Street Improvement Committee

STREET IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 27, 2011 MINUTES

The Street Improvement Committee met on Tuesday September 27, 2011 commencing at 7:00pm in the Council Chambers at Lewes City Hall, in accordance with proper notification, with the following members present: Councilpersons Ted Becker & Victor Letonoff and BPW Commissioners James Richmann & Pres Lee.

Also in attendance were: City Manager Paul Eckrich & BPW General Manager Darrin Gordon; members of City Council present were Mayor James Ford, Barbara Vaughan & Fred Beaufait and members from the Board of Public Works present were Wendell Alfred & Candice Vassella. Alice Erickson was present as recording secretary.

Chairperson Becker called the meeting to order at 7:00pm.

Mr. Becker made a statement regarding the history of the Bay Avenue Rehabilitation project. The first meeting to begin discussion of the project was on June 8, 2010, the design process began with a meeting on August 8, 2011 with a total of eight (8) public meetings held. There has been a lot of correspondence, phone calls and emails from the residents. This is a very complicated project and affects both full and part time residents. Bay Avenue is a street unlike any other done within the City. It is the longest street that has been rehabilitated in the City of Lewes with many facets to be considered. As a result it was decided from the start to have two (2) engineering firms involved. The initial design phase of the project has been completed by GMB and was reviewed by URS. The April 18th meeting shared the first design phase by GMB and the second review was done by URS. Both engineering firms were present to give comment on the project. A meeting was held with URS and GMB regarding feedback from the URS to attempt to blend the differences. Mr. Becker stated they believe this project represents the most comprehensive approach to completing any street project attempted in Lewes. It has been a very demanding process but will produce a product that will work in the best interest of the City and the residents.

1. PRESENTATION & CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM APRIL 13, 2011 STREET IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING.

ACTION: James Richmann made a motion to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Victor Letonoff, all voting in favor, motion carried.

2. REVIEW OF REVISION OF THE DRAFT PLAN TO INCLUDE, BUT NOT LIMITED TO SANITARY SEWER, WATER LINE REPLACEMENT, LINES OF DISTURBANCE, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, PAVEMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS, MULTI MODAL CONCEPTS

Charlie O’Donnell, GMB, spoke to the design phase of the project. This is the 5 th public meeting for the design phase and there were 3 before that regarding other aspects for a total of 8 public meetings. It has been an unprecedented effort by all involved parties- City, BPW, URS, GMB and the public, to create the project that will be presented.

The parameters included the need to minimize the lines of disturbance (LOD). The bulk of the work done since the April meeting has been to accomplish this goal. The other considerations were to upgrade the water and sewer systems, stormwater management, emergency vehicle access and new pavement to accommodate the multi-modal aspects of Bay Avenue. Sometimes these goals have been in conflict but it was necessary to reconcile them in one project.

In an effort to minimize the disruption along the street they have looked into different ways of installing the utilities. It has been determined to use the technology of trenchless installation for both the water and sewer. This technology will not require the digging of a trench and therefore, will limit the disturbance to the properties along Bay Avenue.

The sanitary sewer will not be replaced but will be encased using the existing clay pipes. They also looked at the transitions to each property and finally they reached out to different contractors to determine if there were any ways to further reduce the LOD.

1 SANITARY SEWER:

The limits of the sanitary sewer project are from Savannah Road to Maine Avenue. The sewer comes into Bay Avenue from the side streets and T’s off; therefore it does not go the entire length of Bay Avenue. There will be a little over 5,000 sq/ft of sewer line addressed.

By encasing the existing sewer lines in place, they were able to reduce the LOD by 2-feet, mostly on the Cedar Avenue side. The manholes will be relined to reduce infiltration/inflow (I/I).

Jerry Katzmeyer, URS, reported on the proposed sanitary sewer system on Bay Avenue as follows:

URS did a study regarding the installation of a new sanitary sewer system along Bay Avenue with the least amount of disturbance to the surrounding area. They did an intensive study that included a surface inspection, manhole inspection, and video inspection of the pipe. They then evaluate every section of the pipe for any defects to determine the best method of rehabilitation.

