AVON TOWN COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
April 14, 2008
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. at the Avon Middle School, in the Cafetorium by Chairman Carlson. Members present: Mrs. Samul, Messrs. Pena, Zacchio and Shea.
PUBLIC HEARING: None
COMMUNICATION FROM AUDIENCE – Items not on this Agenda
COMMUNICATION FROM COUNCIL
OLD BUSINESS
83/84-163 Presentation: Connecticut DOT Status of State Projects #04-98 Old Farms
Road, Project 04-116 (Old Farms Road Bridge #4470) and Project 04-118 (Intersection of Route 10 and Old Farms Road)
Jim Norman from State of Connecticut Department of Transportation (DOT) reported tonight the DOT is here to give an overview of our efforts on Avon Mountain the things that have transpired and our activities. The background really leads into the concept that we are going to be displaying tonight. We are going to be floating a concept; this is not detailed design by any means. We could have done more in the lines of renderings. We have laid out a footprint and we can move forward with the input from the community. We have several other people from the department here tonight that have been involved in various other projects in Avon. They are here to listen to the comments that you have tonight. We have the District Engineer who will be in charge of the construction that is going to start
taking place on Avon Mountain later this week. We have the Principal Engineer is in charge of the highway design. The Traffic Engineer, and Engineer for State Design were both involved with the runaway truck ramp and the development of the design we have tonight. Landscape Architect is here to listen to the concerns of the residents and community and will work with the Town in moving forward. Lastly, we have the Project Development Engineer who was involved with the Route 44 project and helping the design team for project 4-123 and has been involved in the truck escape ramp.
He further reported the project is in Avon and Route 44 continues for 238 miles. It starts in Plymouth, Massachusetts and continues beyond Poughkeepsie, New York. We are concerned with a 3¼ mile section that starts near Route 10 in Avon and goes up to Mountain Road into West Hartford, and tonight more specifically the mile and a quarter Avon section. The road really came about as Old Talcott Mountain Turnpike in the colonial period. In 1935 it become part of the national highway system and it gets a good volume of traffic. The location is really the gateway between the Connecticut Valley and the Farmington Valley and the entrance to the Town. A corridor study was done by the Capital Region Council of Governments (CRCOG) and encompassed all of Route 44, from Canton over to Hartford, and
from that study the section of Avon Mountain was deemed the highest priority. There are also some accidents that occur with some frequency elsewhere in Avon but it was severity of the accidents on Avon Mountain that made it easy to deem it the highest priority. The two curves on the hill, one by Pine Tree Lane and up further by Deercliff Road, are where most of the accidents are on the hillside. The horrific accident on July 29, 2005, at that point we were doing a project to do work on the Mountain that was already in design. At that time Governor Rell issued truck inspections and looked for the formation of a task force (AMTF) to study safety over the mountain. The task force was members of the DOT, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and CRCOG. The task force in November 2005, came up with preliminary recommendations that broke down into immediate improvements such as warning signs, police ticketing and short term improvements like resurfacing the
turns, a weather station, and the relocation of signs. The longer term improvements, some of these features are going to be included in the construction that is going to be starting in construction later this week, include soften the curve, provide shoulders and left turn lanes, and provide a median treatment. The construction that will be taking place, project #4-123, really addresses action on the hill but does not address brake failure or runaway trucks. The two ways to address that is with the truck escape ramp and the elimination of an at grade intersection of Route 10 and Route 44.
He further reported that Avon Mountain Task Force (AMTF) reported to the Council their preliminary findings in December of 2005. The reaction was very clear and project #4-123 was supported and it was felt that it would go a long way with addressing accidents on Route 44. Project #4-123 is the realignment, softening the curves, providing shoulders, realigning offset intersections and providing left turn lanes so you can sit protected when waiting to take a turn. That project is going to extend east of the intersection, will not include the intersection and will extend up to the Avon / West Hartford town line. When we got to the features that would address a runaway truck there were more reservations, for two reasons. First, the occurrence of July 29th, it was such a rare occurrence it was unlikely
it would happen again. Second, how would the features impact our community? We had two neighborhood meetings, in 2006, for the project on the hill and preliminary designs were offered to the neighborhoods, the Deercliff area and Pine Tree neighborhood. Going along with that, the task force and the designers for the project were sharing information and ideas. One of the things that really advanced from that effort was a number of the accidents that occurred on the hillside actual involved vehicles that crossed over the center lane. The design which came from that was a landscape median but also with a high extension cable barrier should a vehicle lose control and start towards the other side.
He further reported that during that time the Governor set up a website regarding Avon Mountain to try and get suggestions. We received over 300 correspondences, of which 80% of the input addressed the speeding situation and the second highest addressed a truck escape ramp and the base of the hill. Clearly speed was an issue, so while designing the project a couple of things were done. First, there are two sharp curves and one towards West Hartford. What we did is layout the curves so that they are almost all the some curvature. So you do not get surprised by a sharp curve. We wanted to minimize impact and we did not want to encourage an increase in speeds. We have a proposal for landscaping the medians through the curve areas and the road side and we also have an additional police ticketing
area involved with the project. All this was brought back to a public hearing in 2006 and it was well supported and well attended meeting and the message to us was get this done as soon as possible. We are very happy to report that the schedule to start construction was April 2008 and construction is going to start later this week. The Town adopted the Plan of Conservation and Development and at the same time we initiated a project specifically to study the truck ramp and the Route 10 and Route 44 intersection. It was a study assignment.
He further reported on September 7, 2007 a truck came down the hill and into the Nassau Furniture store. The Governor and Commissioner gave immediate direction that this can not happen again. The options that were explained were a truck escape ramp, which would take about six months, and grade separation at the base of the hill, which would take several years. At that point the Commissioner and Governor consulted. The Governor held a special meeting of the State Traffic Commission. At the meeting they implemented a truck ban on Avon Mountain and it was also directed that a truck escape ramp be put in place as soon as possible. The Commissioner issued the emergency declaration for the escape ramp on October 1, 2007, and construction started in mid-November and the truck escape ramp was operational
at the end of February, 2008.
