All right, I'm going to call it word to date's work session 7 p.m. roll call. We've got one, two, all of us are here, Lisa. You got us there. All right, we're going to move on to the pledge of allegiance.
We have well-root family services here with us tonight for 155 years. Well-root family services has been leading the effort to transform the lives of children and families in Georgia.
Well-root cares for and encourages the growth and healing of children, young adults and families facing challenges or trauma in Georgia.
You may remember them as the Methodist Children's Home, but in 2018, they became well-root family services for collecting both the national movement away from a way from a congregate care to foster care and the expansion of their services.
Tonight we have Sharon Brewer and Lee Ann Ells, Sharon as the Community Cultivator and Lee Ann as the Vice President of External Relations, and there are also our neighbors here within the office part.
So welcome. Thank you for being here. We're ready when you are.
Thank you ladies. Thank you.
All right, we're going to move on to public comment. Our rules of decorum come from Roberts Rules of Order.
Our meetings are held in accordance with Georgia's Open Meeting Act. We will call up those that sign up to speak and then open up to those in the room.
If you signed up by a mistake, feel free to say pass when your name is called. You will each have two minutes to speak, but keep in mind that neither council nor I can respond during this time.
Lisa? No one. Anybody? Anybody?
Going once going twice? All right, sold.
From public comment.
Michael, did you want to speak? I'm told you we're going to speak now. Come on.
That's public comment.
Thank you for giving me first time attendee.
I'm Mike or her camp, and I've lived in Tucker. What is Tucker since 1990? My first 12 years in what's now district two.
And since then, in district one, we're on currently the President of the Smoke Rise Civic Association, or SRCA.
And my interest in being here tonight is in regards to our iconic landmark monument at Rosser Road.
And you, how?
And I was last here on March 24th, seemed to be preserved in light of the proposed changes to that intersection, but is now in peril.
I just want to put out that landmark to my knowledge has existed in its present form in that location.
For 30 years, it's been well maintained by the neighborhood.
We provide landscaping, electric, power, insurance, and our currently planning to upgrade the modality in there.
So I'm hoping that, again, is the first time attendee.
This is early in the planning stage there.
And it's our hope in SRCA that the city will be good scouts with respect to any change at that intersection.
And as any tenderfoot in true paid 76 would know, if you're a good scout, when you go into the location, you leave it in as good if not better condition.
Then when you found it, so I just in wrapping up what I offer the participation of the SRCA board in any planning that may be going on.
And urge council and city planners with apologies to Johnny Mitchell to not acting haste and pave paradise to put in a turning lane.
And possibly consider an alternative number four, putting in a traffic light at the current location.
Thank you.
All right, thank you.
Anyone else?
Anybody I need to remind out there?
Everybody's good?
All right, excellent.
Thank you.
And move on to Mayor's opening remarks.
And we are going to start with a proclamation tonight.
In recognition of Tucker Resonate, Kayla Chen for receiving the Georgian Asian Pacific American Bar Association Rising Star Award.
So I'm going to ask council to come down with me.
I want you to move here so we can see you.
Right here.
See you right here so you can see you.
Let's do a picture first.
There we go.
This is one of my campaigners.
Very proud of our campaign.
All right, whereas the city of Tucker proudly recognizes residents whose professional excellence, leadership and service strength in our community and inspire others.
And whereas Kayla Chen, senior vice president and wealth strategist at Truis, has distinguished herself through her work helping individuals and families achieve their financial, tax, estate, and business succession planning goals with compassion, expertise, and integrity.
And whereas Kayla Chen has demonstrated a strong commitment to mentorship, leadership, and advancing the legal profession through her dedicated service with a Georgia Asian Pacific American Bar Association,
including serving as co-chair of the Women's Leadership Network, chair of the Gallic Committee, and member of the Board of Directors.
And whereas the Georgia Asian Pacific American Bar Association has honored Kayla Chen with its prestigious Rising Star Award, recognizing her outstanding contributions to the Gopaba,
Community and the legal profession.
And whereas Kayla Chen's professional accomplishments included this distinguished legal career in the state planning, probate, fiduciary litigation, and corporate representation, as well as becoming a nationally recognized speaker on a state trust and tax planning topics.
And whereas beyond her professional achievements, Kayla has shown a deep commitment to service and community engagement, including serving on the Board of Directors of the St. Andrews Presbyterian Church Free School.
And whereas Kayla's leadership, dedication to mentorship, and commitment to community service reflect the very best of the city of Tucker, and serves as an inspiration to future generations.
Now, therefore, I am learner, Mayor of the city of Tucker, Georgia, do hereby recognize and congratulate Kayla Chen for receiving the Georgia Asian Pacific American Bar Association Rising Star Award,
and extend the appreciation and pride of the Tucker community for her many contributions and accomplishments.
Just a few more announcements. The Henderson Park Master Plan survey ended with over 1,000 responses.
There will be more opportunity for public engagement at our two-day open houses here at City Hall, June 5 and June 6.
I would make a joke right there, but I won't.
I'm not going to cut down all the trees. I'll put me to events.
TKR summer of fun. First Friday concert is June 5th at the Tucker Town Green featuring land slide.
What band do you think that's your tribute to, y'all?
It would make very good music starts at 7 full schedule and details can be found at TuckerGA.gov.
Backslash summer.
Moody's on the Green was canceled last Thursday, and we were attentively rescheduling it for this Thursday, for Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.
But honestly, the weather's not looking great for this Thursday either, so stay tuned, right?
Community run events for the next two weeks. June 13th is the Tucker Cruz in our main, and the June team Jubilee is at North Lake Mall.
Check our website calendar for event details.
And as a reminder, we typically reserve our second meeting of the month as a work session where we hear presentations and have conversations together.
Get our questions answered.
So that's it for our mayor's opening remarks.
I'm going to move to approve the agenda because I need to make a change.
We're going to remove G1 presentation.
Dr. Sauce had a personal matter come up. He called me yesterday.
And so I told him, please don't worry about us and that we can reschedule this come August.
I believe August or September. So I move that we approve the agenda and scratch G1 and then move up the subsequent numbers second.
Any discussion?
All those in favor?
All right, Lisa.
Thank you. So we're going to move right on to presentations.
And we're going to go now to G1, Hugh Howell Road.
Water main replacement.
Can.
Good evening, Mayor and Council.
We've met with our the cab county liaison some six months ago and it was really good meeting.
They showed us a number of their upcoming projects.
They have on the docket and the spirit of cooperation and coordination.
And they showed us the fact that they're planning to upgrade their water line on Hugh Howell Road.
And the bells went off and we said, well, we have several planned projects on Hugh Howell Road.
We want to make sure we coordinate that.
And we've been doing that.
And I think the plans are about 30% complete on the the new water line.
And we want to make sure, obviously, that our intersection improvement roster road and our future trail and things like that.
We want to make sure we don't construct something and have it torn up or or whatever.
We want to do it one time.
The water operation has been good, but I'm going to let them go over the project and we'll answer any questions.
We have Tiffany Simpson with the cab water shed management and then.
But their consultant is freeze and nickels, so we have Elena Landrum.
Good afternoon again. My name is Tiffany Simpson. I'm the cab county watershed. I am the project manager for this project. And of course, I'll be working closely with freeze and nickels.
Just to give you an introduction, we'll talk about project need, project limits, alignment decision and impacts, pros and cons of night work, and propose IGA with city of Tucker for road resurfacing.
That's intergovernmental agreement.
Okay.
Well, I'll go ahead and hand it over to freeze and nickels to start on the project.
All right. I am Elena Landrum, professional engineer at Free Cynicals.
So just to go over some background of this project, it's a water main replacement project.
That was identified through to cab counties, water master plan, and it is funded through to cab counties, capital improvement projects or CIP program.
And just some big picture goals of this project are to overall enhance the resiliency of the infrastructure throughout the county, reducing service outages, improving efficiency,
and just supporting future demand and growth throughout the cab county.
So looking closer at our project limits.
The extensive this project include abandoning and existing eight inch as best as cement pipe, water main from mountain creek trail along Kuhal Road down to Lillburnstone Mountain Road.
So for the first or I guess the northwest half of this section on this figure,
there is a parallel existing water main that we are just going to be reconnecting the side streets into.
But then this dark bold line for the bottom half of this figure is where we're going to be putting in a new 12 inch ductal iron pipe water main.
So that's the extensive our construction will be or the extensive construction within Huhal Road will be from Canova Drive down to Lillburnstone Mountain.
And our construction duration is estimated to be 12 months and schedule to begin in late Q4 of this year.
To give a little more background on the design process of the project, we are closer to about 90% design on the water main replacement right now.
Earlier on in design we considered a we considered two alignment options placing the water main in the right of way outside of the pavement or placing alignment within the pavement of Huhal Road.
Ultimately the right of way alignment was eliminated due to considerable impacts to project schedule cost as well as public impacts with considerable tree clearing.
So we chose to go with the pavement or pavement alignment.
This would allow us to have a shorter construction schedule with minimized easement acquisition minimized tree clearing.
But then some of the bigger impacts here include open cut installation traffic control.
A minimum of a one lane closure essentially while we're constructing the water main in the road.
Along with that wanted to talk a little bit about how night work for the construction crew would minimize an impact to the community during during the whole construction duration.
So going a little bit into pros and cons of night work.
The biggest benefits include reduced traffic disruption easier lane closures since there's lighter traffic at night as opposed to during business hours during the day.
There's potential for schedule acceleration with this option as well and overall just a lower impact for the businesses and residents along the corridor.
However some higher or I guess some cons include higher worker safety risk for the construction crew as well as potential for noise and light complaints from construction on the around the corridor.
So with that I'm going to pass it back to Tiffany to talk through the.
Again we are looking forward to the proposed IGA with the city of Tucker.
We looked at this for intentional timing of installation of the new water main before planned resurfacing of you how road.
This will minimize duplicate road resurfacing work minimize disruption to the community.
So our plans for decay aspect of it is we'll do the temporary resurfacing of the pipe trench and then city of Tucker will come in and do the permanent resurfacing curve to curve.
This will minimize having to go in.
Doing the resurfacing twice.
In conclusion this project is needed of course to improve the cab counties water system and operations.
It's about 8,000 when you're feet of 12 inch water main on who how road.
Again the construction will take about 12 months estimated.
Quarter four of 2026 construction and pavement requires traffic control night work is recommended to minimize traffic disruption.
And we are looking forward to the proposed I do IGA with city of Tucker for road resurfacing on who how road.
And I'll hand it back over to Ken.
Thank you for the presentation. I just wanted to add about this proposed IGA.
So if there were no IGA what they would do is they would saw cut.
Lane the northern lane I guess it would be the westbound lane if you have road that saw cut at 8 feet wide.
Dig a trench and install the water line put it back.
Catch it and then we would require them to resurface the road to the center line.
It's kind of owners to make them pave the whole road since they're not disturbing the whole road.
If they were a developer that's what we would do would say you have to pave to the center line.
Well you how road has not been resurfaced since we were a city.
So it's been at least 11 years back when it was a state route.
So it really needs to be resurfaced so rather than do half of it at a time that didn't really make sense we want to pave the whole road.
So again what what their plan is to do would would be to to trench the eight feet.
Install the water line put it back and only patch that eight feet and then we would come back.
Our contractor to resurface the entire road so this IGA would be some kind of call sharing effort on that.
All right any questions.
Thank you so much for the presentation.
I've got a few questions.
First question I actually just occurred to me is about the tie-ins.
Could you tell me a little bit more about that in the impact to the community with those tie-ins because you got the little black lines to go throughout all the way down to Kanawa.
So there will be a little bit of work done there is that basically.
Okay and I'm just curious what the impact would be with like the road like you know.
It is oops sorry all the things all the things that you know might not have as much impact as the straight line but could have some impact to the city.
Yeah I totally understand that I.
I believe all of these side street crossings are going to be trenchless installation rather than cutting across the open road.
So for I guess to explain a little bit more the existing.
12 inch water main is along the north side of the road on that section.
So any water mains that we're connecting in from the south there's going to be.
Basically a jack and bore pit that's dug like on one side of the road and they bore under the road so it won't actually be impacting.
So the pavement on top of the road basically in those in those sections and then in these areas where.
We're connecting in from the from the north side of the road it the extensive that construction will stay outside of pavement as well.
As as much as feasible I think maybe there there might be a couple of open cutting of side streets but I don't believe there's proposed open cutting of you have a cross in that top section.
I'm sorry I accidentally turn my.
I apologize.
I'm having a hard time with this microphone tonight apparently but you know concerns about the impact to their yards.
Being on their property what kind of impact do you think that will be with with the with the recommendation.
Okay.
So if there is a resident that is concerned they can probably my business car.
Okay.
We can look at their individual.
Yeah.
Okay.
Thank you.
Now as far as a couple other things real quick that I was on your website today I was on Decab County's website.
Our Decab County website I guess and they had really comprehensive information.
They've you guys will be planning on sitting out letters and all that stuff you'll do that for the community around this project as well.
Yeah.
What is the reach on that when you send out the letters.
It's depending on.
I would say I think it's 24 to 48 hours in advance.
Okay.
When construction starts but we actually have community meeting.
Okay.
So before construction start the community notified.