The current sewer lines are clay pipe with 5’ long joints. For the most part, it is structurally sound but has typical problems associated with clay pipe including cracks, holes, misalignments and root infiltration. There are also signs of I/I. They looked at all 5800 feet of pipe and 123 laterals and determined the best method to rehab was the cured in place method. It is a solid structural repair of an approximately ¼ inch fiber pipe pulled inside the existing clay pipe. It will address problems of I/I, root infiltration and provide structural repair where needed. They have put together a recommendation for a comprehensive sewer rehabilitation which includes the main line pipe, short sections on lateral liners and complete rehabilitation to the manholes with new manhole covers to eliminate I/I. The life of the cured in place pipe is a minimum of 50 years.

Mr. Kazmeyer explained the short distances of lateral rehabilitation will be 3-feet up the laterals to stop water and root infiltration. It is possible to go further up the laterals but would be at the expense of the homeowner. They are able to go 25-feet without a cleanout, and with a cleanout they can go up to 100 ft. They typically line up to the right of way (ROW) line. Mr. Gordon, BPW, stated they will go up to 1-foot past the edge of the road

Mr. Kazmeyer explained this process can be done regardless of the climate. There are 3-ways to cure the liner: hot air, hot water/steam or ultraviolet. It takes 4-hours to cure the liner; therefore, sanitary service will be down 3-4 hours. They will notify the residents ahead of time. The liner is pulled from one manhole to the next and there will be some traffic control needed. There is no digging involved with this procedure and will be done outside of the street rehabilitation.

A sample of the liner inside a PVC pipe was reviewed. The liner is seamless, very structurally sound and should improve the flow rate.

Richard Bacon, 600 Bay Avenue, questioned that even though this procedure will reduce the LOD there will still be a significant disturbance. Mr. O’Donnell stated there will still be disturbance due to the installation of the road.

The savings will be approximately $400,000 for the cured in place pipe liner instead of a total trenched system.

Ron Nardi, 304 Bay Avenue, asked if there will be a process for residents to request to have their laterals lined. Mr. Gordon stated the BPW will be working that out and notify the homeowners.

Jane Thompson, 7 California Avenue, questioned where this procedure has been done in the State of Delaware, what is the success rate and how long does it last. Mr. Kazmeyer stated this process was developed in the 1980s and has been used several places in Delaware. They are currently installing it in New Castle County and will be doing some work in Milford Delaware. Mr. O’Donnell stated this process has been used within the City of Lewes successfully.

Tom Owen, 1006 Bay Avenue, questioned how this procedure deals with the 10’ separation between water and sewer lines. Mr. O’Donnell stated they have met with the Office of Drinking Water regarding separation and if they line the sewer pipe and use directional direction boring for the water they would accept less than 10’ of separation.

2 Libby Owen, 1006 Bay Avenue, questioned what is meant by being ‘outside of the street project’. Mr. Kazmeyer explained that a special contractor is needed to do this procedure and a typical contractor that does traditional street rehabilitation will not do this kind of work. The BPW will have to get separate bids for this and there may not be many contractors available.

Ms. Owen questioned if the sewer work is separated from the project, couldn’t the street improvements be separated out from the rest of the project. Mr. O’Donnell stated the balance of the project should not be separated out.

WATER SERVICE:

Charles O’Donnell, GMB, reported on the replacement of the water service. To limit the disturbance to property along Bay Avenue and the separation between water and sewer, they looked into directional boring.

The focus of this project is to relocate the water main from under the sand dunes to under Bay Avenue. This is necessary due to the level of difficulty accessing it for repairs and the aging of the pipe. They will be relocating the water main to under Bay Avenue from Market Street to Oregon Avenue and replacing from Maine to Michigan Avenue.

Direction boring can only be installed 1500 feet at a time. There will be an entrance pit on one end and an exit pit approximately 1500 feet down the road where the pipe will be laid out to pull back through. The pits will be approximately 15’ x 15’. The joints are fused when they’re on the ground surface, therefore, when it is pulled back through there are no joints. This is one reason less separation is required. The cost is the same but the disturbance will be much less.