He further reported what we are looking at the considerations of the Route 44 and Route 10 intersection. Many changes have taken place over the last 40 to 45 years. Part of the whole process is envisioning what direction the community wants to take in moving ahead. The widths of the roads have been expanded over the past 40 years to handle to increase in traffic. Considerations here are safety, the accident history occurring, the truck escape ramp in place and we know we are located in a rural and historic area. The safety concerns are the steep vertical grades, and the very busy intersection at the base of the hill. Two arterial roadways, one carrying an upwards of 20,000 vehicles per day on Route 10 and 15,000 on Route 44, and to have that intersection at the base of the hill, the concerns are pretty
obvious from that. A lot of accident data has been collected over the years. Right at the intersection, from 2001 thru 2005, there were 111 collisions. One interesting thing is the injuries and fatalities, which is a high percentage when you consider the amount of collisions. The other is the brake failure. Brake failure constitutes almost a quarter of the accidents that happen on the downhill westbound approach. The accident pattern is pretty compelling. If we look at the brake failure from 1996 to 2007, this is 12 years inclusive, fatalities and injuries. It involved dump trucks, tractor trailers, a bus and a couple of cars. You are looking at brake failures resulting in accidents at a rate of once every year. The potential exists. There were also situations where brake failures did not result in accidents. Another item to consider at the intersection would be the safety of pedestrians and there were several pedestrian fatalities from crossing
back from the restaurant to the hotel during the late 1990's.
He further reported the truck recovery ramp is in place and is used elsewhere in the country. It can be very effective, but it does require recognition on the part of the driver that he is having issues with the brakes and he does pull into the ramp. We looked at the intersection and the trigger that really brought it about was with dealing with trucks coming down the base of the hill. Also having seen the accident data elimination of the grade would address many of the accident patterns at the base of the hill.
He further reported they are going to float a concept and will go very quickly through our considerations. The concepts will have impacts, property impacts, environmental impacts, serious community considerations and a huge cost. The first concept we shared with the Council was back in December 2005. At that point in time, it was our proposal to carry Route 44 over Route 10, so there would be an elevated section. The Avon Old Farms Hotel and Restaurant would sit down lower with the roadway passing to the west. We looked at it later on and dismissed it, because of the impacts on the facilities would be to great and the constructability issues. We looked at a number of options all involving taking Route 10 and Nod Road further to the west. They worked operationally but the concerns were that they had a
freeway type of appearance. That was not what we were trying to introduce into this location. The new concept is that has evolved. The existing intersection has Route 44 crossing from left to right and Route 10 and Nod Road from north to south. The new concept draws Nod Road to the west, Route 10 to the west, cul-de-sacs Route 10 up from the south and eliminates any stopping or crossing maneuvers at the base of the hill. The impact is to the west of Route 10 and a bridge relocating Nod Road over Route 44. There will be traffic signals at the locations off of Route 10 and Route 44. These would all work at a very high level so that we would not experience any congestion. A new connector road would carry over Route 44 and would realign with Route 10 and a cul-de-sac near the business where currently Route 10 is. What we just described is how vehicle passes would change. The west bound would be as it exists today and it would remain the same with the
concept. The east bound movement would remain the same. Westbound to Nod Road would be the same, or similar. Nod to westbound would stay the same. Route 44 to Route 10 is where we would have the first true change of pattern. Eastbound going to Nod would be a change in pattern. Eastbound to Route 10 south would be similar to the path now taken. Route 10 northbound to Nod would be a change. Two thirds of the traffic movements are the same or similar to what they are today. About one third o the traffic movements would involve a great path of travel. Again, this is a proposed layout. These are the very early stages but it looks like there may be partial impacts on 11 different properties, the largest being on Alsop Meadow. The environmental impact would be a long list. There would be a Federal Environmental Assessment, a State Environmental Impact Statement, various water quality permits, a 6F for acquisition of open space and it may require a
section 4(f) for impacts to historical or archaeological, resources. There would be a lot of environmental documentation involved with the concept. The estimated construction cost, in current dollars, is estimated in the range of $30 to $40 million dollars. This is a very expensive proposition. There are a variety of community considerations associated with this like speed control and traffic calming. Although we had some concepts that worked out great, we were concerned it would look like a freeway. So we are going to try a Boulevard style median and roadside landscaping. There would be opportunities for more police enforcement locations for speeding. The size and shape of the bridge opening is going to come into play on various issues. One will be on speed control, aesthetic treatments, bridge type, style and surface treatments will play into the aesthetic treatments. There are things that we can do in a roadway and there will be a lot of landscaping considerations. There
would be residential issues since Route 10 goes westerly closer to condominiums. In that area there is a natural hill and what we would propose moving forward would be a landscape buffer extending to the south. There would be business concerns since there would be access and signage revisions. Pedestrian bicycle linkages would be in our considerations with the concept and we would be looking to integrate the intersection of the overpass with the recreational goals with the Rails-to-Trails and the access to the Farmington River. We would work with the community to build the design to stay consistent with the scale and character of the area.
He further reported we have done enough geometry that we could do modeling and a rendering, if that is something that people would like to see going forward. We would like to work with the Town to share ideas so we don't develop them on our own. We have enough work done so it could be done in a fairly quick time frame. If the concept was close the renderings would be close. If there was an alteration of an extreme nature then that would take a lot more time. We want to get a feel from the community and the Council. If there was an interest in the concept we would continue stakeholder meetings, engage the Town and the resources and advancing the concept. If the project was ever to develop it would require Town Council support.
