 of3
3 of3
Chairman Hussey called the meeting to order at 7:30a.m. A quorum was present at this time.
The following guests were present: Duane Schreimann, 931 Wildwood; Larry Linthacum, JCPS;
Gaspare Calvaruso, Capital Region Medical Center; Bob Weber, JCPS; Steve Bruce, JCPS: Elisha
Carlock, 3819 Buckingham Park; Brian Bemskoetter, 1015 Los Brisis; Paul Samson, CMPS; Curtis
Neuenswander and Rob Kingsbury of Farming Holding Company; Mayor Carrie Tergin; and Nicole
Roberts, News Tribune.
1. Introductions
Introductions were made at this time.
2. Approval of the May 10, 2018 Committee meeting minutes
Councilwoman Ward moved and Councilman Schreiber seconded to approve the May 1 0,
2018 minutes, motion carried.
3. New Business
1. School Development Agreement as it Relates to Lewis and Clark Drive and Union
Street (Britt Smith)
Mr. Smith explained due to the new high school development agreement, staff would like to
see Jefferson City Public Schools have control of the roadways due to liability associated with the
roads.
Minutes/Jefferson City Public Works and Planning Committee June 14, 2018
. There was discussion among C~mmittee members, staff and those present regarding the new
high school develo~ment agreement be1ng a separate issue, streets being through the school
campuses, and maintenance of streets.
Comm~ttee member~ asked that Mr. Moehlman continue discussions with the school district to
resolve these 1ssues and bnng to the City Council for discussion.
2. Monroe Street Corridor Highway 50 to Woodlawn requested by Councilwoman
Ward (David Bange)
Mr. Bange explained the costs of reconstructing Monroe Street and make it a two way street
from Woodlawn to Highway 50/63 .
. There was discuss~on am~ng Committee members and staff regarding the cost, the possibility
of a C1ty County Cooperative proJect, and the movement of the retaining wall on Monroe Street.
Mr. Morasch stated staff will be discussing removing the retaining wall as soon as possible. He
further stated staff would bring further information to the Committee at a future meeting.
3. F & F Development Agreement of the Old St. Mary's Hospital (David Bange)
Mr. Bange explained staff is requesting the Committee to affirm the decision to pursue a
development agreement with F&F Development.
There was discussion among Committee members, staff, and those present regarding the
relinquishment of two parcels of property owned by the City in exchange for $15,000 and all
easements needed for the construction of greenway along their properties at Dunklin and Bolivar
Streets.
Councilman Schreiber moved and Councilwoman Ward seconded to refer the development
agreement to the City Council with recommendation to approve, motion carried.
4. Transit Code Modifications for Bulk Ride Purchases (Mark Mehmert)
Mr. Mehmert explained the changes to the code would be a section added for bulk sale of
transit serves to be known as the Universal Pass.
Councilwoman Ward moved and Councilman Kemna seconded to refer the code amendment
to the City Council with recommendation to approve, motion carried.
5. Sidewalk/Greenway Project at Stadium/Satinwood (David Bange)
Mr. Bange explained the Engineering Division in conjunction with the Parks and Recreation
Department is planning the construction of a greenway which will close the gap in the pedestrian
accommodations along the 1200 block of West Stadium Boulevard between the Wears Creek
Greenway and the sidewalk on Satinwood and Vieth Drive.
2
Minutes/Jefferson City Public Works and Planning Committee
June 14, 2018
&. Amendments to Chapter 3 Advertising and Sign Code (Eric Barron)
Mr. Barron explained the amendments are due to a Supreme Court ruling pertaining to
temporary signs. The amendments will be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission in July
and to the City Council in August.
There was discussion among Committee members and staff regarding the changes such as
fa~ade based signage, building mounted sign height, and allowances for temporary signage.
4. Other Topics
1. Water Main Leak Report (Britt Smith)
Mr. Smith referred Committee members to the report included in the packet.
5. Citizen Opportunity to address Council/Staff on Stormwater and Other Public Works
Issues
• Elisha Carlock, 3819 Buckingham Park, spoke to the Committee regarding stormwater
problems in her backyard.
There was discussion among Committee members, staff and Ms. Carlock regarding pipe size,
safety issues, cost of design and construction due to solid rock, adding vegetation or rip rap and
placing mosquito dunks in standing water. Mr. Fontana will further work with the Carlock's on this
issue.
• Richard and Iva Presberry (101 Riverwood) Stormwater Complaint Follow Up (Matt
Morasch)
Mr. Morasch explained the pipe has issues and staff is continuing to evaluate. Staff also reviewed
the building permit from 1998 and the elevation of the house should have been five foot above the
street. He stated it would be a $200,000 project to put in a new pipe, sufficient to protect the home.