Mr. Becker clarified that everyone on the beachside will have to relocate and reconnect to the new water main under Bay Avenue. Mr. Gordon stated the meter pit will be placed inside the property line and it will be the homeowner’s responsibility to tie into the meter. They will be coordinating this with the homeowners.

Frank Young, 906 Bay Avenue, questioned how far apart the lateral connections between water and sewer need to be coming into the property. Mr. O’Donnell stated a 5-foot separate would be enough.

Cliff Diver, 500 Bay Avenue, questioned where the machines will be set up. Mr. O’Donnell stated that will depend on where the pipe can be laid out. They do not know at this time.

Jack Murphy, 610 Bay Avenue, asked what the is the duration of the installation. Mr. O’Donnell stated it will take one day to drill and one day to pull through. They are scheduling 6-weeks total for the water installation.

Sam DeBoer, 302 Bay Avenue, questioned how this will affect the installation of natural gas along Bay Avenue. Mr. Becker stated the natural gas lines are installed the same way the water lines will be installed. The installation of natural gas along Bay Avenue is not a part of this project.

Libby Owens, 1006 Bay Avenue, questioned if it is necessary to install new water lines. Mr. O’Donnell explained the section under the beach is it very necessary. Accessing that water main for repairs is very difficult and it needs to be moved. The water main from Maine to Michigan Avenue is a substandard 4” line that needs to be upgraded.

Dottie Foster, 210 Bay Avenue, stated she is a full-time resident on Bay Avenue and supports the replacement of the water lines.

Kay Gartner, 130 Bay Avenue, questioned if the water lines from Savannah Road to Market Street will be replaced. Mr. Becker stated that is not a part of this project.

3 STREET IMPROVEMENTS:

Vince Luciani, GMB, gave a presentation on the improvements to the street.

There is a total of 7200 feet of surface on Bay Avenue. 1700 feet are within a 12-foot right of way (ROW) and the balance is within a 32-foot ROW. The alignment of the new road will be mostly consistent with the current road. They have tried to keep the road as far to the bayside as possible, dictated by the utility poles. Most of the transition grading is on the Cedar Avenue side. There will be jogs at each beach access due to the amount of restoration that would be involved to make the road straight through and each jog will act as traffic calming.

The paved surface will be a porous pavement of 12-feet wide. There will be a total of a 16-feet clear space at street level with 2 feet cleared shoulders on each side.

The limits of disturbance (LOD) will be 2-feet off the 16-foot clear space along the majority of the street. The LODs are a contractual boundary that is given to the contractor for limiting their work disturbance. They can go beyond that line but if they do, they will be responsible for any necessary repairs. When the project included trenched installation of the water and sewer lines, the LOD was a cleared area. Now that is not the case. Most of the road is flat and the transitions are minimal except in approximately 1250-feet of bermed areas.

TRANSITIONS at 12’ wide ROW: - LOD line extends beyond ROW and is necessary for road installation - All disturbances beyond the ROW line will be restored to the existing condition by the contractor - Any private improvements within the 12’ ROW are to be relocated by the homeowner

Mr. Richmann questioned why they can’t control the LOD more precisely, even if within the City ROW. If the LOD can be controlled within the 12-foot sections where the LOD will extend into the homeowners property, why can’t it be more tightly controlled in the 32-foot ROW on City property. Mr. Luciani stated they are being consistent throughout the street allowing the contractor a 2-foot LOD. Mr. Lee stated there would be a concern about not specifying the LOD. The more uncertainty a contractor has, they would increase their cost and slows down the project.

Terry Stuchlik, 8 Delaware Avenue, questioned if the berms on private property will be disturbed. Mr. Luciani stated within the 12-foot ROW there aren’t any big grade changes but there will be some regrading. They will be working with the homeowners.