Conrad Thamm, from Canton, reported 80% of the data reported indicates that speed was a problem, again we are talking about widening the road, and straightening the road out, making it more of a race track than it is now. Primarily, most of these accidents were caused by speed not because of the curve in the road. People could not make the curve because they were going to fast, or the road was icy and they were still going to fast. Two years ago a presentation was made on the cameras. Unfortunately, the Town Council was against is for privacy reasons and for some other reasons. I have been in states where they actively use the cameras and you can see the difference when you cross the state line, trucks and everyone pull over to the right. No one exceeds the speed limit. I would rather see money spent
more on improvements like that. Maybe the town can get a grant to give the Police Chief two dedicated Officers on the hill and increase the truck inspections. The women who does the truck inspections for Avon is outstanding and the truckers know her that is why they avoid the mountain. I think those are improvements, rather than spend $40 million to go through this.
Wayne Thogmartin, 226 Avon Mountain Road, to support the comment on speed, one thing that has been said in many meetings is that speed does not cause all of the accidents but I would dispute that. You have much less time to react before you hit something. If you are going faster it will take longer for the car to come to a stop. The other thing that concerns me, and I fully support the concept that is being presented tonight, is increasing the ability for people to go faster on that mountain. The concept of rerouting Route 10, it seems to me the people who live or work on Route 44 and want to get out onto Route 44 are going to find it much more difficult. There will be an unbroken string of traffic during rush hour and I probably won't be able to get out of my house. I am concerned
about that.
Bob Hintermister, 27 River Mead, reported this in an ingenious plan. It has a lot of interesting ways of moving the traffic around. It is not a simple plan and generally the safest traffic plan is the one that allows the traffic flow to move slowly in and out. I understand that there are studies that look at that further. You showed some interesting routes that people will have to take to get around. I would like to see them superimposed all at one time, because there will be time that you have congestion. Perhaps that would show additional concerns we should have.
Will Gauster, 2 Templeton Court, reported his concern is with the speed. Most of the dramatic accidents all involve the vehicles entering the intersection from the east with a high rate of speed. I live just north of the intersection and I often find myself waiting to make a left turn to go north and I don't think it's emphasized enough, the misalignment of this intersection. The misalignment of the sections of Route 44 west and east of the intersection is really what scares me. If you are waiting there to turn left and you see people barreling down directly at you and you just hope that they will be able to navigate that last turn. If the weather is bad that is when you expect accidents to happen. I would really support the statements on speed and I think we really need to search for
an effective way to control the speed. Something you are showing here should be a last resort.
David Beizer, 383Waterville Road, reported that Avon has a wonderful recreation area down behind Alsop Meadows and I am unclear with the DOT's taking that was explained earlier. Can you explain what the impact would be on the access off Waterville to get back to the river where the boat access is? Mr. Norman reported that the access road would remain off of Route 10, where the sycamore tree is.
Mark Robins, Canton, reported this is a great idea. I am glad the truck ramp is in. I wish it was in back before the first crash. I was involved with that crash. It's good to see so many things taking place. It is discouraging to see that some of the operators like David Wilcox, who had over 1,000 violations and it appears that he is still operating. It should be a multitask approach in resolving the issues that have occurred. I'm not sure if you have an impact over that but it is discouraging to see some of the acquisitions and to see that he has still not gone to trial.
Jeff Brighenti, 60 Quail Ridge Drive and also associated with the Avon Old Farms Hotel, questioned does the DOT perceive having access up Route 44 from the entrance of the Avon Old Farms Hotel, particularly Avon Mountain going up? Mr. Norman reported that coming down the mountain there would be break in the median so there would be access in both directions, but it would be the only break in the median.
George Murphy, Barkhamsted, reported he is an old time friend of Avon's. I drive the mountain everyday and it concerns me that what is suggested here is to increase the speed, the potential speed, of people coming down the hill. It is a lot easier for me to go fast coming down the hill now that the curves have been smoothed out. I remember the first time I drove it, about 50 years ago, and it was curvy coming down. You couldn't go that fast because you had to watch out for taking the turns. Is there some way with all your changes that we could find some way to slow the traffic down coming down the hill? Mr. Norman reported from a geometric standpoint the least consideration could you effectively reduce speed by doing that. I think that would be very difficult given the volume of traffic and the grade that exist out there.
I don't think there are any artificial means just from a design and construction standpoint that would have a significant effect.
Mr. Murphy questioned the use of rumble strips. Mr. Norman reported that when rumble strips are used they usually get taken out the very next day. Various parts of the country will use rumble strips. They tend to be areas that are less densely developed. In Connecticut our experience is, we put them in and we take them out immediately. There was a proposal for some rumble strips in Avon and it was suggested that we not even put them it. They are very objectable from a noise standpoint if you live close to the roadway.
Linda Biezer, Route 10, reported she heard people mentioning the speed cameras and we just came back from a month in Sarasota, Florida where they have experimented with the speed camera only to find a great increase in accidents because the drivers would see the cameras and slam on the brakes and the people behind would rear-end them, especially in the intersections. I think when people see the camera they react in a way that they shouldn't.
Diane Carney, 36 Rosewood Road, reported that she is concerned with speed. It is appreciated that the DOT has come up with the truck ramp and the proposal here but speed is a problem. With the observations that I have made, the mountain was wonderful to travel during the construction because of all the police cars. When the cars pass the construction area and the police, then it was a free for all. I think the obvious thing is that we have to address more police on that mountain to slow people down.
Wayne Throgmartin, 226 Avon Mountain Road, reported regarding the difficulty of adding the speed cameras. I lived in a country where they had them; I lived in the U.K. for 10 years. They use them everywhere and they love them. They put them in plain sight and they put them in yellow so everyone knows there is a speed camera. You are not trying to catch someone, you are just trying to keep someone from speeding and you can handle it by the way you sign them. Another comment always made on speed cameras, and the reason down here, is the privacy concern. If you go back to your law books you will find there is no right of privacy on a public road. Once you leave your house you leave your privacy behind. You are on a public road you should expect to be observed. They will work.