Yeah.
We can come and ask all the questions and that's where we can even look at properties individually.
So they'll definitely have an opportunity to ask questions.
Right.
Okay.
Excellent.
Thank you for that.
And then will there be blasting of the rock.
Things like that like I just wanted to find out like what noise level we can expect to share with the community.
Okay.
And then I think my last question actually just back around to that communication piece and partnering with us on any kind of communications.
Because we also are going to have a presentation on an intersection improvement that will start next spring possibly.
And so figuring out how to mitigate the impact on the community with possibly two projects kind of going on at the same time.
The other project would be further down further west.
But just being able to get out there and inform the community and partner together on those communication pieces will be really essential I think.
Yeah, we're definitely available for that.
We think that's very important because if we get out there and start doing work the questions come and so it's better for everyone overall.
Okay.
We're available.
Okay.
Thank you so much.
Were you looking for guidance on night work or you're telling us to prepare our community for night work.
I agree with the night work.
I'm just asking that question.
I didn't know the way it was proposed.
What was your question again?
I was just saying were you looking for guidance from us on night work or is that set in your workplace.
Okay.
I just want to make sure that we were.
We fit where on that.
That it is best.
Yeah.
For that area.
I agree.
But also to I think a lot of the homes are set far enough back.
They're not homes that are right at the street.
So I think it would be a little less disruption.
And yeah.
So I just wanted to make sure we were good there.
Okay.
Thank you.
I did want to follow up on that night work piece because I know you noted.
The worker safety piece.
And I know we have had discussions before about in the at night time.
That sometimes becomes a raceway at portions of the road.
Especially at that one intersection.
And so when you talk about safety in terms of worker safety.
Do you coordinate with to KPD?
What is what is this sort of signaling and like protection side of it?
Again, also for the obviously the community.
But most interesting about the actual corridor.
Because as council member reset the houses are further back.
But for me that's heavy on the construction side.
So I would say there is a standard for traffic control.
And we have to submit a traffic control plan to be approved.
So they do take that into account.
But when it comes closer to construction.
We'll definitely have that as a concern or you know.
A risk.
Anything else?
All right.
Thank you for your time.
We appreciate you.
Thank you.
All right.
Can you're still up to the new G2 status on roster road.
You have improvements.
Yes. Ross Arroun at and Hugh Heil-Roun. You'll remember what about a year and a half ago we did a quarter
study along Hugh Heil-Roun identified a number of improvements, like a total of $22 million, I think $7 million
dollars and that was extending the trail, which we know we want to do that. There are a lot
of smaller recommendations, signage, striping, school flasher, things like that, and some
more significant improvements, such as roundabouts or re-lining intersections, site distance
issue at Konawa Drive, things like that. So, we are close to releasing a bit on some of the
smaller low-hanging fruit and products, but last year we awarded an intersection designed to
pond and company for this intersection, as you know, it comes in at an angle, it's a really
severe angle. So, we want to straighten that out. Here's just some accident data. This is over
five-year period until the 34 accidents. That's what's been reported, and it might be more
than that, but that's what the statistic show.
Yep, I'll do that.
We held a public meeting. So, we were about 30% complete with the design, and we paused at
that time to have a public meeting and get gathered input. Again, what we want to do, sorry,
I didn't mean this for the cursor.
To re-align Ross Road, this is the existing alignment here that comes in at a severe angle.
We want to 90 that up, and that actually aligns perfectly with stone lead drive on the other side.
Not sure why that wasn't done to begin with back in the day, but it makes a lot of sense.
And what that left us with was a triangle here that we could do some landscaping and so forth.
We did do a signal warrants study and said that the traffic signal would be warranted at this location,
so that's part of the design.
So, this is what we took to the public thinking that we wanted to try to preserve that monument sign there.
We probably had 50 or 60 people at the public meeting.
Had a lot of good input.
And this is kind of the statistics. You can see that 76% were in favor of the concept that we showed.
Nobody was opposed to it.
And there were some that favored it conditionally.
A couple of the questions that came out of the public meeting was, this is great,
but we really need a right turn lane on Rossor Road, from Rossor Road, onto Hugh Al Road,
which I agree that he was meeting.
And the other one was the monument sign.
Some people said don't disturb it, some people said get rid of it in this fine.
So, we wanted to come back to you now.
We'd like to proceed with the design, but we want to make sure we're all on the same page here.
So, we're showing three potential options, one was what we showed at the public meeting.
That is to realign Rossor Road for a four-way intersection.
Option number two would be to add that right turn lane.
And if you don't add that right turn lane, you are going to have some pretty significant backup in the morning.
And there were probably a handful of people that said, gee, it'd be nice to have around about.
So, here's a totally consultant not to do a full on design because you're not scope for that,
but they did play around with the designs, not quite circular to make all the turning radio work.
And you've got to accommodate trucks and school buses and emergency vehicles.
Pretty significant right-of-way impact, especially on this corner.
You can't see that house there, but that house, the construction limits would go almost right up to the house here.
But a pretty good acquisition here on this corner, and also on the south side, both of these would be pretty heavily impacted with right-of-way needs.
So again, a little closer up showing these three alternatives.
One is no right turn lane, two is with a right turn lane.
There's not a lot of difference in the right-of-way impact on this because when you add a right turn lane,
it's within the city's property.
So you're not really acquiring any more property, but you do knock out that monument sign in adding that lane.
And then here's a little closer up view of that roundabout.
So looking at the three options, if we don't do anything, we try to look at at least 25 years into the future,
to make sure when you build something that you're allowing for future growth and so forth.
So if you don't do anything, you have a level of surface AF.
So it's going to be a really big choke point.
Alternative one, we estimate about $1.9 million, and that's for a traffic signal.
And here you see the impact.
We do have a little bit of right-of-way on that north-east corner and then some easements.
And we improve the level of surface there in 20, you're 2050 when we do that.
If we add the right turn lane, this is only showing a slight level of surface improvement.
I think it'll be a lot better than that.
But that AM is going to be significantly improved if you have that southbound right turn lane.
And not a lot of changes between alternative one and alternative two in terms of right-of-way.
A little bit more cost, obviously, for the more asphalt.
And then alternative three, it's about $3.5 million estimated construction calls.
But with a significant right-of-way, it's probably closer to $4 million.
And here you see how much the square foot is the right-of-way goes up.
And you're really not ganging in a whole lot of level of service at all in the morning.
But then afternoon, you do improve the level of service.
And that is it.
We glad to take any questions.
We're going to start with questions, not comments.
I remember last time I said I was bad.
I think keep track of that.
So we're going to start with questions first.
And then we can go back to discussion with comments.
So questions.
Can your presentation that you just gave that includes?
Does it not the right turn in and out of Ross or Place?
Yes.
I did not mention that.
But that I think for us is kind of a given.
So Ross or Place is currently a tea intersection.
It's full access.
We do recommend that to be right in right out.
Only because you do have a significant number of angle intersection crashes there.
That are pretty unsafe.
So with the installation of a traffic signal, we are encouraging folks.
Instead of turning left out of Ross or Place to come out and signalize the intersection.
So I'm not showing that, but we are planning on that.
And you kind of touched upon this.
I was assuming that your crash data over the five year period did not include the Ross or Place crash.
It did not.
I do have those statistics, but not handy.
And does the Ross or Place element?
Is that within this cost estimates already?
It is.
And we're really trying not to do anything with the curve there.
We're just constructing a concrete island.
And we did show that at the public meeting.
Thank you.
Thank you for the presentation, Ken.
My first question is about.
You know again, traffic mitigation during construction.
What would that look like?
Personal road closures or anything like that?
How would that work out?
No, we always want to leave a lane open.
So there could be times when you have construction going on.
You have a concrete truck pouring the trail or whatever.
But we would plan to construct this new road.
And we would leave the existing road open.
And then there would be just a conversion to shift traffic from the old to the new.
One thing I didn't mention is the trail.
So we do plan in the future to construct a trail.
Ten feet wide.
So we are incorporating that in this project.
Make sure we don't build something and then have to tear it back up.
And I'm glad you brought that up because I was going to bring that up.
And then with the various plans, but specifically plan to.
How far if the trail is is constructed around it.
About how far would that trail kind of reach out on each side?
Well, our standard.
Is a five foot landscape strip in a ten foot trail.
So that's what we've done along the huge out of quarter.
And that's plan to be consistent with that.
But on the on the and where we're gaining, you know, like that potential beautification area.
Would it just stop middle of there or would it.
You know what I mean?
It seems like it could be kind of weird to start.
So the yellow is the trail.
Yeah.
We've come up here to an ADA crossing.
You'll have an ADA ramp here.
Refugeary here.
And then we cross here to be a signalized pedestrian crossing.
Okay.
But specifically going west on Hill Hall Road.
You're saying that that trail segment would only be built about five feet.
Or you know what I'm saying?
Well, yeah.
So we was stopping within the project limits.
Okay.
The trail is a separate project.
But we want to incorporate that within this this project.
So we don't have to redo it.
So five foot landscape strip, ten foot trail.
And yeah, it would just stop right here at the project.
Somewhere.
Okay.
And is this almost certain that if we were to do alternative to there will be a signal there.
Is there any scenario where there would not be a signal there?
Or is it pretty much a given that there will be a lie there?
Yeah.
I think it's given.
We've done the study.
Yeah.
You never want to just install a traffic signal with no justification.
So we have certain guidelines to go by.
We've done the numbers.
We feel like a traffic signal is just a fine.
And that is incorporated into our cost estimate.
Okay.
And then two more quick questions.
One is about the beautification in the original alternative one that we presented.
There was some beautification.
And then, of course, we were trying to save the smoke stack.
If we went with alternative two and this might be more of a question for Courtney.
But what options do we have for beautification and some sort of piece to maintain the character of the of the area?
Well, I like Courtney's speak to all that food food stuff.
I just do the engineering.
But I can tell you will have.
Beauty isn't the eye of the holder.
We'll have about a third of an acre or so left here.
You take out the own road men.
So you have quite a bit of area to play with.
And then, of course, my last question is about funding.
We had so many allocated last year.
Can you just ask me.
Thank you, Courtney.
And then, of course, my last question is about funding.
Yes.
We had some money allocated last year.
Can you just kind of deep dive into where we are with the funding for this project?
So funding last year.
Our current fiscal year 2026 we budget a million dollars for a huge amount of room.
So what have we done with that million dollars?
We spent about $200,000 or we have in combat $200,000 for this design.
We haven't paid them all yet.
But that's what we're paying upon in company for this complete design.
And then we've reserved a couple of $100,000 for our short-term low hanging fruit project
with the signage and striping and school flashers and things like that.
So we've set aside that money.
So we have about $603.
40,000 dollars remaining in this current budget that we would plan to utilize. So in order to get us up to about
the $2 million, we have in the 2027 budget, $1.37, I believe, million. So you had up those two numbers and
get system out $2 million. So which is right in between, I'll turn into one and two. Of course, these
are just estimates, but we think we're pretty close on that.
Okay, thank you. So hands down here, Councilman Schroeder.
Can you go back to the design that's, I think, the first one with all the green landscape, I guess.
So I'm just curious that landscape is all right away that you were taking control over, but
the construction part of the road really doesn't change much there.
It just opens up the intersection. Is that right?
Yes, so this, these are the level lines here, but this little light blue line is the existing right
of way. And this dashed arms line here, these double arms line, that's the existing pavement.
So that existing pavement comes out and it leaves you with all this landscape area.
So we, you, you have all, without, I'll turn it to, you still have most of that area remaining.
We just didn't do the landscape plan on this yet, but kind of the same, same concept in terms of
beautifying that.
I guess, and I'm not an engineer, but it just seems like it's a little different.
And so I wasn't sure that right turn lane is really the correction to expand the intersection, I guess.
To make it safer.
The right turn lane is, is mostly for congestion relief because you have a huge amount of traffic.
And you can say it's all the guineations, but you have a lot of the smoke cross folks as well,
especially in the morning, coming south on Rosser Road and turning right.
So if, if you have, you know, one or two cars here that are stopped at the red line,
that's going to back up pretty significantly.
Okay, all right.
And so refresh my memory when you get into the alternative table, where you have the cost estimate,
and the fees, and the capacity analysis, we want to be at an A, and then E.
A is best, it's like a, like a school grade.
A is awesome, it's is no hardly any volume at all.
That's ideal condition, F is failing with a lot of delay.
You're never going to get to an A on this because you have too much traffic.
So, you know, I think the best measure you're going to do is probably a C.
So that's, there's a lot of traffic, but it's, it's not lengthy delays.
Okay, that's helpful.
Thank you.
I have a question about the traffic patterns.
Given that we're also doing construction sort of upstream at MIT and Hugh Howell.
So how do we see the construction and any change in traffic patterns from that intersection,
like investment impacting traffic here?
There's quite a bit of separation between Mount Industrial Boulevard and Rosser Road.
But not of a major road, right?
I mean, that's, that's the next big major road is Mount Industrial.
To the last year's.
Yeah, it's quite a bit of separation.
I don't think we're going to have, you might have some very temporary lane closures here with this intersection improvement.
But for the most part, you're not going to have a lot of lane closures with this project.
So I think there's probably two independent projects that I don't think one would really impact traffic at the other one.