6. Adjourn
Councilman Kemna moved and Councilwoman Ward seconded to adjourn the meeting at this
time (9:59a.m.), motion carried.
3
Memorandum
320 Ea st McCarty Stre et • j efferson City, Mi ssouri 65101 • P: 573 .6 34.6410 • F: 57 3 .634.6 562 • www.jeffer soncity mo.gov
Date : June 28, 2018
To: Public Works and Planning Committee
From: David Bange P .E ., City Engineer \)rD
Subject: Monroe Street
City Staff would like to update the Committee concerning the removal of the wa ll in the 600 Block of
Monroe Street and continue the discussion concerning the Committee members request to ex plore
options for this corridor.
On Monday, June 181h Sam Gaines construction began the removal of the retaining wall on the western
side of the 600 block of Monroe Street. The wall was being monitored by t he Engineering Division and
was found to be moving slowly but progressively outward . Because the last measurements ta ken on
the wall appeared to indicate that this movement was accelerating it was deemed necessary for the
wall to come down. Investigations since that time have indicated that there is a rock face severa l feet
behind the remaining dirt and fill material. The street department w ill work to remove th is materia l and
restore full access to Monroe Street. The driveway/alley access above Monroe Street w ill remain closed
and a more permanent guardrail will be installed as time permits.
At previous committee meetings we have discussed the Monroe Street corridor with the focus on right
of way requirements and reconstruction that would widen the street to accommodate two way traffic
and street parking . The preliminary estimate for the widening and complete reconstruction of the street
was $3 ,000 ,000 , which included an estimated $300 ,000 for the engineering design.
As was indicated previously this project could be constructed in phases , however, it would be prudent
to have the full design of the project completed so that the phases and the connection between them
could be understood and appropriately planed . The completed plan would also prov ide clea r direction
for the planning and subsequent relocation of existing utilities, as well as defini ng any new right of way
that would need to be acquired .
Currently there is no funding for this project. If the committee would li ke to see t h is project move
forward a next step could be the introduction of this project into the upcoming budget discussions .
If you have any questions I can be reached at 634-6433 .
DB :db
U:\Public W orks\Engi neering\dbange\PUBLIC WORKS & PLANNING\2 018\7-201 8\Mo nroe S treet.d ocx
Memorandum
320 East McCarty Street • Je f ferson City, Mis souri 6 51 0 1 • P: S 73 .634.6 41 0 • F: 5 7 3 .6 34 .6 562 • www.j effersoncitymo .gov
Date: July 9, 2018
To : Public Works and Planning Committee
From : David Bange P .E ., City Engineer ·\.:) 0
Subject: Intersection of Industrial and Jaycee Drives
The traffic investigation of Industrial and Jaycee Drive revealed that the intersection does not meet any
of the warrants for a traffic signal and observations reveal smooth and efficient operations at the
intersection , therefore , staff recommends that the two way stop control currently in pla ce at t his
intersection to maintained .
On June 191h the traffic signal at the intersection of Industrial Drive and Jaycee Dr ive was removed and
replaced by a two way stop on Jaycee Drive . In the week prior to its removal the signal heads had been
hit several times by semi-trailers passing through the intersection . Due to the age and condition of the
support poles it was no longer possible to increase the height of the span wire . Concerned tha t the
signal might get caught on a passi ng truck and cause damage to the t r uck o r ot her vehicles in the
vicinity the signal was removed .
City staff has been aware of issues with this signal beginn ing in 2013 when one of the signal heads was
first struck by a truck. At that time City forces were able to tighten the span wire to raise it above the
trucks , but realized this was not a long term solution . At that time staff performed some informal traffic
evaluations which indicated that the signal was not w arranted . Since t he removal of the signal staff has
again studied the intersection and has reached the same conclusio n .
Lacking warrants for a signal , the intersection could be evaluated as a candidate for a roundabout.
While the present study did not focus on that option, the traffic volumes appear to be w ithin the range of
what could be accommodated by a single lane roundabout. Cons ideration wou ld have to be given to
the integration of the railroad tracks and accommodations would have to be made for the grade of the
southern leg of Jaycee Drive . Further evaluation would need to ta ke p lace to va lidate this option and to
develop cost estimates.