Bob Hintermister, 27 River Mead, reported the Mr. Timothy Wilson from the DOT was trying to help clarify before the meeting, how are we going to handle the various flows of traffic at the intersection where the light is now gone. I understand that all the downhill trucks need to stay in the right lane. The ones that do not stay in the right are going to continue down through. Also, there are some non-truck vehicles that are going to come down in another lane parallel to the trucks and they are going to want to make a turn to the right onto Nod Road. How are you going to decide where the truck traffic goes and where the person in the right lane gets in position to go around that corner? Likewise, the trucks that come off Route 10 and go over the bridge and go around the corner they have to go
around that curve to get back on Route 44 and they are going to have to be very slow at that point. It is going to take quite a bit of distance to get back up to speed before they blend in with the downhill traffic. Could you please explain this for me again? Mr. Wilson explained when you travel west down the mountain there will be a dedicated deceleration lane. If a truck is coming down Nod Road or over the overpass and wants to go west there is an acceleration lane that is long enough to bring cars and trucks up to speed with the flow of traffic. The same is occurring on the other side. Mr. Hintermister reported he does not understand how two lanes coming down the hill and going through those changes without anything happening.
Mr. Wilson stated as you get closer to the intersection there will be a deceleration lane. One deceleration lane that cars and trucks will pull up into to slow down and then make the maneuver. Today you have an intersection where the right line is dedicated for thru and right turning vehicles, and you have to slow down to a point to make that maneuver. This will get you out of the flow of traffic so you can safely make the maneuver. In the acceleration lane where you enter, there will be dedicated lanes where you can accelerate and get into the gap in the traffic.
Betty Jane Murphy, Barkhamsted, reported that she has been traveling the mountain probably longer than anyone else in the room. My suggestion is that you get trucks off the mountain and have police monitoring speed on both sides.
Carl Candels, reported he can not understand, when you are coming down the mountain is there a slow up where you can go into the hotel? You can still get hit with people speeding down the hill. Mr. Wilson stated that there is a dedicated left turn lane so you can access the hotel coming down the mountain. What is happening up the mountain, we have the project starting this week, which eventually will create a center left turn lane for residents who have a driveway or side street, all the way down the mountain until this point.
Carl Landells stated if I go up the mountain at 35 mile per hour and people are going 65 miles per hour and people are passing me, can’t we put on the mountain, from the top to the bottom, 25 miles per hour and enforce it? Is that possible on a state road? Mr. Wilson reported they have heard about speed but unless you have police out 24 hours per day spaced close enough together so there was always a visual presence it is difficult to do that. We have more rear-end accidents at this location going eastbound, driving up the hill.
Mr. Zacchio questioned are we trying to do anything to create less traffic on Route 44? The natural corridor off the mountain and the corridor into Hartford is Route 4 and Route 4 has always been a congested area. Route 44 has become the natural easy route for people to take because Route 4 is such a bad route to travel during rush hour. Is there anything that is being done to improve the flow on Route 4 where it seems the natural corridor off of Interstate 84 into downtown to alleviate some of the traffic issue? Mr. Norman stated there are few opportunities to cross the mountain and Route 4 is one of them and it is very congested. Right now we have a project to increase the bridge on Route 4 over the Farmington River. There are also considerations for some improvements in Farmington but it may be
a couple of years off.
Chairman Carlson questioned how long the concept proposed would take? Mr. Norman reported that it would take 10 years. That would be a reasonable time frame.
Mr. Shea reported when they last met part of the presentation included the issue of weather in relationship to accidents, and someone said about 70% of accidents happen in bad weather. Is that the same percentage still today? Mr. Norman stated he is unsure if that is the case. The weather station we have in has been in place for such a short period of time that I don't know if we would have enough data to be able to make that assessment.
Mr. Shea reported along with the weather station, is it fair to say that there are still more accidents related to bad weather then anything else other than speed, for instance, brake failure? Mr. Norman stated that they occur hand in hand. Whether it is speed or weather, they both have to do with the ability of the vehicle to remain in contact with the road surface. They all play together. As for accident coding, this is where our challenge is. We don't have definitive information. We have various terms - driving to fast for conditions, driving to close, reckless driving and that is how they get coded.
Mr. Zacchio reported the last meeting on this the comment we heard was driving to fast for conditions was one of the items that was the highest contributors for accidents. Of those accidents the ones that you pointed out today were the ones that were usually had the most severe impact and they happened in the cross over accidents. The median was an important factor in this, to keep the cars from crossing over into oncoming traffic. The other question was, will we have input on the aesthetics of the bridge when we get to that point? Mr. Norman stated they would share their ideas with what they think the bridge should look like, what the landscaping should look like. We have things set up now where it can be done fairly quickly but we did not want to make that judgment without the
Council.
Mr. Pena reported at the meeting in March with Representative Bye, we clearly heard from the majority of the audience that they are concerned about speed. Again tonight, we are hearing about speed. We can certainly talk about all of the improvements around Route 10 and Route 44 but I also think the perception is if the road is not seen as safe then the economy of the Town will suffer as well. People coming over the mountain and into Avon to shop or eat, if the mountain is not perceived as safe, it can hinder or hurt the economy of our town. What is being proposed, $30 or $40 million dollars is a lot of money if the road is not going to be perceived as being safe. This may be a good idea but I still want to know what can be done maybe traffic calming idea, that maybe you have not thought of regarding controlling
speed. Mr. Norman reported it is an arterial roadway and there are limited things that can be done when it comes to traffic calming on a road that carries this much traffic. The more effective is the speed cameras, but that has it's plus and minus. On a statewide basis it is something the state has a history of not supporting due to privacy issues. It is something that the task force was supportive of for the program for this set of circumstances. The Town had a public meeting on it and clearly that is when people address the safety issues. When speed control and enforcement is the issue then those are concerned with freedom and noninfringement they come up more prominent.
Mr. Pena stated when you are talking about $30 or $40 million dollars, I would hate to see a project where we would spend that much money and not address speed. In particular, I will go back to the economy of the Town, the hotel and the restaurants, I think it is important for us to understand the impact that people perceive that road not being safe and the impact it will have on our town.
