Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-06-2025 - Study Session NotesSTUDY SESSION NOTES CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Hybrid - Virtual Meeting January 6, 2025 This meeting was conducted both as a virtual meeting and hybrid, where some members of the Council or City staff were physically present at the Municipal building, and some members of the public attended in person as well. A quorum of members of Council were present in Council Chambers for this session. The Mayor explained the virtual/hybrid meeting format, how citizens will have the opportunity to be heard, and the procedures and policies to be followed. 1. Call to Order Mayor Starker called the Special Study Session to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Attendance Council Members present: Jenny Snell, Rachel Hultin, Amanda Weaver (via Zoom), Korey Stites, Dan Larson, Janeece Hoppe, Leah Dozeman and Scott Ohm. Also present: City Manager Patrick Goff, , Assistant City Manager Marianne Schilling, Management Analyst Cole Haeslip, Director of Public Works Maria D’Andrea, Sr, Community Development Director Lauren Mikulak, Senior Deputy City Clerk Margy Greer, and other staff and interested residents. 3. Public’s Right to Speak Re: Item No. 3 - MEMO - Pavement Analysis and Management Program Kelly Blynn, Wheat Ridge Active Transportation Advisory Team Address: 4175 Brentwood Street Wheat Ridge, 80033 Comment: Thank you for the opportunity to comment, my name is Kelly Blynn, and I'm commenting on behalf of the Wheat Ridge Active Transportation Advisory Team. We appreciate the proposed program to improve our roads and streets, and want to strongly support an amendment to the program that would include a review of every repaving project for opportunities to leverage street repaving projects to accomplish the bike and pedestrian safety priorities on the 2J project list, Bike/Ped Master Plan, or otherwise to address low hanging fruit safety improvements that align as roads are repaved and then re-striped. This approach is a cost-effective way that the city can make continuous improvement on its bike and pedestrian infrastructure. A great example of this was the repaving of Harlan a few years ago, when bike lanes were added as part of the project as a result of citizen organizing. Neighborhoods throughout the city have responded to numerous surveys citing bike and pedestrian safety as a top priority; rather than waiting for citizens to organize for each road segment, we hope the city will be proactive and require a review of each repaving project to incorporate bike and pedestrian safety improvements as we improve our streets. Low-cost enhancements could include new or improved crosswalks, bike lanes, pedestrian lanes, neighborhood bikeways, etc. As a few examples, Denver coordinates the installation of bikeways with annual paving activities (https://www.denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies- Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and- Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Bicycles/Active-Bikeway- Projects#:~:text=Bike%20Paving%20%E2%80%93%20Annually%2C%20DOTI%20 efficiently,April%20and%20October%20each%20year.) as does Boulder (https://bouldercolorado.gov/services/pavement-management- program#:~:text=The%20Pavement%20Management%20Program%20(PMP,bicycle %2C%20pedestrian%20and%20transit%20upgrades.). The Federal Highway Administration also has issued a report guiding cities for implementing bikeways as part of the resurfacing process (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/resurfacing/r esurfacing_workbook.pdf). At a minimum, we request that the city annually publish its repaving plan so that residents can advocate for accompanying improvements to paving projects that support bike and pedestrian safety. Thank you for your consideration. 4. Community Partners Grant Program Enhancements Issue Staff has developed proposed enhancements to the Community Partners Grant Program for City Council’s consideration. Cole Haeslip, Management Analyst, gave a PowerPoint presentation which includes an Introduction, stating the Program provided funding to nonprofit agencies and programs for activities that benefit Wheat Ridge. In addition, since its inception, the Program has evolved over the past 17 years including rebranding, council appointed committee to review applications, number of applicants has increased, and the requests and awards portion has changed. He spoke to the challenges with the program including, but not limited to, a detailed application, requiring a budget detailing how funds will be spent and the challenge reviewing over 350 pages of grant applications. He presented strategies to improve efficiency and align the awards with the Council’s priorities. Haeslip presented a two-part review process which included a timeline, criteria, parameters and staff recommendations. The proposal was to break the grants into two categories: smaller grant requests up to $7,500 and larger grant requests of over $7,500. Staff recommendations and City Council consensus was as follows: 1) Two-Part Review Process 2) CPGP Timeline to align more closely with the budget process 3) No recommendation 4) Parameters: Proxy Organizations or Overlapping Organizations Council Member Hoppe stated she was in favor of the Two-Part Review Process and the proposed Timeline. She stated she was not in favor of allowing organizations that were already receiving funds from the General Budget to apply for this grant. Although the high school received four different approvals last time, but they are programs that do not have money in the school budget to begin with. They have to do school fundraiser for their programs. While they are under the umbrella of the school, the funding is not in the school budget. Council Member Ohm asked how the amount was determined for each applicant. Haselip explained that it is the individual strategy of the organization and there is no cap. He stated he tells applicants the amounts that have been awarded in the past. Ohms stated that perhaps caps may be helpful or have a percentage go to small grants and a percentage to large grants. Council Member Weaver stated she does agree that organizations that already are receiving money