Well, I meant, like, once it was constructed.
So, like, yes, during the construction, but I'm just trying to understand because I didn't see it and what you presented.
What the traffic flow patterns that you did in the corridor assessment showed about sort of where is the most traffic coming from and where is it going.
And it is a major cut-through, like, artery of Tucker.
You mentioned the guineations.
So, that's, I'm trying to understand.
So we have a major intersection at MIB and Huhao.
We have brain networking down at the BP station.
And then we're proposing a pretty significant change here.
So, I'm, you know, this is a residential road, but that is treated like an arterial road.
So I'm in terms of traffic patterns.
So I'm trying to understand on the whole corridor and it was an entire corridor study.
Can you talk about how the traffic interplays between these different major intersections on the corridor?
Well, I'm not going to do several hours of state round.
It's a four or five lane road that accommodates 35 to 40,000 vehicles per day.
Rosser road is a collector road that has probably, I don't recall the number, but probably seven or eight thousand vehicles per day.
So, two totally different roads.
We're not trying to change traffic patterns here.
This is, this is just an intersection improvement to, for the most part, to increase safety because the severe angle that we have here.
So, I don't think traffic patterns going to change necessarily except for the fact that we are eliminating left turns at Rosser place.
And now those folks for safety reasons will have to come to the traffic light and turn left.
So, we're not redirecting it in the traffic.
I don't feel like.
And how many cars go down per, you talked about the,
Am I being, Rosser road on who, how right now?
What's our?
As over 20,000 is like in the low 20s.
Okay.
Both directions?
The saw of both directions is about 22,000.
Okay.
And then, just to speaking of funding, you know, I know that this is coming in higher than, I think, many of us were expecting and definitely want to make sure that we are.
Keeping people in Tucker's safe.
I know there are some other intersections that we've been kind of putting on hold as well because of the cost.
So, is there, I guess, I'd like to understand what the thought is behind continuing to keep the trail as such a significant size.
I mean, there's other trails that we've knocked down to eight feet, six feet.
So, what's the thought process behind sort of keeping the trail at the standard width when the project, you know, the safety component of it is increasing?
I'm just trying to think about what are some ways that we could be creative with kind of our budgets and make sure that we have access in other places.
Well, technically, six feet is a sidewalk, eight feet is a trail.
So, eight to ten or even 12 feet is anything above eight feet is considered a trail.
Anything less than that would be technically a sidewalk.
So, our original trail master plan shows a network of trails throughout the city.
And this is, this is called a side path.
It's basically a wide-side log, but it classifies as a trail because of the width.
And that's the standard that we've come up with, we felt like.
Yeah, you can squeeze it down to eight feet, that's really tight for a two-way travel on the trail.
So, ten feet is ideal and we're staying within the right of way.
Now, we haven't looked at the entire huge quarter that we've just started the engineering design on some of that.
We probably need some easements, but for the most part, a ten foot trail with a five-foot landscape strip.
You stay within the existing right of the way.
So, so we would not require an easement.
I noted that the cab county folks mentioned that they went through a more effective, efficient, cheaper option by not doing the right of way acquisition and easement acquisition.
Yeah, that water line was just going to be really impactful because you've got to build out the shoulder and it's almost like building a trail.
But that's why I was asking, because it's what you're describing is a similar piece.
So, here on the, yes, we had a plan.
We had a transportation plan too.
There are things that we are building and constructing and designing now that weren't in our original plan.
So, I guess I'm just trying to understand where, where is the flexibility for this area?
Or are we keeping them completely separate?
And we're just moving forward with the cost as is.
I'm not sure if I understand your question.
We were sticking, I'm going to clarify real quick.
Did we purchase easements?
We didn't purchase easements for any of that.
How trail that we've done yet?
We had to get driveway easements to time drive ways.
And I don't know, I don't know, doors, I got like 10 easements and we didn't, I don't think we paid anything.
They were all really good.
But they were driving.
They were driving.
Okay.
Does that help?
Because it wasn't.
So, I think you're saying, because the calves said they didn't want to, they didn't want to do the water line on the side.
Because they would have to get extensive easements.
So, you're saying, well, we need to get extensive easements.
I'm just trying to, yes, and understand why if we see project costs increasing in one area,
we are continuing with the previous amount on other projects when we are not.
I'm just trying to understand where there is flexibility and where we are moving forward without consideration of.
Okay.
Well, we don't have the design back yet.
No, if we're still on the subject of the trail, we don't have the design back.
We have gone as narrow as 8 feet.
That's a narrow trail.
But you can do that if you have topographic constraints or things like that.
But ideally we'd like to go with a 10 foot width.
Okay.
Questions?
So, if this project were to be funded, and it was to follow a standard timeline,
when would it be getting constructed and how would that be affected by the decay project that we just heard about?
Well, we originally wanted to be under construction on this project this fall,
we've kind of put everything we've kind of paused until we made sure we gathered public input and got clear direction on this,
before we proceed with the design.
So probably would not be under construction to the spring.
So the waterline project, you just heard they would like to be under, I think,
a little ambitious, but they would like to be under construction fourth quarter of this year.
So yeah, there could be some construction going on.
They are going to be very impactful.
They're going to be closing the lane for 12 months in sections.
We don't want to close the entire section if you have a road.
We want to only close the section they're working on.
The stage in like that.
This intersection will not be nearly as impactful in terms of impactful traffic.
With that decaying county project effect, would you schedule this around that?
No, I mean, you saw their plan.
They're really not installing the new waterline until way east starting at the canal drive.
So all they're doing here is doing a bore and tying in a waterline here at the intersection.
We've given them our plan.
We told them we, you know, you need to design your waterline around this intersection.
Make sure your hydrants, not in the middle of the trail.
Make sure you put it back behind the trail.
So there's no physical conflict with these projects.
Right, even though they're not in the same geographic area,
they're still somebody trying to travel from one end to the other.
Good end up with two construction projects going on at the same time.
They will probably be two construction projects going on at the same time.
However, again, I just don't think this one is impactful.
Where we get them to stay on 78 and not cut through.
Right, maybe we can only hope or we can charge a toll.
And then we can fund a lot of projects.
Yeah, let's do it.
Councilman, when likes that.
Go ahead.
I love a good toll.
This one's a little bit different from other intersections.
Can you talk about the extended driveway there?
Are we responsible for any future, you know, reconstruction or damages anything that happens to those?
That's a good question.
We would, yeah, that'd be within our right of ways.
So we would be on the hook for, I mean, hopefully it's built properly and compacted and good job.
And there's no need for any maintenance.
But if anything were to happen, we would be responsible for anything within the right of ways.
You don't, little yellow boxes or driveway easements just to tie them in.
I will tell you this properly, owner is no longer.
But, or, someone else, but she came to the public meeting, she was really happy. She really liked being a little further away from Hugh Alron.
Yeah. Yeah, this for future, if we could keep people's name off of the presentations, that'd be nice.
Would we, like, have a process for whatever the future landowner is, you know, like, is there threshold when we would accept, like, we will go in and fix the driveway for them.
Let's say, like, some tree roots came through or something.
We would not go off the right way, obviously, but anything within the right way that we have constructed, we would be responsible for.
Okay. Yeah. It's all this from the blue line. This whole triangular area is, is public property.
Okay. Yeah. It's just wanted to see if there was, like, some kind of formalized process for them to come instead of, you know, like, a subjective threshold that future engineer or, you know, department head would make the decision.
Isn't the right way to public property? So yeah, I would think we'd be responsible for that.
And then the portion where the trail crosses, can you kind of talk about the decision for the.
What do you call those, the slash lines instead of having, like, a structured corner.
On the west side.
I'm sorry, not this one option one. Yeah. The checker, depending on what you call those diagonal lines.
You tell them in the radius here, that radius there. So when we were designing this.
I told the designer we want to retain this monument sign.
So there would be no right turn lane, but let's make this a wide radius here.
So that if there's one maybe two cars at the red light, you can kind of sneak around and turn right on red.
That was the thought process there. So that's why we didn't build that curve out. We pulled the curve line back and we hatched it.
And in this scenario, we've got the, yeah, right turn lane.
Yeah, is it possible for us to have an option for with the curve built out?
It is a much larger crossing, right, especially for a path that we're going to be asking people to use that to go down to stone mountain.
I'm guessing.
Yeah, so I mean, this would be a signalized crosswalk. You'll have a refuge area in this island so you're not crossing on three lanes at once.
Yes, if we weren't going with the right turn lane and just went with the original design.
Is it possible to just have that bump out?
Instead of having people squeeze through and you can pull that curve out and do the reverse of what I said, you can have a curve there.
And then if one car is here, the red light, and you have ten cars wishing to turn right.
Then, yeah, I mean, it's pretty significant back up, especially in the morning.
Right, yeah, okay.
Yeah, it's just kind of the balling and see where we can improve safety for sure.
That's what this is all about is trying to improve safety.
And then on the bottom, on the east side is a possible to do like a median in that checkered diagonal area.
This is like, you don't have a lot of room there, but we could maybe look at that.
You couldn't do any landscaping, probably.
Okay, but you can potentially do a raised concrete.
Okay, thank you. Yeah, just again, looking for any way to solve people there.
Sure. Yeah, for safety.
Thank you.
All right, Ken.
What do you need for us?
You need some soft vote, conversation.
No, yeah, I know we don't take a vote, but we want to do some guidance.
We want to move forward with a design and we're just kind of looking for a head nod on which way we want to go.
I want to ask you a little bit more, so I was at that public meeting.
I'll turn it to with the right turn lane that came out of conversations with people at the meeting.
Yeah, I mean, we recommended it anyway.
We didn't show it at the public meeting because of the concern with the monument, but from a traffic perspective, we do recommend that.
But yes, that was, I would say the largest number of comments we had from the public meeting was, we really need a right turn lane there.
Okay, so I guess the struggle with that was safety sign.
Right, so we need to, that needs to be weighed.
Right. Well, not safety sign, but congestion sign, I would say.
Yeah, for tain the sign, we've got no right turn lane, you're going to really back up traffic.
If you can stall the right turn lane, then that sign's going to go.
No consideration that that right turn lane could be a safety.
What impact itself?
Yeah.
Okay.
That's good point.
All right.
I just had a follow up to that, because I hadn't, I was looking sort of at the option to.
Is the sign having to go on option to because of the intersection or because of the intersection plus the trail.
We're not showing it here, but the sign is.
It's because of the grading.
So the sign itself is a little misleading because of the tree overhang, but it's over and here somewhere, but the.
Due to the elevation difference, when you construct that right turn lane.
And you do the slopes.
You get into the get into the signs of the sign or the monument is not physically in the right turn lane, but the.
So the first thing that we need to give a head nod to soften to is alternate one.
To.
Or three.
Right.
So which is any conversation around.
Alternate one.
Yeah.
I think, you know, we should go with alternate one.
I know everyone is about traffic here.
I think.
People complain about traffic everywhere in the world.
And we should just be okay with traffic in terms of safety.
Again, a lot of.
What we wanted from the you how in section or you how road.
Said you was safety right.
You know, every time that we it's almost like an inverse right if you're you're prioritizing.
Congestion there's going to be a safe component that you're going to overlook in terms of pedestrians and bicycles.
So I'm really an advocate for alternative one and if we could bump out that.
Corner that would make this all the better because it is a rather large crossing.
All right. Thank you.
Anybody else on alternative one.
Yes.
I mean.
I think that was a really compelling argument that council member when just made.
And I also just want to lift up.
I think there.
Those are very relevant concerns, which I think applies to all the designs about.
The new construction of new driveways and how long that would be.
So I would want to have more insights from the city of attorney on all of it.
So I just I think one is.
It feels like it meets the most again if we're talking just about.
The safety piece we should go with the safe the safest option if that's what the purpose of this intersection construction is.
I'm going to pose a question to Ted Ted on that.
The concern is building those driveways in the right way.
That you see there.
What's our liability.
Realistically long term we build you that driveway apron or a little bit of your driveway and you mess it up.
Someone messes it up.
Are we liable just because it's in the right way or it's for their private use.
Nothing in the right way is for private use.
Nothing.
It is absolutely 100% the city of Tucker's responsibility to maintain in a safe condition.
In perpetuity forever.
But I will say every sidewalk project you have you have to tie in the driveway.
Sometimes you can do it without getting off the the right of way.
Sometimes do the slope you have to go beyond the right of way and in those cases you need.
Easiness.
Okay.
We move on to conversation around alternate to.
Conversation around alternate to.
Being very very familiar with with that area and especially with.
Changing the direction of roster place that's going to increase.
The amount of folks going around to roster road to make a right turn.
I think there's a very significant concern for backup.
Especially in the morning is as tip put out.
And with your permission.
Madam Mayor I'd like to also pose a question to.
Our legal counsel.
In any design you take if you took design one and it left the monument.
We're design.
Sign two and we just scraped that monument.
Are we sending ourselves up for a city of Milton type situation.
By constructing road close to that solid piece of granite.
In a.
State of the law which is in flux a little bit.
Is that any obstruction in a lane of travel.
Is negligence for which there's no sovereignty.
If it is next to the lane of travel.
It might also it might be that we were maintaining a new sense for which there would be no sovereignty.