Mrs. Samul reported that many people have brought up speed as they did in the meeting in March. Also in the meeting in March, the DOT was asked about this being a regional issue not just an Avon issue. The widening of Route 4 to the east of the bridge where you come into the intersection of Route 10 needs to be addressed, perhaps the same with Route 185 in Simsbury, to alleviate and spread some of this out. What was also mentioned in that March meeting was a plan that Interstate 84 to Route 72 to Route 8 by the state was anticipated and discussed. By the virtue of the fact that some of the people in the audience are from Barkhamsted, New Hartford, Canton, it is not Avon, this is all the way out to Litchfield County. The Route 72 connector between Interstate 84 and Route 8 might not do commuter traffic
but it might attract trucks and those are the ones that have the greatest fatality issues on that mountain. If you can not reduce the speed, maybe you can reduce the traffic by spreading it out regionally. Mrs. Samul further stated there is a designated left hand turn lane traveling west coming down Route 44 to turn into the hotel. You have a designated right hand turn coming down the mountain to turn onto Nod Road. Coming off of Nod Road going west you have a designated acceleration lane so that the vehicles can not be hit by the cars behind them. How wide is this? Is this going to be a six lane road because of the designated side lanes? Mr. Norman reported we would have an area with three lanes on each side. Mrs. Samul stated she could see someone coming down Route 44 making a left hand turn into that hotel and being rear ended. That is an accident waiting to happen. That concerns me.
Mr. Pena questioned if a study has been able to calculate the number of cars that would be taking a left turn lane into the hotel. Mr. Wilson reported that the length of the lanes are extensive so there would be plenty of room for the vehicles to pull in, slow down and make the left hand turn.
Chairman Carlson commented the DOT designed an elegant solution, but we are deeply concerned that if you undertook this it would be 10 years off, which gives us 10 years of potential for accidents. The concern beyond that is, this is a solution design from the DOT but we have a bigger issue here, part of it is a political issue. We are not addressing the regional nature of this traffic problem. It is a traffic control issue that maybe with the Department of Motor Vehicles or somewhere else having to do with speed enforcement. I spoke in favor of the cameras. I traveled in a country where they had them. There is a sentinel effect in my opinion having driven on the highways in England. I am concerned we may come up with a solution that may solve part of the problem but to the people who have
spoken about speed, I actually think it increase our speed opportunity coming down the mountain. I am also concerned, picking up with where Mrs. Samul left off, that while there is not pressure to take the left hand turn, having been rear ended myself waiting to take a left hand turn 20 years ago. To this day I still look in the rearview mirror and shutter when I see someone coming at me. If you have a truck coming down the mountain and you are looking at it, which is a concern. Please take a very careful look at this because 10 years from now we may have more people standing in front of us talking about being in accidents.
Mr. Shea reported the DOT has a difficult job and would have a problem supporting the project for many of the reasons that have been stated. When you finish with the $30 or $40 million dollar project and you look at the regional issues, I just don’t see this project having any positive impact on any of the people who live or do business in that area. The Town of Avon wants to be a willing partner with the DOT, but you are taking it upon yourself to take some valuable space that the Town presently uses for other uses. When you look at all the reasons that have been stated, I would have a hard time supporting this.
Chairman Carlson stated he was opposed to the project back in 2005, that flattened out the curve and brought the traffic further up, and you came back with a solution for the intersection that is a better solution to this problem, but there is a bigger problem that needs to be addressed.
Mr. Shea reported he thinks it is fair that the DOT, the Governor and the Town of Avon start talking about speed enforcement. Where can the Town of Avon go to get some funds to assist us with the issue on the mountain, because no matter what you come up with it is going to be awhile. If you could take back that message. The Town of Avon needs more speed enforcement. It appears that we need more people on that mountain.
Mr. Norman stated the construction and problems on Route 44 are the DOT's province and authority. We would reach out to communities for advice and input. Roads that are local authority, we can offer advice but it is not our responsibility. The issue of a regional approach gets to be a bit more difficult for me.
Diane Carney, 36 Rosewood Road, questioned why the DOT is looking at other plans when we haven't finished the first phase of construction? Perhaps we should evaluate the construction that is being done before we move on. Mr. Norman reported the work that is starting in construction and they will be out here for a couple of years, really addresses the accidents that occurred on the mountain. It does not address a truck brake failure. We do have a feature in place which will provide some remedy to it. We have offered a couple of years ago renderings of the ramp which were short circuited by the incident of the truck into the furniture store. This was the second component that we offered to look at further. That is what we did tonight. Just present concepts and get feedback. Ms. Carney questioned if the work that is about to start will have an impact on the proposed concepts? Mr. Norman stated the construction will have an effect up on the hill but down below it will not have
any impact should a truck lose its breaks. Ms. Carney questioned if the Town Council could revisit the use of cameras? Chairman Carlson reported it is State Legislative issue. They need to pass enacting legislation that allows for the use of cameras. We can not just decide to put cameras up.
Chairman Carlson questioned if the truck ramp is totally done and operational as needed to be? Mr. Norman reported it is operational but we are going to install heating coils so we will not have maintenance workers up there during a snow event, closing down the ramp to clear it. We will also be doing a surface treatment on the ramp. It will take 5-10 days to fully install the heating coils.
Someone from the audience questioned if the trucks traveling westbound are required to stay in the right lane only? The Chief of Police reported it is mandatory now that trucks have to stay in the right-hand lane both east and westbound traveling. The westbound side has signs up. The DOT will be putting up the signs for the eastbound side.
The Town Planner reported the landscaping is another item that is not complete with the truck ramp. The Town has been working with the State DOT to design the final aesthetics of the ramp. The missing piece has been wrapped up with the construction that will be starting this week.