Staff is aware that Council members have been asked for the signal to be reinstall ed. G iven that the
intersection does not meet the warrants set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devises
(MUTCD) special action on the part of the Council would be needed p rior to this moving forward . That
action would be the issuance of design ex ception in which the City accepts the liability associated w ith
the installation of an unwarranted signal. Given the pro x imity of the railroad tracks there w ill be issues
of interconnectivity and permitting requirements for which city staff does not have e x pertise, therefore ,
staff would look to hire a consultant to perform the signal design . It is estimated t hat the cost of the
U:\P ublic Works\E ng ineering\dbange\PUBLIC WORKS & PLANNING\20 18\7-201 8\Ind ustra il and Jaycee Drive .d ocx
Memorandum
project with design, permitting, and construction will be in the range of $250,000. Given our recent past
experiences with the railroad at Dix Road and Bolivar Street it can be expected that the project could
take two years or longer to reach the construction phase.
If you have any questions I can be reached at 634-6433.
U:\Public Works\Engineering\dbange\PUBLIC WORKS & PLANNING\2018\7 -2018\lndustrail and Jaycee Drive.docx
2
City of Jefferson
Department of Public Works
320 E. McCarty St.
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Traffic Investigation Report
Industrial Dive and Jaycee Drive
Jefferson City, MO
July 9, 2018
Intersection History:
Carrie Tergin, Mayor
Matthew J. Morasch, PE, Director
P: 573-634-6410 F: 573-634-6562
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov
ln 1984 Industrial Drive was the southern terminus of Highway 179 , as such it served as an
artery into Jefferson City carrying approximately 11 ,000 vehicles per day. At that time Jaycee
Drive/Schellridge Road provided a direct connection between Industrial Drive and the at grade
intersection at Highway 50. The two way traffic volume on the southern leg of Jaycee Drive was
recorded at 1 ,800 vehicles per day. The street configuration present at that time can be seen in
Exhibit 1.
In the fall of 1984 the City requested that the intersection of Industrial Drive and Jaycee Drive be
evaluated for potential improvement. A study was conducted and found that the intersection,
with its current volumes, met the Accident Warrant requirements of Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devises (MUTCD). It was suggested that a temporary traffic control signal could be
installed. However, the study also indicated that an even more immediate measure would be to
remove the brush in the southeast quadrant of the intersection which was limiting sight di stance.
Furthermore the study indicated that the volumes on Industrial Drive would decrease by an
estimated 35% when Highway 179 was connected to Highway 50. With this reduction in volume
the intersection would no longer meet the traffic signa l warrant and it was recommended that the
intersection be evaluated with the opening of the Highway to verify whether its continued use
was appropriate.
Records indicate that in November of 1988 the Traffic and Safety Commission made a motion to
remove the s ignal at the intersection and presumably the signal was turned off, however, the
followin g month the City Council directed the Public Works Department to reactivate the s ign a l
and for a study to done to determine whether or not the traffi c signal should be made permanent
or eliminated. There is no record that a study was ever conducted until the present.
In the early part of June 2018 the signal heads were struck several times by passing trucks. Due
to the condition of the support poles the signal heads could not be raised any higher and on June
19 , 2018 the traffic signal at the intersection of Jaycee Drive and Industrial Drive was removed.
At the time of its removal stop signs were erected on both legs of Jaycee Drive.
Public Works CORE -improve the ~ommunity -take Q wnership -deliver f!esults -g mpath ize with the customer
Existing Conditions
Street Network
At this intersection, Industrial Drive is an east-west route which is classified as an urban minor
arterial, while Jaycee Drive runs north-south and is classified as a local road and serves some
commercial properties adjacent to Industrial Drive and the residential area of Schellridge.
Industrial Drive is 42 feet in width and provides through lanes in each direction that are 12.5 feet
wide with a 13 foot wide two way left turn lane that transitions to 200 foot long dedicated left
turn pockets at the intersection. The northern leg of Jaycee Drive is a curbed an guttered street
that is 40 feet wide and is not striped except for a 40 foot long left turn pocket at the intersection.
The southern leg of Jaycee drive is approximately 38 feet wide as it approaches the intersection
and is also unstriped except for a 90 foot long left turn pocket. The width of the turn lanes are 9
feet and 10 feet respectively. Industrial Drive is uncontrolled while both legs of Jaycee Drive are
controlled with stop signs.
Sight Distance
Adequate intersection sight distance is required for the safe operation of an intersection. The
required sight distance is calculated based on the time it will take for a vehicle to complete a
turn, and will be longer for left turns and through traffic as compared to right turning traffic. In
this instance the sight distance required is also longer for the southern leg of Jaycee Drive as a
result of the road grade at the intersection. Taking this into account the required sight distance
for left turns and through traffic on the southern approach is 600 feet while the northern approach
is 470 feet. For right turning vehicles the sight distance requirement are 440 feet for the northern
leg and 570 feet for the southern approach. Measurements taken in the field indicated that the
sight distance available at the intersection exceeds the requirement with there being 970 feet
available to the east and 1085 feet available to the west.
