TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
MINUTES
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS JULY 21, 2003
SOUTH WINDSOR TOWN HALL 7:00 P.M.
1. Call Meeting to Order
Mayor Aman called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Mayor William Aman
Deputy Mayor Matthew Streeter
Councillor Barbara Barbour
Councillor Paul Burnham
Councillor Thomas Delnicki
Councillor Deborah Fine (Arrived at 7:25 p.m.)
Councillor Edward F. Havens
Councillor Judith Paquin
Councillor John Pelkey
Also Present: Town Manager Matthew B. Galligan
Town Attorney Barry D. Guliano
3. Public Participation – None
4. Communications – None
5. Town Manager’s Report – None
6. Items for Discussion
Roads, Drainage, and Intersection Improvement Program (Presentation by Michael Gantick, Director of Public Works)
See attached Exhibit A – memo dated June 12, 2003, to Town Manager Matthew B. Galligan from Director of Public Works Michael Gantick, and attached Exhibit B – visual aids from the presentation.
6. A. (Continued)
The following discussions took place following Mr. Gantick’s presentation:
Mr. Gantick stated that many other communities are much like South Windsor—they are looking at getting projects in line for ISTEA money at CRCOG’s regional level. South Windsor has been fortunate in the past 15 years in that many projects have been completed using state and federal money.
Councillor Barbour, stating that the Capital Projects list spans several years, asked whether the project costs are updated each year so that the figures are “today’s numbers.” Mr. Gantick indicated that, as the year that the project is to be done comes closer, a closer look is given at the costs. They do attempt to update the costs, but it is not done every year for every project.
It was emphasized that the pictures included in the presentation are examples of types of things which are occurring all over Town.
When asked if the problems being discussed have contributed to any accidents, Mr. Gantick said that there are contributing factors to all situations.
Noting that some residents may not be in favor of road improvements because of necessary changes to their properties, Councillor Barbour asked how to work with people so that “everyone is happy.” Mr. Gantick responded that there is a set of standards—guidelines as to how wide a road should be for a certain amount of traffic and criteria for designing roads for certain types of speed limits and traffic volume; and they try to follow those guidelines. They try to “re-engineer” projects where those types of problems exist and work with residents to minimize the impacts.
Councillor Fine, referring to her own street, stated that it had been paved approximately three years ago, yet it currently needs repairs. She asked the cost of the first paving, whether it was not done thoroughly the first time because of a lack of funds, and what the cost is of current repairs. Mr. Gantick explained that when a road is overlaid, there are still cracks in the road structure underneath, and cracking is a natural phenomenon.
6. A. (Continued)
Unless the road is reconstructed starting again with gravel and new asphalt, there will still be reflection cracking. This cracking will also occur in a brand new road. Where previously roads could be overlaid without much preparation work, they are now having to be milled (the surface pavement is ground off an inch or two). Crack sealing is being done, which is a Bandaid approach, to keep water from getting in.
It was Councillor Delnicki’s understanding, he said, that the Town is looking to apply for a grant this fall with regard to Kelly Road. Mr. Galligan stated that if we apply now, it is probably five to seven years before acceptance of a grant. With Kelly Road, if we are going to stay within the existing right-of-way of 22 feet, it might not be eligible for this type of grant. He said that for grants, it used to be a cycle of four or five years, and it now pushes the projects to seven. It is his understanding, from CRCOG, that they will now be looking at projects which benefit multiple jurisdictions. He did note, however, that changes are occurring rapidly and the “rules” may change again.
Councillor Delnicki, referring to the previous comparison to the disaster of the Mianus Bridge, asked where in Town there might be such a problem, and Mr. Gantick said that we don’t have anything of that magnitude. He did say that the concern is that there are many projects and if they keep stacking up, there may be a problem with a road cave-in. The Councillor felt that although each of the projects is very worthy, it is necessary to keep in focus the tough economic times in which we are living.
The Work Session was recessed at 8:00 p.m. in order to call the Regular Meeting to order . The Regular Meeting was immediately recessed and the Work Session was reconvened.
Councillor Pelkey, providing information about his own street where a water main had burst and as a result the entire road is going to be replaced, asked if the Connecticut Water Company would be paying the bill for this. Mr. Gantick responded that something was wrong with the water line, as it broke three times in four years. The Connecticut Water Company decided to replace the whole water line from Valley View to Palmer. They are going to be responsible for replacing the road from Palmer about two-thirds around the corner toward Valley View. The Town will then do an overlay project after they are done.
6. A. (Continued)
Councillor Pelkey asked whether the possibility had been explored of the Town partnering with the Connecticut Water Company and the MDC to identify the most probable problem areas in an effort to avoid emergency costs. Mr. Gantick said that the Connecticut Water Company and the MDC have their own capital improvement programs, and the Town does coordinate with them when the projects take place. Mr. Gantick clarified that the Connecticut Water Company is on the hook for 100% of the cost of the road from Palmer around the corner toward Valley View. The only section for which the Town is responsible is where the Connecticut Water Company is done reconstructing the road, where the Town will match it with an overlay.
Referring to Mr. Gantick’s overview and the comment that a plan for funding would be presented to the Council, Councillor Pelkey noted that the only option he saw presented was to go to referendum. Continuing, the Councillor said that there are other options, one of which would be to properly fund the Capital Projects Budget so that these maintenance issues can be handled on an ongoing basis, as they should have been all along. He said perhaps the Capital Projects Budget should be increased each year until there is a point where we are “caught up.”
Councillor Burnham questioned whether the $50,000 listed for a Bridge Condition Study is for all of the bridges in Town, and Mr. Gantick said that it is.
Mr. Gantick said that signage replacement will be a requirement.
In response to questions from Councillor Paquin about paving cycles, Mr. Gantick said that with the resurfacing program, three to ten years is a normal cycle. There are currently 140 miles of road and about 7 miles are done per year, which equates to about a 20-year cycle (two to three times longer than it should be).
With regard to the issue of cul-de-sacs, Mr. Gantick said that many have not been there for many years, but it is an issue of safety.
Mr. Gantick pointed out that not all of the projects listed are of the highest priority. They have been identified by either staff or residents.
6. A. (Continued)
Mayor Aman felt that budget spending will need to be increased. He said if the Councillors wished for it to go to referendum, then the Town Manager could begin the necessary process.
A work session was requested to further discuss this issue.
7. Executive Session – None
8. Adjournment
A motion to adjourn was made at 8:15 p.m. It was duly seconded and was unanimously approved.
Respectfully submitted,
Merlyn P. Guild
Assistant to the Clerk of the Council
Attachments
| 