07/08-08 Status Report: Avon Library Building Committee
Ms. Diane Hornaday, Chair of the Library Building Committee, reported all of the members of the Building committee are present except for one that is out of town. The Committee has been working right along and Mr. Peter Well, from Tuthill and Wells, with looking at what the program requirements were for the Library. We have looked at several ideas. We are looking at a basement for the Library so there is storage, not only for the Library but for the Town as a whole. While we were going through this process Mr. Wells was laying out the building on the land we have in conjunction with what we already had and also with the state requirements for parking. As he has done that, we have also looked at some possibilities that are not feasible for our Town at this time but we really explored a lot of
options. We have come to realize that we are going to have to ask for an amendment in terms of the 65/35% ratio of land. What we would like to do is have our Architect give you a review of the proposal. The Town Planner is going to speak about what he thinks can be done with asking for an amendment of the Zoning Commission. What we are looking for is for the Council to give us the authority to go to the Zoning Commission and ask for that.
Mr. Wells reported we do not intend to review the design with you because the design is not anywhere near ready to review yet. The process is you take the building program and analysis it and see what the objective area for each additional space is appropriate. Then you go a step further and decide how much of that space can be on the second floor or the basement and how much needs to be on the first floor. The first step was to figure out how much could fit on the second floor and how much in the basement and see how small we could make the footprint. Each time we have done that exercise we have come up with basically the same footprint for the building, which varies between 23,000 and 24,000 square feet. Right now we are at 23,354 square feet. The site, which is 3.8 acre's, which is 165,528 square
feet, if you do the math you will some up with an available site coverage of 57,934. If you subtract 23,000 square feet from that you come up with an area for paving. Not just parking but parking and sidewalks, which is 44,225 square feet. You can't get 100 or 150 cars into that plus the paving. Right now if this was to go forward this area is the area we are over by. You can argue that we could do all that with grass pavers. Right now it is 41.4% is impervious area, and that is the best result we have come up with so far. We used the most efficient parking layout that we could come up with. We may need to increase it a bit for the need of more landscaping in here. What we would like to do is get some sort of indication that we could go forward with the concept that we would be able to use this ratio in order to meet the state standards for parking and the standards we are trying to meet for the building itself. We are trying to do
things that are required by the program, for example a drive by book drop. One thing we may be doing is having a lot more landscaping then you are use to seeing with commercial landscapers. This facility has to have good landscaping. It is not just because we want to buffer the surrounding properties but for aesthetic reasons. We are also trying to keep it simple so the snow plows don't rip up the curbing. We are continuing to work out ways of organizing the interior of the building.
Mr. Shea stated these finding speak often towards the $1 million dollar grant, are we any closer in knowing that we are going to get a million dollar grant? The Library Director at this point we know what we have to do to qualify, and that is to build a building that will serve the community for the next 30 years. We do not know the competition. One of the factors is who else is going for the million dollars. Some communities are not as fortunate as Avon, so that is held against us. The best thing that I heard was the parking places are not held against you in the program. I will be going to a workshop that is required for all towns/cities that are participating and I hope to get a better feel at that time. I think we have a good shot as long as we keep our priorities in line.
Mr. Wells reported the layout that we created has had man y modifications and we have worked with the state on 30 to 40 projects. We have a good hand on what we need to do to get them, since we have gotten them every time. The problem now is they increase it from $500,000 to $1,000,000, so a lot more people are trying to get them. If you look at the list of people applying for the grant they are not all applying for the $1,000,000. Some apply to replace the circulation desks, some look to increase a small portion of the Library, so it is difficult to determine.
Mrs. Samul reported that she had heard there were 16 communities applying for the grant money. The Library Director reported a number of communities qualify as distressed communities and they would not be competing against Avon. There is money separate assigned for those communities.
The Town Planner reported for any institutional use located in a residential zoning district, a certain amount of green space needs to be maintained. Prior to adopting that regulation a subjective analysis of a case by case basis was done. The standard the Commission adopted is the one that is being discussed and that is 35%. We apply this to all the facilities including Avon High School, nursing homes, and Churches. We do, however, have an exception to the rule for something that we call building coverage. Building coverage is the footprint of the building as a percentage of the whole lot. There is the ability of the current rules for the Commission to grant come minor deviations. This idea was floated by the Planning and Zoning Commission and they may be sympathetic to the issue. It may be
required that they add to the aesthetics in other ways such as additions to the landscaping to make up for the additional parking. Legislation would have to be drafted to change the rules of the Commission.
Mr. Zacchio stated there is an exception process for commercial properties, there is not an amendment process for this since it is residential. This would be more in line with what we have done with the commercial properties and allowed with the exceptions. The Town Planner reported the Commission would use discretion and it would be a case by case basis.
Mrs. Samul reported in the past few years a number of institutions have come before Planning & Zoning with this issue and have been told they have to conform to Planning & Zoning.
The Town Planner reported that he does not recall any request where applicants appeared and said they wanted to have the rules changes. Certainly a number of applicants came to Town Hall and the rules were explained to them and we worked around the rules. They have not asked for an amendment to the rules.
Mrs. Samul questioned if this modification was approved it would apply, not only to town buildings, like schools and the Library, and churches, but would it apply to things like nursing homes, nurseries and day cares? Are we opening up to a greater degree than what we think we are? The Town Planner stated the regulation as it exists right now, applies to any special exception case that is in a residential zoning district, which includes all of the places you mentioned. The conversation that was had with the Planning & Zoning Commission is that any of those institutions could apply for a special permit, but they would have to demonstrate excellence in another area. By state law towns can exempt themselves from their own regulations. The Town of Granby, for example, does not follow their rules or
regulations.
Ms. Hornaday stated the Library Building Committee is looking for the Council's approval and authority to modify the application to Zoning for the amendment.
Chairman Carlson questioned the timing of the special amendment. When will it be brought in front of Planning & Zoning? Once the special amendment is approved it will apply to all. Are we asking for the special amendment before we know where this project is going? The Town Planner reported that he has been asked by the Planning & Zoning Commission to draft the amendment and at the next meeting on April 22, 2008 they will review it. If they look at it and say they want to hold a public hearing, the soonest we can do that is in a 30 day period.