Volume
Machine recorded vehicle counts were obtained for average weekday conditions on all four legs
of the intersection. These daily traffic volumes are summarized by hour for each leg approaching
the intersection on Table 1. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes from previous traffic counts
are provided below.
Location Year
1984 2005 2008 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Industrial, West of Jaycee 11,250 10,183 9,882 9,840 9,112
Jaycee, South of Industrial 1,800 690 624 596 594 646
Jaycee, North of Industrial 1,210 2,139 1,964 1,882 1,698 1,622 1,618 1,758
As it can be seen from these previous counts the volume on Industrial Drive has decreased over
the last ten years and is approximately 2000 vehicles less than in 1984. It should also noted that
there has been a 65% reduction in the number of vehicles using the southern leg of Jaycee Drive
since the counts in 1984. Over the same time the volume of traffic on the northern leg of Jaycee
Drive has increased by approximately 500 vehicles.
Public Works CORE -improve the ~ommunity-take Qwnership-deliver ,Besults-,5mpathize with the customer
Table 1
Traffic Volume Summary
Average Weekday
Industrial Drive and Jaycee Drive
Approaching Traffic Volumes
Vehicles per Hour (VPH)
Industrial Drive Jaycee Drive
West East North South
Time Period Bound Bound Bound Bound
12:00to l:OOA.M. 12 18 2 1
1:00 to 2:00A.M. 12 11 2 1
2:00 to 3:00A.M. 13 14 3 0
3:00 to 4:00A.M. 8 13 3 0
4:00 to 5:00A.M. 25 21 4 2
5:00 to 6:00A.M. 57 89 6 8
6:00 to 7:00A.M. 161 265 20 32
7:00 TO 8:00A.M. 347 518 78 195
8:00 to 9:00A.M. 305 357 49 137
9:00 to 10:00 A.M. 256 288 37 67
10:00 to 11:00 A.M. 274 294 33 71
11:00 to 12:00 A.M. 392 389 37 85
12:00 to 1:00 P.M. 305 48 32 81
1:00 to 2:00P.M. 288 345 35 77
2:00 to 3:00 P.M. 296 377 44 68
3:00 to 4:00P.M. 382 407 32 129
4:00 to 5:00P.M. 483 555 42 155
5:00 to 6:00P.M. 457 524 51 133
6:00 to 7:00P.M. 216 331 27 62
7:00 to 8:00P.M. 148 214 15 48
8:00 to 9:00P.M. 158 150 14 26
9:00 to 10:00 P.M. 88 101 9 11
10:00 to 11:00 P.M. 39 so 4 7
11:00 to 12:00 P.M. 23 37 5 3
24 hour Total 4745 5416 584 1399
Level of Service
The level of service is a measure of the average vehicle delay. The intersection of Industrial and
Jaycee Drives was observed and the delay of each vehicle northbound on Jaycee Drive was
measured and recorded. During the AM peak the cumulative delay was measured at 5 minutes 35
Public Works CORE -improve the ~ommunity -take Qwnership -deliver fiesults -.Empathize with the customer
seconds. When distributed evenly to the cars on that leg of the intersection the average delay per
vehicle was 5.5 seconds. When compared to the level of service listed in Table 2 below it can be
seen that this would be categorized as a Level of Service A. The longest measured delay to any
vehicle during the peak hour was 3 5 seconds which is less than the cycle time of the signal when
it was in service. Vehicle queueing was also recorded. During the peak hour there were three
occasions in which there were two cars queued at the intersection and in all other case there was
only one or none.
Table 2
Level of Service Definitions (Unsignalized Intersections)
Control Delay (sec/veh) Level of Service
0-10 A
>10-15 B
>15-25 c
>25-35 D
>35-50 E
>50 F
When considering delay it is important to note that due to it being uncontrolled, there is no delay
on Industrial Drive, whereas delay was prevalent in the signalized condition.
Crashes
Since 2007 there have been 26 crashes in the vicinity of this intersection. The most frequent type
of crashes were rear end collisions (eleven}, right angle crashes (four) and there have also been
four collisions with deer. The eleven rear end crashes led to six reported injuries while the right
angle collisions had one reported injury. The remaining crashes were scattered across a range of
crash types. This pattern of rear end crashes is to be expected and is a result of the traffic signal.
A summary of these crashes can be seen in Exhibit 2.