Now that issue may be before the Georgia Court of Appeals as we speak.
So to continue off that and I concur with you sir.
To continue off of that I think.
Option two over option one gives the city the safest in terms of potential future liabilities.
Plus it's necessary.
All right.
Any other conversation on to.
After the public meeting that we had I think it was back in February.
And full disclosure when when I came to when we when we was talking about the safety.
A lot of the input I'd gotten previous to the design.
Was about trying to preserve the monument because it it's beloved.
In the community.
After we had the public meeting though.
I heard overwhelmingly more about concerns.
I've not having that right turn lane in the impact on the community around.
And I don't know if you have the numbers went from the actual.
The data that you guys collected but.
I got I got several calls.
I've had folks you know stop me in the grocery store what not talking about that.
I got a text on the way over here.
I'm concerned about that right turn lane.
So certainly I believe strongly and listening to the community.
And one of the things that I'm sort of interested in is you know is there a way possibly to save the monument.
At the same time I do believe that that right turn lane.
Is the safest choice.
I look at I look at that design up there now.
And I just think about people riding a bike along there and a car pulling up.
Really quickly in that striped area to maybe try to you know going around and there could be a possible impact with alternative to.
So formalize that that intersection feels safer to me about.
Having a place where people want you know pull up to stop.
Wait for the signal whatever but but ultimately.
Where I am right now is.
Would like to try to find some solutions for the monument monument.
But the overwhelming feedback that I got was for alternative to.
Any other conversation?
I just want to talk a little bit more about the congestion.
This is very well documented about the induced.
The man right like the more that we improve this intersection for congestion say the more people are going to be routed this way.
More traffic you're going to add on to heal how and then there's going to be a downstream effect right.
And then we're going to be back at this conversation later down the road when we're talking about.
It might be in 78 and we're going to have to increase those lanes again.
I just want us to be very cautious because this is very well documented.
Everyone kind of agrees at this point if you increase in the man here you will see.
More traffic right over the years like these traffic studies will only guarantee you.
The quality of service for the next three years because they know that people are going to continuously.
See this has been more attractive option to drive through.
I think it's a short term phrase, as most intersection improvements, for terms of quality of service, argument, sake, heows, it just doesn't last.
So, I just have a follow-up kind of to some of the things that have been said. I'm curious if we put the trail in there and the sidewalk, then it's almost like a complete street, and then we're doing a right turn when we're still talking about the alternative to option year.
So, that means that the entire, I'm just curious if the cost goes up a lot more, or if this is the cost, because now I'm thinking this is sounding more like a complete street.
So, is this what you're referring to the difference in cost between alternative one and alternative two?
Well, I guess what I'm concerned about is is that this cost estimate isn't including the trail project.
It is including that. Yes, we made that clear from the start that we don't want to re-build.
No, we made it clear with the consultant that we don't want to re-build anything. We don't want to build an intersection and come back with a trail. We want to include the trail within the scope of this project.
Okay. So, I again think that the option for the best safety or this intersection is what we really need to focus on as counsel within anything else.
I was with a couple of people with a weekend who are complaining about this intersection. It's not safe.
So. Thank you for that point of clarity.
That cost includes the construction of the trail.
Yes. To get on that in that portion within the project limits.
Within the project limits. Okay. That's a good point of clarity, because I was not aware of that.
Right. Amy, you were looking at me like, and how did you miss that?
I thought it was more of the design. See, I thought it was more. I didn't know that also include the construction of that.
Okay.
Yeah.
All right.
Yeah. I agree. I thought it was. We were setting the foundations, not literal foundations, but like enabling that to be an intersection.
The trail could pass through adding real estate risk construction of.
Yes. Sorry. I didn't make that clear. Okay.
Yeah. I mean, I, if I look at alternatives one and two, I believe that alternative one fixes a safety problem of the just really wonky angle.
And I think it will cause backup, but councilman wins point.
I'm not sure backup was the problem we were trying to solve.
And if we make super easy traffic flow, then that's to the detriment of pedestrians.
And then if we're looking at spending a ton of money making that a full on pedestrian, very long pedestrian pathway.
I don't know about free flowing traffic at that right turn.
I'll have to think about it, but I respect the argument that the safety element is in the angle.
And then the right turn is for congestion. We're always going to have bad driver behavior.
So if somebody wants to drive over a kind of and do a right turn where there's not a right turn lane, that's a different issue.
All right. So I'm going to take a little soft straw pull here.
So if you want can to move on with more work on option one alternate one, give me a little sign.
Three, two and a half maybe. Okay.
Okay. And then alternate two.
So I got one, two, three, four.
So you have four for alternate two, three for alternate one.
You can even talk about alternate three, but I'm going to see what means everybody's worried about budget.
Oh, we're not going to worry about that at that time.
We'll think about that further down the road for the racing.
So you're going to go ahead and look at alternate two.
And I think then there needs to be a further discussion.
Sitting looking at what does the beautification piece look like.
It's all that tonight. We've heard. Thank you. We've heard from folks. There's other folks to hear from.
But if we're investing this amount of money and we're looking at safety and we're looking at a trail and a complete street.
I think there needs to be a little give on a monument sign and a partnership working to see what that looks like with you all.
But that can't be the end. I'll be all for this not to go forward.
All right. Thank you. You got what you need. Thank you, Ken.
All right. We're going to move on to vision zero policy. Maybe we should have had that first.
Vision zero. Maybe we'll come back and change our minds.
All right.
So as you all know, we're doing our combined transportation trail master plan.
We've had the draft study for for months now had number of public meetings and so forth.
We'd like to.
It's already been to a couple of times we we'd like to take it back to the planning commission and two reads and mayor and council and and get that adopted.
But one of the things this come out of all these discussions with not only the public and the stakeholders committee,
but council is really.
Prioritization of complete streets vision zero policy and then a safety action plan.
So those are all components within the plan as we've developed our plan.
It's been as much much higher emphasis.
As you know, a safety action plan that's one of the.
Criteria to be eligible for certain funding so.
Safety action plan is as a component of this transportation plan.
Anyway, I've said enough. I'm going to turn it over to Richard Feingman upon in company.
He's got a presentation and answer any questions.
Yes.
Interesting to see the you know discussion on the on the previous intersection that's sort of right at the crux of a lot of what.
I know you guys are thinking about really trying to prioritize safety, but yet keep keeping moving in and how how do you.
How do you you know do those different things and so we try to look a lot of that those types of things in the transportation plan.
I guess what we what have we done in the last couple months I guess as we saw before one of the things we did was we really did go back and look at any of the.
The edits that we're needed in that in the report but also looked a lot more at the complete streets component and how we really.
Where do we talk about complete streets and how that's part of your your process so.
I was just going to give a quick.
Just a quick recap of the plan elements sort of quick plan element overview and then I know you want to talk a lot about vision zero and sort of the complete streets and.
And what what sorts of things you might be committing to if you commit to doing the vision zero.
You know sort of a commitment there and and why and why that would be something that would recommend so.
I guess one of the things I guess to start office you know talking with a plan and how it kind of supports the tech revision you know one of the things.
Look at as you know you got your vision of being a vibrant inclusive connected community committed to high quality of life.
I think that the plan supports this vision is really that inclusion of the safety action plan and vision zero policy.
Is it a big component of that because the idea that you're trying to emphasize quality of life you're trying to really emphasize how you're going to have you know safety in the community.
And how you're going to move people and you know you talk about connections to downtown and we'll talk about how some of this does that for the multimodal aspects of your plan.
So expansion of the trail network is a way to comply to provide complete streets that's all where we think as part of this vision as well.
We know we talk about complete streets a little before there's a little more the document about that now one of the things that I think is really important about about the approach that we did to the complete streets is by having this multi trail plan.
And instead of saying let's just put it let's just put complete streets on every street it allows you to kind of focus on a few things and one of the things you'll see when we talk about the short term projects is that they really do focus on getting people across.
You know putting a trail spine in across your your city but then also connecting to downtown and so those are those are some things we think are.
And then if this is on safety and operational improvements versus roadway capacity that was something that we thought was important here there's not and we'll talk about that there's not that many capacity projects really focusing on intersection operations reducing congestion but but a lot of these projects are identified as as safety projects.
So what's in the plan there's three three components the comprehensive transportation plan update which is related to all the different modes of travel I guess.
Through their connections on a wheels bicycles transit trucks that's update the plan that you had before also the trail plan update is sort of an update to that plan from before.
And with again focusing on the shared paths but one thing that I do want to draw attention to is we did do a lot deeper dive this time we we looked at all of those trail components one thing that's in the if you go to the appendix of the report and that that's pretty thick.
But for each one of those trail segments our folks from the folks from all to who partnered with us really did go out and they they looked at things in this in the field they really tried to look at what was.
You know, the feasible to be done and how that would relate to costs and such.
The new element then is a safety action plan so part of that comes with the idea of looking at crash data developing up what they call high high in network.
Which is the network of roads were most across the car on looking at putting safety in your project prioritization so we did that as a prioritize the process we made sure that safety was one of those components of prioritization.
And and we also look at safe routes to school we know that was a program has had success of some schools with it making that a little more universal.
And then also the vision zero commitment and the reason that they have the vision zero we have the vision zero sort of commitment in there is that's really a key part of.
What they call this the safe streets for all.
You know safety action plan process and so what that that's part of what what you're trying to hear this with this plan.
And by by doing that what that does is it sort of meeting the guidelines that they that they want to have in there is to have that kind of adopted.
You know.
Vision zero commitment and then what that does is also it's helps to free up when you have the plan in place and you have that and you do some of those things it helps free up the funding that you could get.
For implementation money for safety as well.
But also it's a great practice because you'll see as we talk about there's great things that sort of help and grain bring into what it would do.
Just real quick here on belabor this much but just wanted to run through because I know we talked the last time a lot about sort of the you know public outreach and what we got from the public and all that and.
One of the things I just kind of want to highlight here is we were going back through everything going back all through our notes is is the stakeholder committee process we think was one of those things it was really was really great in this.
You know as we work through this plan you can see some photos you had folks from public meetings but even with this room's packets only portion of your of your citizens right.
But one of the things that's that's the stakeholder committee did was they follow the process all the way through so we had the committee so when they went each of these three meetings they were sort of seeing the projects progress as it.
The processes that progressed and it helped give us a really good input on you know as we came to these these recommendations because they weren't all the same as you might have had your previous.
You know some things that were a little different and so we did think that that that that had a bit of value.
Another thing that again just to recap real quick we recommend a press by implementation phase and so here short minute long term.
But what we did here was you know trying to look at the types of projects so the short term we only had there's about four sort of roadway intersection capacity projects and those are really projects sort of already moving through the process again that short term and you had us go back and look at that and make sure.
We verified that yes that did include the projects you already kind of had you know in the in the plan.
With some other sprinkle in and then and then we don't really hit another roadway to pass the intersection projects a long term because it takes a little time to develop some of those larger projects that.
You know that are there including the long term.
But then operational projects can see there's a pretty steady stream of those throughout and that's really where a lot of your safety improvements come in so when we talk about operational projects things just like the one you're talking about just now.
How do we improve that because we need a traffic signal at roster road or some way for folks to get out.
But how do we do it in the most safe way right and so we what we try to do is as we look through all these projects that we're there.
There's there's about 30 or so type of criteria that fit into you what the federal highway administration calls there sort of proven safety counter measures right.
So when when we had things that we're going to include one or more of this proven safety counter measures.
And that was something that we said I that checks the safety box it would be something you could potentially get safety funding for later and also isn't helping to improve safety.
So so that was operational approach you see there are really projects that are geared.
You know most of those have a safety component as well.
So sidewalk projects and trail projects that are also also shown in there so a lot of component of this plan we feel like is really you know towards that.
You know again multimodal transportation with sidewalk controls and then handling a lot of your congestion.
Another thing I guess that we talked about last time that we had shown this by travel mode but not caught up all together in one in one graphics we did put that in the in the plan itself.
But also kind of showing here so these are kind of your short term projects all.
So instead of we would have like short-term intersections on one map and short-term roadway on another map.
But what I think you can see when you cease together, there's definitely an emphasis on handling some of your major corridors,
but also in, you know, when you look at your trail network and some of the things that they're shown in purple, like the shared use path, you know, you're how road,
and you've got, you've got it along, you know, the road there,
you're, um, lovista and such going to the west, you're really getting a good spine through your city with your stuff in the short-term.
Now, now some of that is designed at that stage, not implementation, but is developing that whole spine there and then providing a north-south connection as well.
And when you see that in the sidewalk, you're really kind of focusing a lot more of the ability for people to move across the city, but also to get to downtown.
And there's also a lot of intersection in, you know, operational projects, you know, showing on there.
And some of the ones that are, they're longer our corridor or sort of operational projects where we have several along along the corridor,
that those are the ones along 29 and on not industrials.
So that's kind of what, you know, something else to look at if you want to explore that in detail in the report that's got, you know, kind of all that put together.
But then I guess the next thing is sort of how does this relate to vision zero and, you know, incomplete streets?
And so when you look at your safety action plan and your vision zero goal, so the safety action plan does it does a few things to kind of meet that criteria.
One that identifies this high injury network.
Another thing is that it provides this vision zero commitment.