Mr. Pena reported having served on Planning & Zoning, at times when an exception was about to be made the Commission would hear about applications. Have you heard anything about this amendment? The Town Planner reported that he is not aware of anything.
Mr. Shea questioned how the Planning & Zoning Board would differentiate on future projects on who gets the exception and who doesn't? The Town Planner reported they would look at it the way they look at an exception to a commercial business. Over 19 years there have only been three or four cases. The applicant really needs to do something exceptional. The message is that we have a strict code and we have high expectations regarding the aesthetics of the project and the functionality of the project and if you are appearing before the Commission asking for an increase in coverage then you ought to show something exceptional.
Mr. Pena questioned if the Library Building Committee is at the point that they need to move with the amendment today? The Library Director reported the deadline for the grant is July 29th.
The Assistant to the Town Manager reported we may be a little ahead coming to the Council and asking for this approval to go to the Planning & Zoning Commission only to make sure that we are on the same page as the Council with where the project is going and to make sure the Council is comfortable with the amendment.
Chairman Carlson stated the Library Building Committee is asking for an exception under a potential amendment that the Planning & Zoning Commission may or may not agree with.
Mr. Wells reported it is not just the grant they are concerned with. The building program is a good one and it is an analysis what the Town needs whether you are going for the grant or not. You should not take the line that the grant is driving this. It is a large sum of money but even if we were not going for the grant we would still end up with the same problem.
Mr. Pena questioned if we were not to use this footprint then we would have to go in the direction of a basement? Mrs. Hornaday stated they have encouraged the idea of a basement for a couple of reasons. One, the Town needs some storage space. Also, after speaking with the Town Engineer, it is the cheapest storage space you can get since you have to already have a partial basement. We are looking at it for that reason. The program needs are what has increased the size of the footprint. We are going with what we think would be the last building of the Library. We are hoping this is the final construction.
Mrs. Samul reported in the past she had heard in order to get the $1 million dollar grant we need to have this program. It has always been the grant driving the program, and therefore the building size and therefore the parking and therefore the buffering, etc. Are you saying the opposite? That our needs are driving the building and what we can then get for the grant? Mr. Wells stated if they we not going for the grant we would still use the same criteria that the state has developed as for those who are going for the grant. The grant is what drove the program and how to apply for the program but the actual indications in that building program and how much space you need are accurate whether you are going for the grant or not. If you were to scale the building down then you would not
have a Library that will function with all the services that the Town needs. That is what the grant application process identifies.
On a motion made by Mr. Zacchio, seconded by Mr. Pena it was voted:
RESOLVED: That the Town Council approve the request from the Library Building Committee to appear before the Planning & Zoning Commission and request a special exception under a potential amendment to allow for a building that exceeds 35% of land coverage.
Messrs Carlson, Pena, Zacchio and Shea voted in favor. Mrs. Samul opposed.
NEW BUSINESS
07/08-84 Presentation: U.S. Post Office, Relocation of Avon Retail Operation; Mr. James Hickey
Mr. James Hickey, Real Estate Specialist and Project Manager with the United States Postal Service (USPS) located in Windsor, Connecticut, reported we administer real estate and construction projects for the six New England States and most of New York State. The reason we are here tonight is to bring to your attention a planned project that will impact the Avon Post Office. Like any other organization the Postal Service is undergoing a constant change. One significant change that has happened is there is some new technology that has come on board and what this involves is what they call the F.S.S program, which is a large mail processing machine know as a Flat Sequence Sorter. What this will do when it comes online is it will sort the flat mail. Flat mail is periodicals, magazines, large
envelopes, currently first class mail is processed automatically and is brought to the post office already sorted for the carrier to take out and deliver. The flat mail is still manually sorted. What will happen when this technology comes online is the flat mail will also come pre-sorted so the carrier will not need to spend as much time in the Post Office sorting the mail. They can take the mail right onto the truck and get onto the street. What is going to happen, after careful analysis, we found that this is significantly impacting our facilities needs. We basically need less space. We are planning facility replacement projects based upon this new technology. What is happening in Avon is a plan to consolidate the carrier operation from Simsbury to the Avon Post Office. We would relocate the retail customer service operation into a smaller facility that is to be determined somewhere in the downtown business district. The
Simsbury retail customer service operation will relocate to a smaller location in Simsbury. The carrier operation in the Weatogue area of Simsbury will also be relocated into the new carrier annex in Avon. The impact on Avon is that we will relocate into approximately 2,200 square feet of customer service space to serve the public and the existing space will be used to deliver mail to the Simsbury/Avon area. We go through a process before we relocate any customer service facilities; we bring it to the Town and look for input on the idea. If there are any concerns/ problems with the idea we take that into consideration.
Terri Wilson, 64 Mountain View Avenue, stated the existing Avon Post Office is a rented building, are you going to continue to lease it to have carrier service for Simsbury and Avon out of that building? Mr. Hickey reported that is the plan. Ms. Wilson confirmed that the retail is going to move elsewhere. What about the Weatogue facility will that close as well? What about the carrier service in West Simsbury? Mr. Hickey stated that the Weatogue facility will be consolidated but the West Simsbury facility is not affected in this.
A resident of Avon stated with the present cost of gasoline the United States Postal Service (USPS) is going to have the Simsbury/Weatogue carriers come into Avon to get their mail? Does that make much sense?