Evaluation of Improvements
Traffic Signal Warrants
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devises (MUTCD) has established nine warrants for the
installation of traffic signals. In order for a traffic signal to be justified it must meet one of these
warrants, however, the satisfaction of one or more of these warrants does not in itself require the
installation of a traffic signal. Of the nine warrants only two are applicable to this intersection,
namely, the Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume and the Four-Hour Vehicular Volume.
The Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume warrant is intended for application at locations where a large
volume of intersecting traffic is the principle reason to consider installing a traffic control signal.
Within the Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume warrant there are three possible combinations of
volumes, that if maintained for eight hours of an average day, would satisfy it and are as follows:
a) 600 vph on the major street and 150 vph on the higher volume minor street approach
Public Works CORE-improve the ~ommunity-take Qwnership-deliver _Besults-_5mpathize with the customer
b) 900 vph on the major street and 75 vph on the higher volume minor street approach
c) Or both of the following volumes
a. 480 vph on the major street and 120 vph on the minor street approach and
b. 720 vph on the major street and 60 vph on the minor street
The bolded text in Table 3 indicates the eight highest volume hours for the intersection. When
the traffic volumes are compared to threshold numbers listed above it can be seen that while they
meet the criteria for some hours of the day, they do not meet them for all eight hours. Therefore
the warrant is not met.
Table 3
Signal Warrant Analysis
Approaching Traffic Volumes
Vehicles per Hour (VPH)
Higher Volume
Industrial Drive Jaycee
Total of Both Approach
Time Period Approaches (Northern Leg)
12:00 to 1:00 A.M. 30 1
1:00 to 2:00A.M. 23 1
2:00 to 3:00A.M. 27 0
3:00 to 4:00A.M. 21 0
4:00 to 5:00A.M. 46 2
5:00 to 6:00A.M. 146 8
6:00 to 7:00A.M. 426 32
7:00 TO 8:00A.M. 865 195
8:00 to 9:00A.M. 662 137
9:00 to 10:00 A.M. 544 67
10:00 to 11:00 A.M. 568 71
11:00 to 12:00 A.M. 781 85
12:00 to 1:00 P.M. 353 81
1:00 to 2:00 P.M. 633 77
2:00 to 3:00 P.M. 673 68
3:00 to 4:00 P.M. 789 129
4:00 to 5:00 P.M. 1038 155
5:00 to 6:00 P.M. 981 133
6:00 to 7:00P.M. 547 62
7:00 to 8:00P.M. 362 48
8:00 to 9:00P.M. 308 26
9:00 to 10:00 P.M. 189 11
10:00 to 11:00 P.M. 89 7
11:00 to 12:00 P.M. 60 3
Public Works CORE -improve the ~ommunity -take Qwnership -deliver .Besults-~mpathize with the customer
The Four-Hour Vehicular Volume warrant, like the eight-hour warrant, is intended to be applied
where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principle concern. The warrant is considered to be
met if for each of an y four hours of an av erage day the total of the major street volume and the
highest volume minor street when plotted together all fall above a pplicable line on the following
chart. Given the configuration of the intersection Industrial Dive is a two lane approach and
Jaycee Drive is considered a single lane approach. In thi s instance two points fall above the
applicable line and two below the refore the warrant is not met.
MI NO R
S TREET
HI GHE R-
VO L UME
APPROACH -
VP H
Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Fo u r-Hour Vehic ul ar Volume
500 ----r--r----~~-
2 OR MORE LA NES & 2 O R M ORE LANE S
L _LJ_I-1----1
2 OR MORE LANES & 1 L ANE 400
I I
300 1 LANE & 1 LAN E
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
MAJOR STREET-TOTAL O F BOTH APPROA CHES-
VEHICL ES PER HO UR (VPH)
It is worthy of note th at the traffic volumes on J aycee Drive are skewed toward the right tum
movem ent with more tha n 80% of the vehicles making ri g ht hand turns. Given that this
movement is coupled with a very low numb e r of ve hicl es going straight thro ugh the intersection
the ri ght turn volume could b e taken out of consideration in the warrants just discussed, howe ver,
for the sake of this evaluation they were considered.
Summary
In its prese nt config uration with stop control on the two legs of J aycee Drive the intersection
appears to be f unctioning well as witnessed by the minimal del ay at the intersection. Thi s form
of intersection control could continue to be utili zed into the future at an acceptable level of
service .
This in ve stigation focus ed on the existing conditions and the evaluation of signal warrants for
which none were found. What the stud y did not do is inve stigate other possibl e intersection
improvement s such as a roundabout. F urther inv esti gation would be necessary; howeve r, the
volumes of traffic present at this intersection would fall within the parameters of what could be
ac commodated by a roundabout. An evaluation would need to be made to de termine how a
roundabout co uld be integrated with the existing railroa d and the s urrounding topo graphy.