Bonnie Hebner, 107 New Jersey Avenue, stated she and her husband object to the 12-foot road and feel they should be able to stay within the 10-foot range. They are concerned about the increase in traffic. The extra 2- feet are not need and will ruin the character of the street.

Mr. Becker stated it has been requested by the Lewes Fire Chief for a minimum of a 16-foot cleared space for them to deploy the equipment during an emergency situation. The 2-foot shoulder will allow them to setup their stabilizers for the ladder truck. This 2-foot area will never be paved but they will encourage the residents to plant grass or low growing vegetation.

Allan Vessel, 1708 Bay Avenue, stated the existing pavement is already 12-foot wide. This process has gone on long enough and he wants the project to move forward.

David Fogg, 5 Delaware Avenue, questioned the ROW and the LOD. He would like to see where the LOD will be on the drawings. Mr. Luciani stated GMB will be out along Bay Avenue to lay out the LOD and begin meeting with the property owners to discuss each situation

Betsy Hershey, 7 Indiana Avenue, stated the city needs to deal with parking issues in this area. When the road is 16-feet even more cars will want to park there. Mr. Becker stated parking issues will have to be addressed by City Council.

Dale Parsons, Vermont Avenue, questioned how the project will be finance? Mr. Becker stated the city will be using bond funds. Mr. Gordon stated the BPW will be using cash reserves that have been put aside for this project.

4 Jane Thompson, California Avenue, questioned why there are no fire hydrants on Bay Avenue for the Fire Department to use? Mr. Becker stated that is part of the water improvements.

Mr. Luciani went on to present the TRANSITIONS at the 32’ ROW as follows: - On the Bay side of Bay Avenue the LOD line varies but generally is inside the existing ROW - On the Cedar Avenue side of Bay Avenue the LOD line has been established as a result of the road installation and is approximately 4-feet from the edge of paving at flat areas and 9- feet from the edge of paving at bermed areas- approximately 1250-feet of Bay Avenue (total of 7200 feet) - Existing improvements (landscaping, trash enclosures, etc.) within the LOD should be removed/relocated by the homeowner prior to the contractor beginning the project – the contractor will have authorization to remove items in ROW as necessary. (GMB will be meeting with property owners to discuss) - GMB is to layout the LOD within the next 30 days - GMB will attempt to meet individually with each homeowner to discuss the work at their property.

Eliselle Anderson, 308 Bay Avenue, questioned in the area where there is not 12-feet available, what will happen? Mr. O’Donnell stated there is one area that does not have a 12-foot ROW and that is the best that can be in that area.

There were many comments regarding the need for a 16-foot cleared corridor for emergency vehicles, the LOD and the disturbance of vegetation. There was concern that the Fire Chief was dictating the width of the road. No one from the Lewes Fire Department was present and Mr. Becker stated he cannot speak for the Fire Chief. Mr. Richmann agreed, though he has spoken with the Chief on this topic many times, he cannot comment for the Fire Department.

Mr. Luciani stated that if trees are outside the 16-foot corridor but inside the LOD, the contractor will make every effort to work around it and leave the tree in place wherever possible. Areas where regrading is necessary, vegetation will have to be disturbed.

Mr. Fogg, Delaware Avenue, stated that with all the concerns over the width of the road, it makes sense to him to move forward with the sewer and water installation and continue to discuss the pavement of the road.

Mr. Becker stated the charge to the Street Improvement Committee from Mayor & City Council was to develop a redevelopment of Bay Avenue in total. Mr. Richmann stated they would like to move the project along. It is a priority for the City and BPW. It makes sense for the project to be completed in whole, not just a piece at a time. They have been debating for a long time with an open and transparent process and it is time for a decision. Some may not all like the decision but they must move on with the project.

Libby Owen, 1006 Bay Avenue, questioned what the recommendations from URS were relative to the street. Kyle Gulbronson, URS, stated that in terms of the street design, recommended changes were minor. During their review of the plan their main considerations were the utilities and how to minimize the LOD. They did not comment directly on the width of the roadway.