Mr. Bob McGraff, Planner from the United States Postal Service, reported this question gets to the core of why we started to look at plans like this. The USPS is in a tough spot right now. Everyone knows that the economy has taken a down turn and we are trying to try to balance our universal service standards with our operating costs. Some of the unique challenges we have been faced with as an organization, fiscal year 2007, our agency took a $5.7 billion dollar loss. We have to take every creative initiative we can to try and reduce that. The Postal Service is an entirely self-funded agency of the Federal Government. The only money we have is from our postage revenues. We also know we have some safety issues, we have some maintenance issues and we have some excess inventory
issues that we can not ignore. The plan that is being outlined explains that right now those facilities total over 15,000 square feet of operating space. Using some of the efficiency's that Mr. Hickey was speaking about, we can service the same customer base with a projected improvement in customer service in 11,000 square feet of space. The projected annual savings in the 4,000 square feet of space will far out way the additional driving costs for the carriers. With the increase in gas prices the Postal Service sees a 1% increase in gas prices costs the facility $24 million dollars a year because of the 238,000 routes that we have to drive. Last time I looked, the gas prices were up 25%/28% over this time last year. That is about a $600 billion dollars against our bottom line on top of the $5.1 billion that we took in Fiscal Year 07. For a self-funded agency, $600 billion dollars is about one and a half billion first class postage stamps
that people would have to mail just to absorb that increase in fuel costs. All of this is why we need to do some creative things like relocate our buildings. Most of the changes will take place in the backroom and will not be visible or noticeable to the daily customer.
Chairman Carlson questioned going from 15,000 to 11,000 square feet does that incorporate the additional retail space and have you identified any potential sites for the 2,000 square foot facility? Mr. McGraff reported this does include the 2,000 square foot facility and no potential site has been located. All that is known is that we need to maintain a presence in the downtown business district. Chairman Carlson questioned Mr. McGraff's definition of the downtown business district. Mr. McGraff stated this would be defined with the help of the Council's feedback for the meeting.
Mr. Hickey stated the USPS would go out for an RFP, advertise in the local paper and it would be a very public process. What we are doing tonight is reviewing the concept of the project. We do not want to go any further until the Council is aware of project and the feelings are known. Chairman Carlson stated he can't comment on the concept and is more concerned with the impact on the town residents and their usage on the retail space and in order to comment on this the location of the retail space would have to be known. To me the downtown business district that is right where you are located. Mr. Hickey reported Route 44 is what he would consider the downtown area.
The Town Planner defined the downtown area within the immediate proximity of where the current Post Office is located. The Post Office is the one place in the community that everyone comes to and it is important to the business. It is important to not extend the search to other areas of Route 44. The presentation this evening is talking about using the current building as a warehousing and processing center but that is probably a conflict of the Zoning Ordinance. That would be considered more of an industrial use. It would be most appropriate to locate a building in an industrial zone. Mr. McGruff reported the USPS is not married to staying in the current location.
Terri Wilson, 64 Mountain View Avenue, questioned if the current location was used would that require more trucks to be parked there? Could you switch them and use the current location as the retail area and relocate the warehouse. It is a common area and people know it is the Post Office. Mr. McGruff reported the current building is about 7,100 square feet and we need only 2,200 square feet.
Betty Jane Murphy reported her father was the Postmaster for 30 years and they never moved outside of the building they are in now. It seems to me if that is too much space then you need then perhaps you can rent out part of it but I do not think the Post Office should be moved from walking distance from where it is now. It does not make sense to move it.
Mr. Pena questioned how many additional trucks would be coming in and out of the current facility? Mr. McGruff reported there are currently 19 delivery routes working out of the Avon Office and there could be as many as 19 more. Mr. Pena questioned if the current building would be remodeled to have the additional trucks coming in and out? Mr. McGruff stated if the facility was retained as the carrier annex then the customer service area would be removed. There would be no external changes other than removing the lobby. It would mostly be internal renovations. Mr. Pena stated one potential problem would be the additional trucks coming out onto Route 10 with the traffic light. Mr. McGruff stated there would be an additional 19 trucks per day but it would be less customer traffic. Mr. Pena
questioned if the facility would be operational seven days a week? Mr. McGruff stated the mail comes to this facility presorted so it would only but six days a week. It would be slightly earlier closings than they currently have now.
Mrs. Samul questioned the times the trucks are coming in and out of the building. Mr. McGruff reported that trucks come in around 5:30 a.m. and go out about 5:00 p.m. and it is not projected to change.
Terri Wilson, 64 Mountain View Avenue, stated a large white truck goes to the Post Office everyday between 5:30 and 6:00 a.m., and loads up and then leaves. He is back around 6:00 p.m. and then on Saturdays picks up around 7:30 or 8:00 a.m. and again around 6:00 p.m.
Mrs. Samul stated then there will be one large truck daily and 38 smaller trucks going out to deliver to the homes in Avon and Simsbury. People will be driving in with their cars and 38 trucks are leaving around 9:00 a.m. for the day of delivering. Then coming back in the afternoon around 3:00 or 4:00 p.m. and then the people will be leaving. In the mean time what is happening in the building? Mr. McGruff reported during the day the building is mostly empty. The letter carriers will arrive, punch in, organize what needs to be organized and heads off to deliver.
Mr. Shea reported the Council's goal is to speak on how this will impact Avon. The retail operation needs to stay near that building or in that building. The rest of this is really up to the USPS and how to make efficient. If the retail portion was moved it would defer from the plan that we have for the Retail Development of Downtown Avon. Mr. Hickey reported in terms of the retail it will be public and there will be an opportunity for sites to be review with the Town Council and we will seek your input on that. We will have a site review and we will tell you what site we have in mind. Mr. Shea questioned if they could commit to staying within a half mile of the current location.
Mr. Zacchio reported the difficulty is it is hard to make a decision on what we think the retail move should or shouldn’t be without knowing what space you might require. Back to the downtown area, what does that mean? Does that mean Wal-Mart Plaza, does that mean up by Staples or down by Route 10. To the Council it means within the current area of the Post Office. Going along with the development plan for a more pedestrian friendly center, and our development of a center in the future, that is an area that we began the plan around and the Post Office is a staple in that environment. Knowing that you want to move it sounds ok, but in what area? We think the area of the current Post Office is the area we would be the most agreeable to. Mr. Hickey stated that is the area they will
focus on.
Chairman Carlson stated the Council looks forward to seeing the Postal retail location that is chosen. Mr. Hickey stated hopefully there will be an abundance of sites to choose from.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Attest:
Caroline B. LaMonica
Clerk
| 