Further stud y could also analyze the pote nti al reduction of rear end and ri ght angle crashes that
hav e persisted at this intersection.
Pub lic Works COR E -improve th e £ommunity -take Qwn ersh ip -deliver B esults -~m pathi ze with th e custome r
Submitted by
~~
David Bange , P .E.
Public Works CORE -improve the ~ommunity -take Q wnership-deliver R esu lts-J;mpathize with the customer
1---' m \0
00 ;><
0 ::r' -· ~ 0" -· l"""t--· 1---' (t)
~
~
::r'
0
l"""t-
0
(JQ
~
~
::r'
Exhibit 2
Traffic Accident Summary
Date of Crash Description Explanation No. Injured
03/07/18 Backing Car stopped at red light backed into car that stopped behind them 0
06/23/11 Bicycle Bicycle shifted to make left turn and struck passing car 1
04/16/07 Deer 0
10/10/10 Deer 0
01/07/11 Deer 0
10/22/13 Deer 1
11/29/13 Fixed Object Truck struck traffic signal head 0
12/31/08 Left turn Vehicle turned across oncoming traffic while trying to enter a driveway at 24211ndustrial 2
10/31/12 Loss of control Loss of control after rapidly accelerating away from signal 1
05/06/08 Passing Car attempting to pass on the right was hit by car turning left into private drive 0
02/12/07 Rear End Rear ended a car in the left hand turn lane waiting at red light 0
04/04/07 Rear End Ran into the back of a car stopped at red light 0
02/09/09 Rear End First car was stopping for red light and was hit by second car 2
04/07/09 Rear End Light just turned green stopped vehicle had not yet begun to move when hit from behind 1
09/30/09 Rear End Inattention by second vehicle ran into first vehicle that was stopped at the light 0
03/18/10 Rear End Rear end, ran into the back of the queue at the stoplight 0
08/10/10 Rear End Ran into the back of a car stopped at red light 0
08/10/10 Rear End Ran into the back of a car stopped at red light, hit and run 1
01/25/11 Rear End Vehicle slowed for right turning vehicle into a private drive was hit from behind 0
11/11/13 Rear End Ran into the back of a car stopped at red light 1
09/09/14 Rear End Third car hit second car and pushed it into the first car that was stopped at the red light 3
03/23/07 RightAngle Vehicle on Industrial ran red light and was hit by car from Jaycee 0
03/15/16 RightAngle Vehicle on Industrial ran red light 1
12/03/16 Right Angle Failure to yield, right on red 0
02/15/17 Right Angle One car or the other ran the red light 0
07/03/07 U-turn Vehicle struck while attempting a U-turn 0
.GRAPHIC· SUMMARY OF VEHICLE MOVEMENTS
a·b·s~rve.r J)aq.:;J~o"'g~ · _. .. · Date"T\Aty ~.~~leo: . Day~~~o(Qf
· lntersect"ion .of Ptc.~e. D::c~\d. and :CndLss{-y;a\ \)v;~
c it y Te.~!k-<~:1) C d'y
· Time:
AM l',l5-2~f5
(PM} 'i: :£:> -5:'bD
. TOTAL.ENTERING
AM · (PM)·
· N IS ·1 1.5l
Total . ~£:?S
HoO
(pot) N
TV'\alt.s:A'(";Q ( U<:·~
Street Name
. 3~01RV
Department of Public Works Memorand um
32 0 E. McCarty Street • J efferson City, Mi sso uri 65101 • P 573-634-641 0 • F 573-634-6562 • www.jeffcitymo.org
Date : July 9 , 2018
To : Public Works and Planning Committee
From : Eric Seaman , Wastewater Division Director #6443
Subject: Corr ection to Section 29-151 and Appendix Y relating to sewer charges
Public Works staff recommends keeping the intent to disconnect water servi ce fee at
$10 pe r door hanger. A $26 fee has been listed in Appendi x Y for 'intent to disconnect'
which is essentially delivering a warning doo r hanger prior to a disconnect ion of water
service for a delinquent sewer bill. The fee was to increase to $27 on June 30 .
Customers have never been charged the $26 fee for the warning door hanger. The $1 0
fee covers printing , sorting and delive r of warn ing door hangers and has been t he
assessed charge in the past.
This correction to $10 will allow the cost to be covered *, but not burden the customer
with a cost ($27 per door hanger) that is approx imate ly th e value of a monthly bill.