Another thing we have and there's this is, well, they have establishing an evaluation monitoring system.
So the idea is that each year you would be monitoring the crashes and seeing what improvements you're making towards your goal.
Do you need to retool things as you go, right? And then establishing a safe routes to school program.
That's not something to requirement, but we know that's something that is a good idea and it was something you all had wanted to do.
So those are some of the key kind of aspects of that safety action plan.
And this back here just shows a bit of the high injury network.
And I showed the one that includes 285 and Highway 78 and all that.
I know we did put a second series of maps in there.
When you go through the reports, you can see the ones that pull those off.
But really the other reason we left that on, you know, you know, and have to leave the reporters it.
They want to include all the roads within the jurisdiction from the federal standpoint.
But when you look at that, your high injury network is about 11% of the roadway network there.
But about over 60% of the crashes and over 70% of the fatal crashes and seriously injured crashes.
So that says if you can pay some attention to that area in prioritization and doing some of your activities, you can maybe have a big impact on those on those really serious outcome crashes.
So that's a component that they want to have in the plants that you're looking at how that relates to things.
Other things when we talk about is complete streets and there's a relationship.
It definitely between having a good complete streets, you know, a process and and and also having a good plan.
So some of the things that we did do is go back and try to strengthen what we talked about with complete streets.
We had a lot of the projects in there, but we probably didn't have them really spelled out as much.
And I know some of the things you talked about to is what are some design stands to go to street.
So what does it mean when we say complete streets?
So we added in a few sections there, language on there.
So I highlighted here a couple of pages in case you wanted to go back and look.
But there's a discussion of police streets elements added on 66 and 67.
We, the use of shared use paths to provide complete streets for, for bike and ped travel modes was sort of discussed through there as well.
And then I'm just trying to think of Spanish real project sections of complete streets.
We did give some sample details on page 93.
I think that that's something and we'll talk about the complete streets policy.
That's something you may want to refine as you, as you develop this complete streets policy.
Because we did add the recommendation for complete streets policy.
We added that to the recommendation section.
And then we put an example complete streets policy in the appendix.
Now that's got again some samples as far as things that you might want for your roadway standards.
But developing that something that you might want to do over some time.
It's probably not the same thing.
You wouldn't have to adopt that at the exact same time you're adopting your vision zero plan.
That might take a little bit more development.
Economic benefits of shared use paths.
That was another thing that was a good question.
So we did do a high level estimate of economic benefits for shared use paths.
And so we included a discussion on that on page 96, which used some average, you know, costs like things that we're, you know,
how the city may benefit from historic data on additional trail use and what are those things are constant.
And not surprisingly does show the for your program overall, you know, that you do have a good positive benefit cost ratio for putting in trail type.
So those are a few things that change a little bit and kind of started linking those pieces together.
Another thing I think that's important to see is you saw before we, you know, had the short term projects and how they were just kind of coming in in certain spots.
But when you, when you look at sort of the build out of the network, we've got a lot of other connections, a lot of loops, a lot of things that people want to have when they have a fully fleshed out complete streets network.
And so we thought that giving this versus say having just a policy this has put complete streets on every single road.
This gives you more guidance. You can certainly put it someplace else.
And not, you know, it's, you know, completely up to you all as you move forward, right?
But this plan kind of lays out where those, where those locations go.
We did go back and look at a couple of those key roads as well.
That was, like, rocket road, the section of rocket road.
We really thought a trail down of school would be something that would really make a lot of sense into downtown.
Even though that, that, that road was, you know, sort of try to make the decision.
Do we, do we go with, with traffic calming or complete streets, but we do think that it makes sense to go back.
And also, we did look at Chamble, Chamble, the Tucker road, you all had done a lot of work to do what you've done out there.
And it asked us to look back.
And so we do have a recommendation of putting that in there in the future.
It might not be the first one you want to do because a lot of places that aren't already touched yet, right?
But it does seem like that would be an important corridor.
Again, both those because of their nature of bringing people into downtown and connecting to a lot of neighborhoods.
So those were, were two we went back and it really looked down.
So a couple of things, so then the vision zero commitment.
So what sort of involved in actually this commitment of vision zero.
And really what it is is that the main, the main things that they want to see in that,
and that are part of what we had kind of put in there is this acknowledgement that sort of no,
no traffic deaths are acceptable.
The idea that we, we are not going to say that has certain and level is acceptable.
Really striving to have zero fail, you know, fatalities and serious injuries.
And it also represents a high level support to provide resources necessary to implement the city safety action plan
and promote broader countywide policies and programs in alignment with a vision zero goal.
And I say countywide because the idea is that you're supporting not just within yourself,
but also as the county is working with you on other things.
It adopts and so then it gets a little more strong.
Okay, it adopts a goal of achieving vision zero traffic deaths by 2050 under the SS4A leadership community.
And they do want to see a year that you say that you think you want to strive to get to that goal.
And I think this is one that we had talked about a bit with the stakeholder committee,
but there's nothing about 2050 that that has to be the year.
You know, so that could be something that you could think about.
But we think that that does 25 years in the future so that it does give you a good, you know, a good target year to really kind of move towards.
It also commits to continued collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions and other partners to advance projects identified in the plan.
And it also commits to monitoring and reporting on progress.
So, so that's kind of the, it doesn't necessarily recommend you to doing any specific projects.
It doesn't say you have to do the projects that are in the safety action plan.
It's really more of a, you know, that you're going to be following this, this kind of path to trying to promote the safety and to not just promote it and move, move towards it.
It's got two more slides and then I'll be done, but.
So one, one other thing here, the vision zero and complete streets, you know, complete streets policy would support, you know, it would be supportive of vision zero.
So complete streets policy can be valuable tool for advancing that.
We buy requiring, but that goes further into the commitment usually.
Usually when you have a complete streets policy you're saying things like buy requiring streets and plan and design and operate to accommodate all roadway users, all people of all ages and abilities.
Sometimes then you will link that back to, well, we have a plan as to which streets they'll be on, right?
So it might not be on every street, so that gives you a way to kind of link it back to a plan.
But those, but the usually with the complete streets policy you tend to have a little bit, you tend to go a little further and you tend to sometimes also adopt design standards for the various.
And I know you guys are talking through that sum here, you know, should use a 10 foot pass, should use a put pet and you can see the whole interplay there, you know.
So you're not that you always have to follow them, but you have adopt standards that would, that would go generally with the complete streets policy.
Again, it shifts the focus from transportation design from moving vehicles quickly to prioritizing safety for all users, so that's an advantage and sort of a nexus of those.
And also, by proactively addressing vulnerable road users, that's something that really aligns it well with your vision zero.
So there is a thing where those things go hand in hand, but by adopting a vision zero, you know, policy you're not necessarily, you know, adopting a complete streets.
So, and this is kind of the two page of this, this was refined a little bit from the one that went out, beginning of the year, and primarily to bring those three points at the very end in alignment with what I just said.
You know, that's where it says therefore let it be resolved, you know, and so this, this obviously, you want to look at, you want your attorney to look at and things like that and you know, whoever is looking at this kinds of things.
But, you know, provides a commitment to vision zero, and then the target here, so it has that in there.
And then the adoption of policy and this is the, you know, the policy, we adopt this policy to continue collaborations with neighboring jurisdictions, etc.
So, so those are those three things. Now, you know, you can put anything you want to in a commitment or resolution, but that's what we would suggest to be something that really kind of, you know, hits the mark of what you need for the federal criteria, but gives you the most flexibility.
Again, not being an attorney, that's something that you all have to also work out that way and amongst yourselves.
But, I don't know.
Okay. Anyway, so yeah, no, I'm really quick and I'm sure you guys have questions, but I wanted to kind of give that over to you a little bit of order.
Do you see anything I know Congress right now is looking at the build America 250 Act.
Just come up. It's bipartisan. It's just to make sure that they can.
You know, reappoint those funds and keep it moving for the next five years. Of course, this is the right thing to do.
But does it also help with that kind of funding? Do you see, do you see the administration?
Because the current administration is different, you know, obviously the current administration is different.
There's a lot of discussion more on the idea of capacity and on trying to move things.
But I think that there's also, I think that safety is one of those issues that is, and that's one of the reasons why this plan was kept in place.
Quite honestly, I think, you know, they could have just taken this plan out. They took out other aspects of their grant funding about the safety aspect stayed in.
And so I think that there's something that that's good about having this sort of process and it being able to translate in there.
Especially they're talking, they're trying to do things for capacity, but it's probably also going to be a safety oriented, you know, improvements as well, you know, and can argue with that now.
How far they want to go with safety, I don't know, and how that ties in with complete streets, those are all things that are, you know, yet to be determined.
But that's my guess is that you still have to have value in the safety plan.
And I think that there's some value in just having it in place, quite honestly, for the community.
All right, good. Any questions down here?
We're still thinking. All right, Councilman Schroeder.
I just want to ask you a few, like, to make some recommendations about complete street programming and safe routes to school programming and what we can do in the city.
We partner and do a safe routes, you know, every following spring at elementary schools, and just feel like we're missing some opportunities.
And then to educate our residents to slow down.
I mean, one of the reasons why we did the traffic calming on Brockett, which I know that you know this, is to drop the speed limit because people were speeding at all hours of the day 80 plus miles an hour.
So we finally were able to drop it from 40 to 35, and that was a huge improvement in people are still speeding, not going 80 miles an hour because they can't because of the chicane.
But you know, what do we need to do to educate? And while I understand people have, you know, drive that behavior, some people drive a little bit faster than others.
So I was just curious if you might be willing to share a sort of thoughts around that.
Yeah, well, I mean, with education, there's, you know, education almost has to be a consistent process, right, because it's hard to get people to just learn it once and then do it.
I think part of this building, a culture of, you know, a little bit of a culture of safety, like if you're doing things to the city and there's a way to be promoting safety along with that.
Things, you know, things like events that you're having, there are other things you can do that are sort of safety oriented.
Folks have done it along the complete streets and where they'll do like, you know, hey, a bike to not everyone goes to the bike, but also learn about bicycle safety things like wearing helmets and, and how to, you know, how to ride not ride.
And the big challenge now is he bikes to people are getting on these e-bikes and some of them are really fast.
But, you know, so, and I don't know that it's so much that they're, you know, running into other people, but, you know, but you've heard that it can be very dangerous just just driving this and navigating on this.
So, so there's, there's things like that about safety.
So how do you do that, you know, having this kinds of things in the, you know, within the events that you have in the community.
I think another thing is, you talk about Cyprus and school and there may be a way to sort of partner with that, if you can do things with a school where you've got.
The kids that are talking about not just safe routes to school, but bring home information about safety on the railways and not speeding.
That's one way to do it.
I think that some things that have really helped a lot of communities is a lot of these speed.
Matching enforcement along with these speed advisory, putting in one of those speed advisory trailers.
And then doing that for the long and then ticketing people to get them to kind of understand what they're doing.
Obviously, those are all big decisions as whether you do that.
You know, you rather, you know, get people correctly not to do things.
But we can, I don't know if we had as many ideas in here about that.
But we certainly can come back with what are some educational ideas that, you know, it could maybe be good to be added to that.
Well, I'm sure that we would like to continue to explore that as a city and community.
I noticed that done when he has dropped the most of their, you know, our connector street speeds to 35.
And I thought, well, that's an interesting opportunity to try to encourage people so down.
We obviously have two major highways with freight traffic.
So it's not as easy, but I still think that in the neighborhoods in the connector streets, especially close to the schools.
We need to continue to figure out what types of programming and education that we can implement.
So thank you.
All right, questions.
Very much appreciate this.
And I am curious, and I think it goes to Council Member Schroeder's question about education too.
Did you talked about the piece of the vision zero commitment connected to collaboration and other, you know, communities.
I know you mentioned to Cow County, but I'm, you know, immediately started thinking about ARC.
So do you have, and didn't ask you this ahead of time, but do you have a sense of other, like Georgia or local municipalities or counties that have adopted or been moving towards a vision zero policy?
Yes, yes.
Cherokee County and Fayette County recently.
I did one.
I'm sure I think.
I think it's pretty strange.
So most of the places that have done these, you know, these plans have put one of those employees.
So maybe like an opportunity for us to even, like, again, be more intentional with the cab county and saying,
I know we've had some other resolutions that some advocacy groups have been coming, you know, to multiple things.
On the education side, the reason I thought of ARC is I've seen.
Thank you.
Sorry about that.
I pushed my button twice apparently with my notebook.
But the reason I asked about ARC is plan RVA, which is their regional, a while ago adopted a vision zero policy.
And now they have these very interesting community advocacy and predictive tools.
So they just wanted a word for this where the community reports near misses on fatalities and they are building an orienting their priorities around prevention, not just like a dressing and moving backwards.
So I just appreciate you like lifting this up as sort of like a, you have to have this kind of step in place in order to get to those other sorts of things.
That's a good question.
And ARC, I believe it's going to be embarking on doing some work on their on a safe streets for all planning.
There's this geared toward schools and they have three different communities that are in different areas of the region that they're doing that.
I think we're looking at involved in county, Clayton County and Brookhaven.
I think if it's correct, correct for the ones that they'll be looking at it.