Mr. O’Donnell stated there have been multiple discussion with the Fire Department, they have walk and ridden the street with them. They would like a 24-foot width but are willing to go with a 16-foot clear roadway. There have been many discussions regarding the 16-feet width. This is what the Fire Department has requested. Mr. Becker reminded everyone that the minimum required street width by the Fire Marshall’s Office is 24-feet; 16- feet is a compromise.

Libby Owens, 1006 Bay Avenue, stated the emergency vehicles will go down Cedar Avenue and access Bay Avenue by a side street. Bay Avenue should only be an access street for the residents that live there. Mr. Becker stated many of the side streets are not easily accessible also. They are looking at limited access for emergency vehicles on the side streets because many of them are not accessible.

Mr. Lucini showed a cross-section of a Worst Case Berm Grading Detail and explained the need to re-grade for the transition from the berm to the 16-foot cleared corridor. There are places where structure and/or plantings will have to be relocated if the homeowner wants to save them.

5 Mr. Becker explained an option that can be offered to the homeowner of the installation of a retention wall to reduce the disturbance to the berms.

Russ Tatman, 7 Michigan Avenue, stated this impacts his property and he likes the idea of the retention wall to reduce the LOD, maintain trees and reduce stormwater runoff.

Mr. Luciani presented a SUMMARY OF THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS.

On the recommendation of DelDOT, it was determined to not use speed bumps along Bay Avenue. Due to the multi-modal nature of the street they would create tripping hazards for bikes and possible damming for water.

Traffic calming considerations: - stop signs at each intersection - average of 300 ft between intersection - reduction to 10 mph under consideration - Multimodal use of street

Bonnie Hebner, 107 New Jersey Avenue, questioned if they will be reversing the traffic pattern as previously discussed. Mr. Becker stated it was considered by Mayor & City Council and implementation was postponed due to the need to move all the mailboxes to the other side of the road. There is a benefit to doing it and it will be considered as they move forward with the project.

There was discussion about the stops signs at each intersection along Bay Avenue. Mr. Luciani stated the installation of stops signs and the jogging of the road the each beach access should act as traffic calming. Residents stated the stop signs to not deter vehicles from speeding and enforcement is needed. Mr. Becker stated enforcement of stop signs will be a topic to be decided by Mayor & Council and the Chief of Police.

There was also concern about an increase in parking along Bay Avenue. Mr. Becker stated there will have to be signage. It is an ongoing discussion.

Mr. Luciani stated they are recommending limited emergency access from side streets: Maine, Iowa, Washington, Michigan, Indiana, New Jersey, Rhode Island, East Canal and Savannah Road. These streets were chosen because they are wider and have a larger turning radius onto Bay Avenue.

Mr. Richmann stated there will have to be no parking on these side streets leading up to the intersection for it to work. Mr. Becker stated these streets were chosen because they are wider.

Cliff Diver, 800 Bay Avenue, stated no parking on those side streets will require enforcement to make it work. There needs to be enforcement to eliminate parking and speeding issues.

Mr. Luciani gave a SUMMARY OF STREET PAVING as follows:

Street Pavement Section: - 4” porous asphalt; 2” no. 8 stone reservoir layer; 10” no. 2 stone bedding layer; underneath will be a geotextile fabric; with a compacted subgrade. - structural number = 2.96, which is greater than all Lewes beach streets - per earlier feasibility study – section manages 5-year storm event without ponding - economically feasible stormwater management - demonstration of a porous asphalt sample

Several other options have been considered. This is the lowest cost option for stormwater management. Porous pavement has been used on five streets in Lewes for the past 10-years and 4 out of 5 streets are working fine without maintenance. It is currently being used down in Ocean City with success. There can be 4 inches of rainfall on the road before ponding occurs. There is a maintenance issue that will have to be resolved.

Pres Lee stated the road will be crowned to allow for runoff and does not believe the porous pavement will be effective. City has had some success but over all porous pavement has not succeeded and should not be used

6 in sandy environments. It is very expensive, less structurally sound surface then traditional pavement and expensive to maintain.