It is the intent of door hangers and water disconnects to compel the customer pay the
sewer bill in a timely manner, not to re ceive more charges which may cause more
customers to lose services . The warning door hanger along with warning phone cal ls for
customers has achieved a compliance rate of 66 % (1 00 average calls per month , 60
average door hangers per month).
Council action will be requ ired to return the fee to the $10 per hanger. A d raft ordinance
and bill summary are attached .
*Cost Recovery:
$5.50 Staff tim e ( 4 per hour a verage @ $22. 00/hr)
$4.50 M aterials and Supplies (fuel. paper. etc.}
$10.00 Total Cost of Reco very
Public Works CORE -improve th e g,om munity -take Qw ne rship -d eliver _B es ults -,!;_m pathize with th e customer
BILL NO. 2018-
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMAN _ _.:....:.;HU:::.:S:.:S:.::E:..:.Y __ _
ORDINANCE NO. ______________ _
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 29-151 (CHARGE FOR NOTICE OF INTENT TO
DISCONNECT) AND PART APPENDIX Y (SCHEDULE OF ADMINISTRATIVE FEES,
PERMITS, LICENSES AND OTHER CHARGES) OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
JEFFERSON, MISSOURI.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON, MISSOURI, AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1 Sec. 29-151. Charge for Notice of Intent to disconnect.
Any residential, commercial, industrial, or governmental establishments which has
received a notice of intent to disconnect water service which has been personally delivered to
the establishment shall be charged a service fee, which shall be plaoed in Appendix Y
accessed as $10.
SECTION 2 Appendix Y. (Schedule of Administrative Fees, Permits, Licenses and other
Charges).
APPI!l\IDIXY
SCHIDULEOF ADMINISTRATIVE I'DS, PmMITS, LICFNS~ AND 0111m CHAR~
Chapter Section Section Title Current fee Proposed Fee
29 131(A) S8Yier Connection Charges $408.00 $417.00
4&1-1Rl9R& te "IBG9RR9G& $28,.00 ~
Section ~ This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the date of its
passage and approval.
Passed: ____________ _ Approved: ___________ _
Presiding Officer Mayor Carrie Tergin
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk City Counselor
Editor's note: Deleted language shown~-Added language shown thus.
BILL SUMMARY
BILL NO: ____.2:.;::0::....:1....:.8-______ _
SPONSOR: Councilman Hussey
SUBJECT: Change to Section 29-151 and Appendix Y relating to sewer charges
DATE INTRODUCED:-=J;..=.u::.~-IV....:.1.:.:6.L..:2=-=0;..:..18=-----------
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR(S):, ________ _
CITY ADMINISTRATOR: ______________ _
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval
SUMMARY: Removes 'Intent to disconnect' from listed costs in Appendix Y. Reduces
Intent to Disconnect cost from $27 to $10.
ORIGIN OF REQUEST: Public Works
DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE: Public Works
PERSON RESPONSIBLE: Matthew J. Morasch
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The value in Appendix Y listed is for disconnecting water
service for delinquent sewer bills (a cost paid to the water provider). The intent was to
access a fee for delivering a warning door hanger notice to the customer that the water
would be disconnected if the sewer bill is not paid by a deadline.
FISCAL INFORMATION: This action will save delinquent customers $17 per incident and
will reduce total penalties accessed to delinquent customers by approximately $12,000
annually.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
TO: Public Works and Planning Committee
THROUGH: Sonny Sanders, Director of Planning and Protective Services
FROM: Jayme Abbott, Neighborhood Services Manager
DATE: July 3, 2018
RE: CDBG 2018 Annual Action Plan
The City of Jefferson annually receives federal funding from U.S. D e partme nt of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program. As a result, the City is required to prepare an Action Plan every year
to address the community development needs affecting low and mode rate income
residents of City of Jefferson. Various community developme nt projects in the city are
funded in part with grants received from HUD. These grants e nable the City to provide
decent affordable housing, economic development opportunities, neighborhood
improvements and community development services for the low and moderate income
residents of City of Jefferson.
In May 2018, HUD notified the City of the 2018 allocation in the amount of $286,021.
This represents 15% increase over the 2017 allocation of $244,499. The City has
updated the 2018 Annual Action Plan to reflect the actual allocation amount that is
distributed between the Down Payment Assistance, Homeowner Support,
Infrastructure Improvement and Demolition programs.