But the idea is not just to look at those three communities in a vacuum, but to look at that and see what else can be applied outwardly.
It is a very good opportunity to probably do that and as you mentioned all these different places that now have these in place.
Might not be bad to say, well, what is there something they could do together to at least, you know, especially when you talk about ongoing sort of coordination collaboration.
What are the best practices that other people are putting in place.
Yeah, and the other thing I wanted to say, I really, if you go to the short term project slide.
And I know we're going to have the full plan.
You know, kind of recommend front of us for adoption.
But I'm partially just because I just saw a presentation on this on Friday.
What I like about this short term priority project map is how closely it aligns with the need map for.
In terms of mobility and access.
And so, you know, that map in the plan where it shows that the central corridor is where the highest need for mobility access is.
So it looks like, you know, y'all incorporated poverty rates, disability rates, literally what the infrastructure is.
And so I'm just trying to think through the adoption of the vision zero policy, but also complete treats and sort of how that ties into, you know, saying.
Hey, these short term projects aren't.
They are.
The policy of it addressing a very specific need, right?
And in terms of serving people of Tucker who have the list access to two types of transit.
And so I just, I'm appreciating seeing seeing those projects together.
I think it would be great to see it overlayed on that map just so that we can highlight.
Like we have, you look all that a great job identifying a really important gap in our community where we have not been able to serve everybody as much.
And so I was wondering about where we're spending dollars and how we're investing.
Being able to have these projects connected to.
We are thinking about safety specifically for people who may only have.
You know, we have one or two types of options and they may not be able to be a vehicle.
So I'm just really appreciating that and wanted to look.
Thanks.
Yeah, we can look and see if there will be interesting see map to see.
Let me see what we can pull together on that too.
Interesting story till.
All right.
I really don't have that much question.
I just want to thank you for filling all of our requests.
I think this is really wonderful that you have kind of addressed every thing that we've requested from you.
So the design standard is all the updates to the trails the vision zero.
I think the one thing that we just want to a little bit more details is like the safety action plan.
Can you talk about that?
Kind of how low implement it, how low kind of key track is there like a.
You know, five year plan where each year has a different thing or like.
Yeah, I think the main thing is just tracking, you know, what are you you know, what are you implementing that's that are safety projects and we do have this kind of identified within there.
You know, and then are there, you know, are there improvements in, you know, within those local areas to the crashes.
So, you know, that's one one way to do, you know, as it's sort of an after you know, study there and then that's something you could be reporting back.
One is, well, what are, how are your crash rates overall in the community, but then how are they in these specific.
You know, areas where safety related crashes are, you know, being or.
Okay, what that kind of be something that you would drive primarily can.
Yeah, no, this is a wonderful, I just want to kind of say they all of the surrounding jurisdiction.
Around us, everyone's kind of committed to like 2050, I think there was like one that was like 24, 24, 24, but they took off their major, you know, corridor from G dot.
I would like to, you know, have us committed to keeping that within ours.
So that's, you know, the VISTA Lawrenceville, I know it's not our road, but it goes to our city.
It is our road.
All right, guys.
You know, wrap this section up.
Thank you.
We appreciate you very much.
Appreciate all of your work.
Thanks for coming back.
All right.
Smart way expansion and camera policy discussion.
Micah, you're up.
All right, good evening.
We've got a fun one here tonight.
I'm excited to chat about this with you guys.
So I'm going to go ahead and jump on this.
All right, so tonight we're going to be kind of mixing things up a little bit.
You know, obviously staff has received a lot of feedback from you guys over the last year to that you don't only want to see updates when there's a contract.
When I have a policy discussion about ahead of time, so that you know that you're getting sort of what's within the scope that you actually want to see, not just an up-down vote.
So that's what this is tonight.
Hopefully an opportunity to have that feedback cycle and, you know, agree on what direction we're moving.
Specifically with smart lights.
And I also want to place it in the context of sort of a wider camera policy discussion.
When I use the word policy here, I'm not meeting like a written policy, I'm meeting like policy spectrum of ideas.
So, why now?
We are preparing to bring the smart light implementation for the Tucker Town Green and downtown Main Street Tucker at the next Council meeting.
We recognize that public sentiment about government operated cameras is something that's kind of ever changing right now and in the last couple of years.
And we're looking to have this be our moment of transparent discussion about what we would use cameras for, what those use cases are, what are our values, what are the limitations of the cameras that would be owned and operated by the city.
Because, you know, we're not everywhere all the time.
Certainly, we do not have in-house law enforcement, our law enforcement services provided by the cab county PD.
And so that naturally limits the scope of anything that the city would deploy on its own.
So just to do a quick review, we had initial discussions in fall of 2023.
That was around public Wi-Fi at the construction of the Tucker Town Green.
And then also sort of the long term, what is the vision of these sort of off road trails and what kind of security would we consider rolling out in those locations.
We implemented it to your pilot from October 2023 to 2025.
We brought the results of that back to discuss with Council in August 2025.
It was just a report that the technology was effective, it was feasible, it was a good fit.
There wasn't like some overwhelming data point about how much it got used because it was really just on like 150 foot stretch of trail.
It wasn't even in a park, there wasn't a bench there.
It was really just we had students come by that kind of sat there on the afternoon sometimes.
People walk through, we did have some people connect but it wasn't like we got a thousand people on this little network.
That was not the scope of what we were doing, we were making sure the technology worked and it did.
But it was not like the result of a big event or something.
So we've been working on a technical coordination with Georgia power and Comcast smart solutions for a more sizable rollout.
And we thought that would be a rather quick process and then it wasn't.
So I apologize that it took me a 10 month drag or nine month drag from August until now to really have this thing wrapped up and have it all kind of actualized.
But we're here so I'm going to take us tonight through a couple different things.
The basically going to include this sort of spectrum, this graphic here and then you're going to see some boxes and green.
Those represent things that we're doing and you know may not be necessarily clear to some people in the community that we're doing them.
This is that for a step of transparency to say this is what we have around here.
The red that you're going to see is basically going to be the area where I'm steering your attention for discussion tonight for a sort of decision as sort of yes we want to see the next contract or actually.
No way not really ready for that next step and we don't think that's a good fit in here in this situation, et cetera.
So just to run down of what we have.
I'm going to be going through three slides here next in detail that go through the green boxes right here, so that's what we're about to see.
So we have city facility cameras.
These are common sense safety and security cameras inside city facilities and the immediate exterior of city facilities.
The staff generally does not review the cameras unless it's needed.
That runs the IT director so it's really kind of one point of contact.
Very you know closed up system unless we've got this specific issue we want to respond to typically that goes out of the city manager through director.
It's pretty close loop.
We do have some cameras in our city parks just less than 20 of them.
We have implemented some limited monitoring in our public parks.
These are locations that are responsive locations of cameras and public spaces.
They're based on actual public feedback and actual situations which have taken place.
These cameras do not have any live monitoring to them.
So they're really kind of localized data.
They get stored with a third party through Georgia power so Georgia power has the only power in the parks.
They have a recommend vendor.
We use them and then if we have a need to access video we would go to the vendor and ask for access to the video.
So that's sort of the structure that we have there not really any live view from staff.
Really no staff access at all until there would be a situation that would be something we would request video for.
The next thing we have are city least flock license plate reader cameras and we do have 15 of them.
So this is a couple more bullets I really am just going to kind of read down them and kind of run through the history here.
So the city in coordination with the cab PD rolled out some limited flock license plate reader cameras.
It was early as 2021 was before I got here we had five.
And then we re-uped in October 2023.
We got a rate lock and we selected 15 locations.
The policy goal of the time was to make sure that the top city priorities were monitored.
Just wider to cap county priorities. Obviously, DKPD has very wide area and they've got certain things that are top priorities for them regionally and we wanted to make sure that we capture what we wanted to capture.
So DKPD obviously collaborated with us on the locations or what were the best places to sort of work on Tucker's priority outcomes, so there were no problem areas, there were kind of city gateways and there was some major thoroughfares in the middle of town where
we've got license plate reader cameras in certain areas. DKPD does have live access to that data, but they're just pictures.
So this is where you'll hear people say, you know, there's a hot list, well if a stolen car runs past a certain checkpoint in Tucker where one of these cameras is then it sends a notification to a police officer in that moment.
And so they know someone's rolling through Tucker with a stolen vehicle. So there's an element of live data to be had there, but it is not a live continuous camera feed or a live camera product that they can kind of click a camera and see a thing.
It's just like a photo.
Information of this nature, I wanted to highlight this particular LPR information of this nature is protected by state law and not available to the public.
And when I say that I mean specifically a search of a license plate. So if for some reason city staff doesn't search it, but if it's a cab county PD officer searched a specific license plate number for a specific reason the results of how many times it popped up in the city that's not publicly available information.
You can see a report of who searched and when they searched and why they searched, but the exact license plate is private.
I make that point to emphasize that the state of Georgia is a very open open records state. And so really there's very few protected areas where video footage is not given to the public and this is one of those few exceptions.
The last thing I wanted to highlight here were partner agency cameras. So just to be clear, in addition to what the city of Tucker might have with the 15 block cameras.
The cab county, of course, has their own set of cameras which they've rolled out through their digital shield initiative.
They announced that on October 1st on the website, you can see lots of very good details there to kind of understand what their what their vision is and what they're trying to do with that.
They also work with the community through the voluntary fuchsious program where a private property owner can integrate their cameras to the system or instead of integrating them maybe register them and say, if there's a crime, you can ask from my camera data, that sort of thing.
As it was last published on the website, DKPD has 271 flock LPRs and 500 plus cameras county wide.
That number is old, I think, a year to old, I would imagine it's higher now, but that's the last published data point I could find.
And just to be clear, DKPD has partnered in a very limited scenario to provide some video access to Tucker public works.
In the case of emergency weather response, so there is an element there of information sharing where we've agreed that there is a limited scenario where let's just say it's snowing on how and someone's car has skitted out.
It doesn't require a police officer to necessarily physically be there, they could call public works and we could coordinate together emergency responses usually the only case for that would be acceptable.
So we're back to this same spectrum, these are our six use cases, city facilities, city parks, leased LPRs, partner agencies, and then we did the smart light pilot.
So now to the decision point, whether or not the city would be open to doing smart lights and cameras in downtown at the Tuckertown green.
And so in order to sort of facilitate that discussion, I put together a couple policy spectrums.
And my goal here is just to try to help us wage through what our values are and what's acceptable to us and why it isn't acceptable.
Certainly I have framed these in a particular way, you're welcome to frame them in a different way.
If you think that it's insufficient, obviously this is just sort of a moving conversation together here.
So smart light use cases, we're looking at Tuckertown green, we're looking at Main Street and then the future would be looking at off road pedestrian trails, places with bad cell access, you're down on the riverbed,
I'm over by Peter's Park, there's tree canopy, that sort of thing we're looking to fill a gap and meet a need in those difficult spaces to get to.
And this is a rerun of what I mentioned back in August we talked about what our values are and really what we want to focus on with any project of this nature that we'd roll out.
Obviously we only want to do it with smart goals in mind we need to be specific about what we want to measure and what we're trying to achieve with any added cameras in the public space.
Obviously they would be there to promote public safety, transparency and trust in this process making sure we discuss them with community equitable internet access is a huge part of this project which is not in the scope of discussing cameras but it's a part of this smart light project.
And this responsibility, service reliability, secure system design, these are all the things that we're thinking about when we think whether or not the project got to move forward and these are the things that staff is trying to get ahead of and make sure that we implement before we even bring something to you.
So smart lights, smart lights with embedded cameras are the next technology that we're looking at.
This technology opens discussion on what I see as three main policy spectrums.
We have these use case scenarios, we have public camera accessibility and we have the use of AI in public cameras.
So this discussion will help direct staff as to whether to bring a contract for consideration and if so what those limitations would be.
So the framework that we've used to discuss whether or not we would add cameras in these different situations is whether or not we'd add them to places with high volume and that really should say pedestrian volume, high pedestrian volume and low visibility.
And so when the only places that we've really discussed adding this type of service, this type of live camera service is on Main Street and at Tuckertown Green, those are places where we have 1,000 plus people for large events.
And then in the future we would certainly say if this is the technology that the city likes and would continue to roll out we would look at low visibility places.
We have a lot of miles of off road trail which is different than a sidewalk obviously of the accountability of a 100 cars going by you don't have that when you're again under the tree canopy off road.
So this is the framework that we would use to implement cameras obviously we would discuss with you if they were going to expand beyond different uses but this is this is sort of where we are.
So I'd like to just park for a minute.
We have some cameras that are for the purpose of securing city facilities.
I think we could all agree that if we bought another facility we would put up more cameras and that facility that would be an acceptable expansion of cameras that you know wouldn't require additional oversight.
I think we could agree that if there was one issue in one particular spot typically staff has the bandwidth to respond to those and say we're going to respond to this known issue.
And generally with the support of council we want to do that so the next step is do we want to add cameras to high volume places and low visibility places with general support of council.
I think you excellent presentation.
Good thought good background let's go to the security facilities real quick because like the new public works building.
We'll have cameras in that new public work building for security and safety theft that kind of thing right.
Okay and that at cameras in response to known problems and complaints.
I know and some of you may not know that don't live in district three but we've had someone shooting off a gun in the middle of the night at Henderson Park.
