DPW Meeting - April 26, 2006

Staring Lane Community Association
EBR Dept. of Public Works
MEETING RECAP

Meeting Agenda: Wednesday, April 26, 2006
9:00 AM – 10:00 AM, CST

Meeting Location: EBR Department of Public Works
Peter Newkirk, Director
300 North Boulevard, Room 208
Baton Rouge, LA 70802
(225) 389-3158 Office
(225) 389-5391 Fax
(225) 389-3090 Complaints
dpw@brgov.com


Attendees: EBR DPW – Peter Newkirk, P.E. Director
SLCA – Executive Bd

Discussion Recap -

1. Highlight milestones of bonding and funding of Green light plan to date.
$180 millions have been sold. This funding will cover design,
acquiring right of ways, and complete projects already in progress.

An $280 millions in bonds will be sold over 3 years

CSRS as Program Manager will execute Design work,
handling the details of defining right of way issues up front with
Ford Street and Staring Lane.

Right of way acquisitions plan is “relocation” not “buyout”

Listing of schedule to be provide end of June, 2006 mid July, 2006

Selection process of Designer for each project is delayed due
to award process change requirement (due to protest)

Every other week meetings are held to discuss planning with CSRS.



-
2. Does ABMS Summary serve as justification for 4 or 5 Lane planning for Staring Lane? Why would 4 or 5 lanes be needed?
Staring Lane current traffic observations, both directions time of day only significant traffic occurs at normal drive hours Monday thru Friday;
7:30 AM to 8:30 AM
11:30 AM to 1:00 PM
3:30 PM to 6:30 PM
Also reduction in traffic occurred after January 1st 2006.


3. Are there other traffic data sources?

4. Are more traffic studies planned?

Response to questions 2 thru 4 above ;
ABMS Summary not used for planning
Traffic pattern will be reviewed as requested, new study
will be issued to DPW engineer , noting time of traffic flow is
important .
Mr. Newkirk agrees it does not make sense to build five (5)
Lane if it not needed.


5. Does final decisions of the projects rest with DPW or Mayor?
Mr. Newkirk shares decisions making with the mayor.


6. Property Issues:
a. Where will property be taken from? East side, West side, both?
SLCA request will be address to take minimum property from
both sides

b. Will zoning changes be necessary relative to current property?

c. Will excessive taking of property for right of way , total property acquisitions be required?

d. What is the official setback for home on Staring Lane ?
25 feet See attached.


e. Note, many home owners or in retirement, what is the sensitivity to the property owners position?


f. Is there a property appraisal formula in place?

g. Is blighted property an issue and will be addressed via plan?
Green Light Plan does not address such, funds Dedicated
New Construction is 70 %
Fixing Potholes 27%
Beautification & Landscaping 3%
The beautification will applies to areas of construction.
Should property owners have problem with blighted property
contact DPW and issues will be addressed.

Blighted property on Staring Lane was not viewed as a reason
for 4 or 5 lanes demand.

7. Other projects in place and their impact on Staring Lane project.

a. Four (4) lane improvement Perkins Rd. between Essen Lane
and Bluebonnet Rd
b. Staring Lane at Highland Road intersection
c. Staring Lane to Burbank extension
d. Four (4) lane improvement to Burbank
e. Interstate I-10 improvements between College Drive and Highland Rd Area.
Mr. Newkirk agreed that these projects would have a positive impact
of traffic flow relative to Staring Lane


8. Staring Lane Community Association request :

a. Staring Lane traffic improvement should be limited to three (3)
lanes from Hyacinth to Highland.


b. Staring Lane is a residential community and should maintain
that character.

c. Three lanes will also be LESS intrusive to the neighborhood than four or five lanes.

d. Residents of the street should not have home taken nor their current quality of life taken away.


e. Improve Staring Lane in same three (3) lane configuration as
Lobdell Ave. (Goodwood to Jefferson Hwy.) This street
project was just completed measuring .6 mile at a cost of
$2,500,000.00 . It has the same characteristics as Staring Lane.



Schedule next meeting if needed

Questions presented by previous summary prior to October Tax vote;

What is Staring Lane specific volume to capacity (v/c) ratio? Note, stated Volume and Capacity (v/c) ratio for Staring Lane is > 1.0, but its not clear where either is sited in the same findings.

“Operational Comparison” and “Turning Movement Counts” geometry not clearly linked and no “time variable given.

ADT of “Less than 24,000“ clarification needed, Define “ADT”.

“Nontransversable” definition needed. How does it applies to residential use.

Refuge areas for pedestrians sited in both 4 and 5 lane plans would have limited use.

Time of counts do not include “time of day” and other time related factors.

Residential land will be limited as a result of 4 or 5 lane plans.