Down Payment
Assistance
Homeow ner Support
Infrastructure
Improvements
Demolition Assistance
Administration
(20% Cap)
Priority Needs
Addressed
Affordable Housing
Affordable Housing
Preserve & Improve
Neighborhoods;
Economic
Opportunities
Removal of Sl um &
Blight; Economic
Opportunities
Tota l :
~~ ,1. ~ ) J....... .... • -~
.outcome ·
(# Assisted)
11 Households $56,078
6 Ho useho lds $15,198
(PI $15,000)
3,000 Individuals $112,541
3 Bui ldings $45,000
$57,204
$286,021
The public hearing was held on june 26,2018 and copies of the 2018 Action Plan are
available at City Hall, Mid Missouri Regional Library and Public Housing Authority.
Comments are being accepted on the proposed budget through Friday,] ul y 27,
2018. To access the 2018 Annual Action Plan, PowerPoint Presentation and/or learn
how to comment visit
www. j effersoncitymo.gov/government/redevelopment and grants/plans. php.
The 2018 Annual Action Plan will be considered for approval by Council via Resolution
during the August 6, 2018, Council meeting. The 2018 Annual Action Plan is to be
submitted to HUD on or before August 16, 2018.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
TO: Public Works and Planning Committee
THROUGH: Sonny Sanders, Planning & Protective Services Director
FROM: Jayme Abbott, Neighborhood Services Manager
DATE: July 3, 2018
RE: Removal of Cardboard Recycling Bins Update
In May 2018, New World Recycling terminated their zero dollar ($0) contract for collecting,
processing, and marketing newspaper, magazines and cardboard from six (6) different loca tions
for a total ofnine (9) containers. The bins were removed and relocated to an offsite area on June
15,2018.
Notice to the public of the termination of the contract included News Tribune running several
stories, press release, Face book Posts to J e fferson City Recy cles, City of Jefferson and Parks and
Recreation Department pages. A l te rnative recycling opportunities open to the public include:
• City Residents can use Single Stream recycling carts (grey top lid) for plastic, aluminum,
paper, & cardboard.
• Commercial recycling available through Republic Services 635-8805.
• New World Recycling located at 2007 Idlewood Rd., 635-0331, accepts plastic, a luminum,
tin, paper, cardboard & more.
• Federal Recycling located 2730 W Main St, 636-5828, accepts plastic, a luminum, tin,
paper, cardboard & more.
• Glass recycling is accepted in the Ripple Glass purple bins at the following locations:
-1228 E McCarty St (Save A Lot Parking Lot)
-2284 Hyde Park Rd
-2730 W Main St
-McKay Park
Staff is monitoring the six locations for illegal dumping, which at this time has not b een an
issue. Contact from the public has primarily been from non-city residents for which they are
directed to utilize the above identified alternatives.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
Public Works and Planning Committee
Sonny Sanders, Planning & Protective Services Director
Jayme Abbott, Neighborhood Services Manager
July 5, 2018
Solid Waste Designation for Single Family Residence and
Duplex Units
In 2016, the city entered into a 10 year contract with Republic Services for solid waste
services. The contract defines who the Responsible Party for obtaining trash service is:
Responsible Party. The owner of the property, except that the owner may assign responsibility to
the occupant of any single family residence or duplex, only Any assignment of responsibility
shall only be effective ifit is in writing and specifically states that the occupant is responsible to
obtain and maintain solid waste, or trash, service.
The assignment of responsibility from landlord to tenant apparently was first
implemented with the trash cart system. It is our understanding that individuals and/or
organizations from the community such as realtors and landlords opposed requiring the
landlord to take the responsibility of providing trash service.
After seven years of this requirement, staff encounters problem with tenants not getting
service. Often, no trash service is identified by complaints of using other persons trash
containers, letting it accumulate at their residence, illegal dumping on other property or
disposing of it in other illegal means.
It is suspected that landlords receiving Section 8 vouchers, which include funds for trash
service, often don't provide that service, although they are getting paid for it. There is
not any hard data to base this opinion on, but only conversations with tenants using
Section 8 vouchers. However, we do know that trash related violations are
disproportional to number of rental vs owner occupied residents. Since 11/1/17 property
maintenance data shows:
No trash service violations -87 violations
72 (830fo) were 1 & 2 unit rental properties
9 (lOOfo) were 3+ rental units
6 (7o/o) were owner occupied
Illegal dumping violations -21 violations
19 (90o/o) were traced back to rental properties
2 (lOOfo) were traced back to private citizens
Accumulation of trash violations-322 violations
271 (84o/o) were rental properties
51 (16o/o) were owner occupied
Staff Recommendation:
To change the billing/responsibility to landlords would take a minor code change and
minor amendment with our Republic Contract. Staff recommends that the definition of
the responsible party be amended per the following:
Responsible Party. The owner of the property is responsible to obtain and maintain solid
waste, or trash, service.
Changing this ordinance will help reduce trash related code violations and help keep
Jefferson City beautiful.