And so we have a camera.
That place there.
To help didn't help this time but close enough right we saw a little bit and so that's an instance there and the minute we got emails from neighbors it was pull up your cameras.
First thing they said right can you check your cameras.
Now we're talking here.
Your focus more on the smart lights for ad cameras to high volume low visibility because you've done a lot of work on this and you don't want to bring this in June.
If we don't want you to right okay.
I just want to set that straight I think there's other times to talk about these other contracts when they come up but you wanted to just put that out there to lay.
Groundwork for what we've got.
Let everybody understand and know that.
Come back to those other initial types of camera usage but tonight you want.
Add cameras to high volume and low visibility public spaces.
Okay.
All right.
Discussion.
Questions any questions first.
Questions.
Well.
Hold on.
Questions.
Amy.
So clarifying that.
We'll discuss one slide at a time like the various aspects of installing cameras and that kind of things.
So this one is specifically for where and kind of why we would do it.
Yeah, it's really my hope here was to acquire a why is this an acceptable framework to even talk about at all level when you have staff.
We're living a day to day and we're you know saying,
you know, this, you know, is this a good reason to even talk about it or should we just, you know, this is not it is or it isn't a good reason for us to have a discussion and do the like work.
Go to contractors pull together prices or you just say, you know, skip this all together.
We don't we don't need this type of framework to to look at cameras.
That's kind of where I'm at.
And I'm like kind of the format of this all can we break this into a couple of different ways more specifically smart cameras and regular cameras.
I think those are very large distinctions in terms of like use case of you know, like benefits and negatives right.
So tonight it's nine o'clock.
We've had the groundwork here tonight when we leave you need the answer about adding cameras to high volume low visibility public spaces and we can come back.
If we need to on flock and all those others I think you and I discussed that last week too that we were going to have this is a background of all of our cameras.
But tonight again is being focused on whether you come back in June the next meeting with a contract for that particular smart.
Camera that's Georgia power and Comcast correct.
Yes and there are two more spectrums there's two more policy slides after this one and I would also like to say apologize I meant to put this PowerPoint up last week.
Both my links were to a memo and not one of them was to a PowerPoint so it was done in advance and I apologize for that.
Do you want to go to those other two slides yes and I can I can hit those real quick and then we can jump if you guys want to start on different one of these three we can start on a different one of these three.
So the next policy spectrum that we have in and around we could you know the city could reasonably have no cameras we have cameras.
We have the the first green box to your left basically says.
We've rolled out responsive cameras.
The second green box identifies we've had cameras for the purpose of review after the fact only so I can in the day in the parks we don't have any live view of those cameras.
That's a different use case than if we have live access to a camera that's.
We have DK PD access to.
Block data from LPR's which is live but again they don't have access to a live camera feed of something that we've installed.
So the question is whether we would want to take that next step.
Is the city interested in having live cameras out in the community which is.
How to go quickly different than some of the other things we have.
That we can view the feed.
And.
Is that something that we want to give access to DK PD in the real time crime center to view live as well.
So those are kind of two incremental policy steps one of them says this type of camera and this type of location.
And the second says we shared some data with DK PD if we add this type of camera and this type of location.
Would we also share this type of this new type of data with DK PD.
So those two things they don't have to move together they you could accept one and reject the other.
But I think that they make sense on a spectrum together which is why presented this way.
So again that's going back to the smart lighting decision.
Do we want it.
That vendor whatever this is another policy.
Decision under that.
Yeah, and if you guys were to say.
No product of cameras we're only going to put them out there when we respond to things.
That would be a great direction to staff we wouldn't ask questions we'd wait for things to come to us.
And then we would just respond to them and that's a policy level decision that.
Makes it easier for us to know when to ask questions and when to just.
I could put our heads down and focus on other priorities.
The last spectrum here is an AI spectrum.
I have generally sensed not very much interested in using AI.
I think a lot of people think of having AI watching over them as something makes them rather uncomfortable.
That's my interpretation of it.
And so I've put up here a spectrum of use cases that was brought to us by the contractor.
And I've identified I think the only two that I've received responses.
Generally that makes sense for our community based on what I know, although clearly I'm looking for your feedback on those things.
That's not my interpretation that matters most.
And so on the spectrum of whether or not we would use AI analysis in these cameras.
Are there certain use cases that we would or wouldn't use.
And I know that there's an element of saying, well, if you turn AI on it's on.
And the one thing I would say in response to that is that we pay for a certain amount of processing power.
And so if it runs one or two.
The process is at any given time. Then we would pay more money to run six processes and use more back-to-end power to analyze and to store that information and that sort of thing.
But yeah, it's all in the same boat and yeah, which was to your perspective.
Are you thinking like, we use place or AI right now? Is it something similar?
I wouldn't put it in the same camp.
It's tracking you on your phone.
Yeah.
Okay.
It is.
It's tracking.
So go back to the first slide because that's the first thing we're going to deal with first because there's
no need to talk about the others if we don't want to do smart lighting.
Okay.
Yes.
Okay.
Big.
I, in order to answer this question, I feel like I need just a little bit more information around this conversation
around safety and how we define safety.
So, and also, I was very excited about the smart lights from the Wi-Fi capability and bringing public like Wi-Fi access to our community.
In our public spaces and so, as we're having this conversation, like there are values that fall under this that are distinct from how we're thinking about the camera or not.
So I understand what the mirror is saying, but also there are computing like interests in this.
And if I could confirm you, we could absolutely have Wi-Fi.
No cameras.
We could order a product that only has Wi-Fi routers and has no cameras in them.
That's a total possibility.
Because I was like, yay lighting, yay more lighting generally, yay more access to Wi-Fi generally.
My other question is about, as it relates to the public spaces and potentially in the future things like trails within the parks, not our trail network.
Have we looked at things like safety call boxes?
That's a good question.
I have not personally looked at them at different times.
I know that any time we've talked about it with engineering,
yet since we haven't reached the policy point of saying, we are doing it in this particular way.
It's really just been conversations, but I think, yes, a number of times we've talked about this, we said,
it's one thing to have internet access.
It's another thing to have a blue phone, like you have on a downtown university campus.
And that would be something we would definitely look closely at, certainly, again, on to the tree canopy.
That's really helpful.
Just from again, as I'm trying to think through what the purpose and use of these cameras are around safety.
So kind of thinking about prevention as well as response.
So that's helpful.
So thank you for that.
Good question. I know downtown campuses have gotten rid of their call boxes because they have access to the, you know, their phones all over,
but when you're in areas, better and more remote along a creek or wherever else.
Yeah, you need to probably, we need to look at those and see what some other folks have done on their trails.
My biggest concern is trails and being hidden in what just happened on the belt line.
So it doesn't prevent it, but you can sure track some folks and get them before they do it to somebody else.
So I agree.
Anybody else?
Okay, so we know we said Wi-Fi and lighting to good uses.
I don't know if we want to spend all that money for just Wi-Fi and lighting, but it's what's what was important.
So those two important things right there.
Yeah, basically, control and supportive of smart lights as Wi-Fi access.
I am not supportive of camera systems right now that are maintained by anybody other than like an actual security company.
I think there is an expectation from the public that we would have cameras on city owned property.
But I don't think there's an expectation and there is a lot of justified fear about video footage being accessible to anybody other than city employees.
So maybe the entire smart light concept is not right for us right now.
I'm supportive of the Wi-Fi part of it, but not of the camera data access where video footage of families and anybody visiting the city could potentially be shared outside of the city.
I think that was much better said than I ever could.
Is it possible to do any like dumb cameras system adjacent to this?
I'm running through two or three different filters to get there.
One is the dumb camera in terms of like internal loop.
Yeah, CCTV kind of thing.
I mean, I know that there is an analog difference and I'm not the IT guy, so I will say to the degree that was possible for the pilot.
Literally the wire that carried the data went into the annex and so like you know it's the way that the fiber internet works as opposed to you know any other type of wire as one might conceive of it.
Fiber is one point to one point and so there's none of this like my data got mixed like it would on an electrical wire where a big lot wires since a connection to a thousand places.
Your fiber is one to one and no one touches it and so the only way, but I hesitate to give a strong information that says it, you know, if we went with this smart light head and there's Wi-Fi and there's you know a closed loop camera that just goes to the city server doesn't go anywhere else.
I just, I wouldn't feel comfortable guaranteeing that a person couldn't ever hack the Wi-Fi and then watch the closed loop or someone couldn't kind of pull on the side of the wall and go hack the little server that we had that holds it all.
I mean to the degree possible we can definitely make it close loop instead of connected to something else.
And if we'd like to dial it way back and look at an actual CCT sorry I just hit that and actually like older type of technology that's more analog at something we could certainly consider.
Yeah you're never going to get rid of like all the threats and bone abilities right but my question is this more of can we go with a older system that the software is not sending to someone else and it's just only going to us.
We could look at something like that I don't think that would match with the product that we're looking at at all that's just got too many features and stuff that I'm not sure we could get it to function quite that way but.
That could be a kind of approach that we could look at.
Okay.
Then I'm right with Councilmember Chocchi and kind of.
From against this whole smart life that we can't close it out from third parties there's just no guarantees that we can control that data there's no auditability you know and there's no.
You're in the future that you know a simple term of service change doesn't open us up to that kind of vulnerability and liability.
So you couldn't do let's just say at the park right not mainstream we own the Tucker town green it's our facility there is a facility there.
If we chose to use the smart lights you couldn't close loop it like you did.
On the walkway yeah so we we would we could we certainly could and the way that we have the infrastructure right now designed to set up it would basically close loop down behind the stage.
And yeah the really the only vulnerability would be if you had someone out there who was capable enough to.
Hack into the smart lights and just get in the middle of however that work said not still enough to speak about it so.
Lighting we already have lighting out there we have lighting.
We don't have Wi-Fi for folks okay so smart lights offer Wi-Fi but.
Okay get rid of that I'm just looking at now do we even spend the money right.
On smart lights just for Wi-Fi.
Because if we're not going to use all of its capability or the majority of its capability.
Honestly why bother.
You know I mean I would love to have some cameras there we've got damage to the park it's somebody damage some of the stuff on the stage so we see that but it would be cameras like we have.
And our other parks and I know that.
Lieutenant O bester.
Said that there is a officer who is an environmental design officer who does look at security and parks for the cab in general.
Who could come in and help us with that not saying we'd hook up to their cameras but tell us.
Good placement for our own cameras which would be great.
Yeah when I'm hearing as.
Maybe we just do that I mean we've got lighting now.
We do that we look at the design safety of it where do we put some cameras that are like we're currently using that's only.
Specific access and not tied into anybody else.
Okay see heads there.
Good.
So I have a couple of things about that one is.
I was under the understanding that part of our town green design on the town green side around lighting was with the assumption that we would have some other additional lighting in the park so I think there's some.
Like strong lighting I think.
But I didn't think that we were sort of stopping there because I thought we were having these these other lighting.
I like the idea of having you know some advice around where to place.
Not just potentially cameras but lights and call boxes if we don't whatever.
But so one is that I think it would be helpful in terms of the.
Monetary conversation and investment conversation to be able to have a comparison though because.
Something for years like we originally were going to do with our but we never did was talk about broadband access and Wi-Fi so like.
Yes, maybe it's not the smart lights, but also I don't know what to compare that to in terms of a city providing like Wi-Fi and public spot.
So I just would say that it would be helpful comparison cost if we're having the is it worth it conversation.
And then.
You know I think this is where.
It's hard to have this conversation without having the other because some of some of the feedback that I know I have heard from multiple people in the community is.
It's a question of who's like actually potentially accessing it but it's also about what's the accountability when it is misused or accessed in accurately and because we as the city don't have ownership over that data.
I mean we get asked the question and we don't have very good answers about what leverage do we have to hold somebody potentially misusing our you know information that we is access because we put.
The camera there there doesn't you know that that's a big question that's out there.
I think that parallels with.
So we don't do something on top green.
So many people continue to ask about the D.
You know the to cap PD camera and light at the at Main Street in the railroad tracks.
So they also asked about to cap PD at.
It wasn't a no king's protest but the one before that.
Having those deployed in the city of Tucker so.
But whatever we decide to do with our cameras we still also have a need to identify and be clear on what the relationship is between like our.
Our cameras and the cabinet's cameras and how those are being used because it really sucks to not be able to have an answer to that question which we do get because it is a hot topic over and over again and not be able to.
I want to be a.
Supportor and booster.
For our to cap PD I think they do a great job and I think we have great resources here and so not being able to answer that question around safety is really difficult.
So I just I'm saying like yes on the one hand we're saying we don't have a camera but the cap PD does have a camera and they are you know I don't know how it's used and we get that question.
So that's good not for tonight but that is good and I know that you guys did a one page or on all of that and you got information.
From D. K. PD and their usage and that's out there too I believe on their website so.
Yes very good and and I appreciate that and we do need to look at a policy for ourselves internally.
If Micah grows rogue one day and.
You know once you use the camera that what does that look like right what does that look like so I think I've written both of those down for us to come back to.
These smart lights we're going to be in the current lights they were not additional lighting right we were going to change the light hits they were going to be entirely.