from the City’s General Fund should be able to apply for the grant. She also stated that a disclosure regarding the high school funds is probably needed, and she agrees that the school programs can apply separately. Mayor Pro Tem Stites stated that the Committee should make the decision on the amount awarded to the applicants. Recommendations regarding disclosure is okay, otherwise the program is good as is. Council Member Dozeman asked if there was a matrix or scoring given to each applicant. Haselip stated such a matrix is used for scoring the applications based on the programs criteria and it is given to the applicants. Dozeman stated she is in favor of a disclosure statement and is comfortable with having applicants apply even though they are receiving funding from the General Fund. She liked the idea of favorability over the smaller apps and the money remaining going to the larger grants. She doesn’t like the idea of a cap. Council Member Snell agrees with the recommendations from staff and agrees with a percentage for smaller and larger grants (50/50). She stated she was in favor of the disclosure as well. Council Member Larson stated that he likes the shortened timeline and efficiencies proposed. He stated he would like to see more money given to fewer organizations because it has a bigger impact on the organizations. He spoke in support of the criteria proposed and agree with other councilors on other issues. Haeslip stated they are not proposing a percentage of funding for small and large grants, just that there is an amount of money from the budgeted amount set aside for each category. Hoppe stated that she is not in favor of eligibility if applicants are already receiving money from the City’s budget, thus there would be more funds for other applicants. Consensus from Council was reached on the following: 1) Create the two-part process; 2) the Timeline presented; 3) Criteria with the addition of not allowing applications to be received from organizations that are already receiving funds from the City’s Budget; and 4) including a Disclosure statement from the Proxy Organizations. 5. 2025 Capital Improvement Program Overview Issue In late-2023, all Capital Improvement Program (CIP) responsibilities were aligned to be delivered by the Public Works Department from the beginning of a project (planning, design, environmental) through the end (construction and close out). The city has recently hired several new staff to oversee and manage the CIP who will be introduced at the Study Session. Staff will also provide a brief overview of the planned CIP activities for the upcoming year. Maria D’Andrea, Director of Public Works, stated this is an informational item only. She stated that they are focusing staff on the CIP programs and streamlining and improving the process with the goal of delivering the projects on time, on budget and with a high level of quality. She introduced the Public Works Team that is delivering the projects for the community. CIP Program Manager Kent Kisselman. Showed a map of the location of the following CIP projects being worked on and a timeline for each of the 12 projects. He spoke to others as well including the Stormwater Rate Study, Emergency/Prioritized Storm Sewer Repair, Pavement Management, Sidewalk and Concrete Maintenance in Zone 2, and the ADA Pedestrian Ramp Installation in Zone 2. 6. Pavement Rating Analysis and Pavement Management Program Issue The goal of Wheat Ridge’s Pavement Management Program is to continuously maintain the city’s street network in a safe and fiscally responsible manner. To accomplish this, the Public Works Department programs and implements cost-effective maintenance and repair strategies in a manner that will maximize the service life of a given street. The overall system will be maintained to achieve an average pavement condition index (PCI) to be no less than 65. According to the recently completed pavement analysis, the current average PCI of the city's street network is 66. Maria D’Andrea, Director of Public Works, reviewed the rating programs for street conditions within Wheat Ridge. This year an intersection-to-intersection review of the condition of the streets was performed by a contractor for the 130 miles of streets within the city. The data collected states the condition of the streets along with a numerical rating with zero being the worse and 100 being the best condition. Overall, Wheat Ridge had a 66% rating which was on the high side of the Fair category. She gave a PowerPoint presentation showing several graphs and tables regarding the highest traffic volume streets as well as the Collector and Neighborhood streets and the rating of each street within those categories. She reviewed the funding needed to upgrade poor street to fair condition and maintain the good and best ratings, showing a $2-to-$3-million-dollar annual need. She showed photos of several streets within the city which were in need of repair or replacement. A question-and-answer period followed between D’Andrea and City Council. 7. Staff Report(s) City Manager Patrick Goff stated that Peter Wall represents Lamar Advertising contacted several council members regarding the city’s code banning billboards and electronic message boards. He received consensus from Council to review the code since it has been a year since the current code had been adopted. Goff also stated that the Council agenda packet is formatted differently due to ADA requirements when posting the agenda packet to the website. support. Do we want a discussion…consensus to bring to study session. He stated that Council retreat was scheduled for January 31-February 1 and asked Council to please complete their survey regarding same by Wednesday. Goff announced that a Wheat Ridge graduate, Tim Gill of the Tim Gil Foundation was recently awarded the Medal of Freedom from President Biden. 8. Elected Officials’ Report(s) Mayor and Council Members reported on recent meetings and events they attended and upcoming activities in the community. 9. Adjournment With no further business to come before Council, Mayor Starker adjourned the meeting at 8:28 p.m. _________________________________ Margy Greer, Senior Deputy City Clerk _________________________________ Korey Stites, Mayor Pro Tem