Tom Owen questioned what the increase in ponding would be if regular paving was used. Mr. Luciani stated that if impervious pavement was used it would increase the runoff. He does not know to what extent but they are very confident it would increase.

Mr. Volturo, 6 E Canal, stated he is in agreement with Mr. Lee. What will the maintenance cost per year be and what guarentees will there be that it won’t increase. Mr. Luciani stated it is their proposed plan to vacuum 16 times per year. Other streets with porous pavement have never been maintained and are still working.

Mr. Gordon stated they have looked into the cost of maintenance for the porous pavement. It is difficult to find a contractor that is able to do the vacuuming. The only one he was able to find was in Wilmington and would cost approximately $4,000 per trip. They could purchase the equipment but it is very expensive. He sat through a webinar regarding porous pavement and is concerned with the design. Porous pavement is less structurally sound then regular pavement and would need to have an edge or curb to protect the road which is not a part of the cost at this time.

Mr. O’Donnell disagreed and feels that is not accurate. The structural integrity is 2.96, which is higher than most of the other streets in Lewes. DelDOT is very much in favor of using porous pavement. He is not aware of the edging issue, but they could consider installing if necessary.

Mr. Luciani stated there is no doubt sand is a challenge and will increase the need for more maintenance to keep it working properly. No matter how clogged a porous surface becomes, it can be vacuumed and brought back to full functioning.

Libby Owen requested feedback from URS regarding their recommendation on the optimum road design regarding stormwater management. Mr. Gulbronson stated they have concerns about the use of porous pavement and potential for sand clogging. They also have concerns about using the stone bed as a storage mechanism for stormwater. If the road was to be flat, the water would not flow and would drain thru the sand along the sides of the road. The road width is not an issue when it comes to drainage but they could go with a 10-foot paved road with 4-feet of clear space on each side.

Mr. Becker clarified that the 12-foot corridor creates a safe width for the multi modal aspect of Bay Avenue.

There was concern voiced again about the proposed 12-foot corridor instead of a 10-foot paved roadway. Mr. Luciani stated GMB is not comfortable signing off on a 10-foot road for the type of road and its multiple use.

Mr. Letonoff clarified that URS recommended a 10-foot paved roadway with 4-feet of cleared space on each side which would still be a 16-foot corridor. The research that he has done does not support there is any traffic calming benefit between a 10-foot road compared to a 12-foot road.

Mr. Gulbronson stated this is correct. The 10-foot pave road would only provide better drainage. Mr. Luciani stated the total amount of paved road that is being proposed will be slightly less than what it is now.

3. RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION TO MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL AND THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS.

ACTION: Mr. Richmann made a motion to forward the proposed GMB design for Bay Avenue as presented to Mayor & City Council and the Board of Public Works, acting as a whole, to approve with the provision that alternatives to stormwater management as proposed by URS, be considered, seconded by Mr. Lee.

Mr. O’Donnell questioned if the stormwater consideration would include any future proposal or what has already been presented. Mr. Becker stated only what has already been presented.

Mr. Richmann stated it is his personal sense that the general feeling of the BPW does not support porous

7 pavement and therefore, he cannot support a motion that might not have the support of the BPW.

Mr. Fogg, Delaware Avenue, requested the consideration of a 10-foot street width be included in the motion.

Mr. Richmann stated he has chosen not to do that because ultimately the final decision will be made by the Mayor & City Council and they are aware of the street width issue. Mayor & City Council are not letting the Fire Chief make the decision, it is their decision. Mr. Letonoff stated after 16-months it is time to move this project along.

Mr. Schaen stated the public has not been made aware of the URS option on the drainage. Is there anything else the public should know? Mr. Becker stated he does not believe there is anything else.

ACTION: All voting in favor, motion carried.

Mr. Becker stated the Mayor & City Council and the Board of Public Works will hold a joint meeting on October 7 th at 7pm to address the Bay Avenue design as presented. Given approval to move forward, the bidding process will take place in January and they hope to proceed by March 1, 2012.

There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 9:50pm.

Submitted by,

Alice M. Erickson Recording Secretary