Yeah so the colonial style we have we're going to go away for something that what you know slightly more modern kind of a different cone shape.
Okay so not additional lights just the lighting we have but maybe we do look at what do we need for some additional lights.
So.
Right now we're saying.
Anybody else anybody else got a little bit I'm not in I'm not a hundred percent sure where I am per say obviously I do feel like.
We want to make sure as it talked about inside that one of the sides that that you know the third party is someone we feel like we can trust.
I am interested in the technique.
So that's just what I'm thinking about that is something that I feel like is important in necessary, but I'm
struggling with.
I'd have them everywhere and I'd have them live everywhere. It doesn't bother me, but I'm not a dictator.
So this is a discussion. I don't care if they're here here, because everybody can track you no matter what you do.
I'd love them live, so we could catch somebody in the act, right?
Or whatever, and it's not after the fact, but if that's not the will, I mean, I don't know why we would do it if they're not going to be alive.
I just feel like that's a lot of money.
Yeah.
And effort for the things that we're saying we care about is not going to be solved by these anymore.
And maybe that discussion should have been had before you did all that work, but I think you did a good job now of laying that out.
Yeah.
Could I just say, I felt like I heard maybe there's some openness to cameras if they're closed, if it's actually like dialed down.
It's actually so like the current camera system we have in the parks where, in order for staff to access that, we have to send an email to a third party that's been selected by Georgia Power
and if Georgia Power can keep someone accountable, I don't know who can, but big boys in the room.
But so we've got a structure that works there that I think we've seen comfortable with.
So if there's willingness to say, hey, maybe we could add some security cameras and we don't mind that it sits on the side of the pole and looks like a security camera looks like it's staring at you.
But you know, what's used the structure that we have and try that, all the poles in our park are already Georgia Power poles.
We could attach it to that using that type of relationship.
What's funny say that because I'd actually made a note about, I want to understand, we don't have to do it here, but I want to understand a little bit more about who Georgia Power's park's camera vendor is.
There's been some companies that have been used by seemingly trustworthy entities and they have not been good actors.
So I'm not saying that I would want to use the same setup for downtown as we do in the other parks.
I want to understand a little bit more about what we currently have in the parks and that company and kind of look into them before I would agree to it.
Yeah, and it might just be a good time to review that in general for our parks as we're opening up Henderson and planning for safety with Henderson master plan and for Johnson said as well might be a good time.
To look at that, are we, do we have the best cameras in there? Do we have the best service, right?
Yeah, that's a good point. Okay, one last one.
Yeah, I'm not opposed to live cameras is the fact that someone else is processing, right?
I think, you know, with all the reports and open records request, we see that these LPRs are not just reading license plate, right?
They take a whole video, they process it, they read the license plate, but everything else is also being captured and everything else is also being classified, right?
The person, what they're wearing, what their ethnicity guesses, all that is being stored, that's kind of the main problem.
So there is a need for us to have live cameras and cameras in general, it's just we need more control and auditability.
Again, I think you mentioned that there are logs with the LPRs, however, that has changed.
It no longer provides who requested it, no longer provides a lot of detailed details.
It just says someone requested something that passed your camera, right?
So we have no control, we have no sale of it.
I do think, you know, if we do scale up our cameras, we would need additional personnel to process it and have a gatekeep and someone to review the logs for reviews.
Is it just, and I'm just going to ask this, because I don't know, is it just flock, that's the problem.
It's a majority of.
Okay.
All right. All right. Are you good?
Could I click through just one more slide here? I think the AI slide I'm ready to go to.
I'm ready to go to you.
Yes.
I have more presentations.
So an executive session.
I'm just looking at proactive camera rollout.
I'm getting a yellow slash green and I'm just looking at the policy values here.
All right.
I think I'm good.
I just need to look at that last box and make sure I understand.
Yeah, I think it's, but I think it's maybe looking at who are we using, who it is.
And are the placements where they are now working, right?
Because we've got them somewhere and if you shine headlights at it, it doesn't work.
Yeah.
If I may ask one more question.
So are we still interested in Wi-Fi at the park?
Or is that something, I mean, right now we wouldn't have to roll Wi-Fi at a main street.
I'm not sure that has relevant anymore since we do more of our events at the park and less on main street.
But is that a scope you'd still like to see?
I mean, I don't, I don't know if it's for like June.
But I also think it's maybe a, I think there's maybe a larger conversation about what is,
Are we a city that does public Wi-Fi?
Because there's a lot of different ways that look.
So, I mean, it did, yeah.
But I mean, I'd like to have it at the park, but I'd like to have it at our parks where we have no,
It's where we have no, it won't access in all places like Henderson.
I know that's come up in the master planning process.
So, I'm just, I think it's a bigger discussion, I guess.
We know you're getting ready to go on paternity leave.
That's true.
It is true.
So, maybe something you want to think about.
Okay.
And maybe there's what are other options for us in those public spaces for Wi-Fi?
Okay.
And just let us know what those look like.
All right.
Thank you guys.
I appreciate all your work on this.
You really did a good job.
Good discussion.
Good job.
Excellent.
Excellent job, Micah.
All right.
Thank you.
Okay.
We're going to move on to staff reports.
And first, I was very rude at the beginning of the meeting.
And I did not officially introduce Craig Zalkesky, who's here for his first meeting
with us our new parks director.
Yeah.
Thank you for being here.
Now, get to work on those cameras.
I'm just kidding.
You already experienced some of that.
Okay.
Child, I fire.
All right.
So, that'd be second.
I did it on was a presentation.
I did that.
Page.
One.
Two.
All right.
Good evening.
Sorry.
We were just organizing our presentations for the next two.
Tonight, the fee schedule update is actually just hopefully a very quick conversation
for some guidance for the second read.
Because we had feedback during the first read, but we didn't get specific direction on what changes we might actually need.
So, focusing on two items in the fee schedule for the upcoming approval in June.
For the budget and the fee schedule that coincides with that.
So, the first one was the Tuckerton Green hourly rate versus the six hours, 12 hours, and then the maintenance fee as well.
Let me just scroll toward those.
So, they're both right here.
Inside of this Tuckerton Green kind of encompass under.
Under this section.
We did hear that we thought that the rate was not high enough for the hourly rate and maybe.
Using a only a half day full day six hour 12 hour scheduling instead of hourly rates.
So, we just wanted to come back have that conversation.
On that.
And then the second was the maintenance tech.
Which would be a change.
I think I have another presentation of what Sarah has suggested.
Looking at other what she did before we even came to this and then with your SS input.
So, just moving that out from under the Tuckerton Green and just a generic line in the fee schedule.
So that it could be used at other park rentals as well where it's needed.
So, we can flip over to the other one.
I'm going to show the, I'm going to, you guys have copies of this as well.
This is what Sarah had sent.
You all received an email this morning or might have been the afternoon I can't remember.
When this all happened.
But you have a document on your email and on your, on your counter up there.
With what was sent out this morning to council with the recommendation, the venues that we researched.
Our social parks and parks and parks, Sarah actually researched it.
And what her recommendation would be.
With it being our premier park downtown, it's brand new.
The yellow highlighted portion is kind of what her rates were.
I just wanted to note that the 30, the maintenance tech, the $35 an hour.
Would be a change from the $20 is her suggestion.
Which is based on what an hourly rate would be for somebody.
Would be for somebody in that position trying to cover what that cost would be.
For that.
So, obviously, we heard that the $100 an hour was not enough.
I mean, we didn't want it to be the one hour or two hour.
So, doing a half day full day.
So, the new suggestion would be 300 an hour.
It should be 1800 for a half day, 3600 for a full day for anybody to rent it.
Obviously, we have a lot of partners within city of Tucker and the 501 C3s.
We have a little different rate.
So, like the art Tucker's taste of Tucker, those would be a different, it would be a discounted rate.
Which was at 150 an hour.
So, there's a little bit.
That's kind of what we've suggested.
Obviously, this is an open conversation.
If you guys think those are too much if we want to be lower.
What we want, the goal is that we can come back during the second read with those changes.
In the fee schedule for approval with the budget.
So, and obviously, Sarah said she wanted to make sure we focus on the prioritization.
It would obviously be our events first.
Two would be those non-profit events that we just spoke about in then any other rental.
But she would want all rentals to allow Tucker time-gradimate,
remain open to the public throughout the duration of the event.
Must outline how the proposed event promotes community engagement and outreach.
And then they will incur that maintenance fee that we just talked about at $35 an hour.
And then they had to follow any permitting that is set forth by the city of Tucker.
I like that note, ticketed events too.
Yes, did I miss that one?
That was smart.
So, let's start with maintenance fee because that's not just Tucker town green.
That's everywhere.
Yes, that was a comment.
I don't remember which one of you I think multiple of you actually said it.
But what about other park rentals?
We need that maintenance fee as well.
So, it was suggested to pull it out so it could be used at the other rentable locations as well.
Okay, so let's talk about that first.
Okay, at other.
I'm going to break it down.
Okay, at other rental spots too.
Okay.
I'm just, I'm going to ask that first.
I'm going to kind of break this one down just a little bit.
So, okay, at other rentals.
Okay.
And then the cost, you showed us in the email how we broke down that cost.
Okay.
Yeah, that's the one I so appreciate breaking it out.
But also personally appreciated.
And maybe it was too low being able to rent the Henderson Park per billion for $25 or
some, I guess, an hour, which would, you know, so I've had kids birthday parties out there.
$75 for three hours.
And now I'm adding like, the maintenance is more than the hourly rental fee.
So, I do think we should be charging rental fee, but the scale maybe doesn't.
And this, the same way that we wouldn't charge the same rate for all the parks.
Maybe we shouldn't charge the same maintenance rate.
Because I don't want to price people out of being able to have a nice, like, affordable community
birthday party in our parks.
Because they have to pay like more for maintenance than they did for the actual rental.
So it's a former Henderson pavilion or the Peter's Park pavilion is much different maintenance than the Tucker towngrain, right?
Yeah.
And I think they're probably, you have to be a policy that follows us.
That says when it would be used at which parks and how much, like, what pavilions need it and which ones do not need it.
Sarah and I had that conversation after this was all sent out of, is it apples and apples?
Because you look at Tucker towngrain and how elaborate it is and then you're talking about a pavilion.
Should that cost be the same?
But we're also trying to make a uniform because it's still going to be that same person going out there doing that maintenance.
So it's kind of, we could adjust the rate or we could just leave it on Tucker towngrain and we can always come back.
If we see a need for it and other parks as well, that's up to you all.
Do we see a need at the other parks for the maintenance person?
I would say, honestly, that person has to make sure before those people show up for their event that it's looking good.
And then that it's cleaned up afterwards.
It has to be a pre-posed.
So let's say, do we think I'm going to break it down further?
Thirty-five.
$5 an hour is good for the Tucker town green for maintenance. Just Tucker town green. Okay, so everybody's pretty good with that. All right. Now, at our others, what is a reasonable maintenance fee at our other parks?
Yeah. I mean, I don't know. I don't know. You did some research too. Yeah. I, I was thinking that the maintenance would be only at the Tucker town green. However, if we're doing a $25 shelter rental at go for a hinder center, one of the others, you know, maybe putting in a $10 fee, something minimal, but still helping support our maintenance costs.
And also giving the impression that hey, you've got to leave what you found be somewhat responsible for our civility.
So to speak. Yes, this one might have come. Yeah. Okay.
I mean, I like the idea of, and also, maybe it's not, again, for the non substantive parks. Maybe it's not an hourly fee. It's a, you know, it's just a fee add on, right? Like there's a maintenance fee, just like you have to put your deposit down for, again, just going off of my groceries experience. You put down 125, but you get the 100 back at the end, which is, you know, had been purportedly in case you didn't clean up like you are.
I will also say this is more like counsel, but and credit. Welcome in.
But I also think that there's some conversations about what the status of the maintenance is when you are renting, because there have been plenty of times where the trash cans weren't emptied ahead of an event or something.
And it's not fair to charge like the community for something that we are already charging them for through, you know, taxes by that paying through that contract.
I think at least a nominal, a nominal maintenance fee goes, maybe towards that, but then it doesn't, again, prevent utilization of those parks.
It holds us accountable to.
Okay. So 35 for Tucker Town Green, nominal fee at the others. Go ahead.
So yeah, I was like, and I don't know that I have too much different from counsel, more shredder or weaver. However, I will say that I too thought we were really talking about the Tucker Town Green and I see our Tucker Town Green is our premier park.
It is our premier park where our higher end events are going to want to go.
I look at Henderson, Peter's Park, Rosenfeld, the pervillions to be family oriented.
And like we talked about birthday parties, you know, family reunions and things like that.
So they're going to, in my opinion, they're going to be a little bit more on a budget, and it's going to be scaled down.
And so I think that all the conversations about, you know, making sure that there is a maintenance fee in order to assist us with costs and all that.
But I would prefer us to be a little more thoughtful about what those other uses are that family oriented vibe and maybe scale it.
And I think that was probably said earlier, too, but that's really where I am. It's just, you know, for working families and stuff like that having their two-year-old birthday party and stuff like that.
I think we want to be, you know, thoughtful about those kind of gatherings.
Okay, you all got that.
All right.
Deposit 500.
They get that back.
They would.
Okay.
And then let's go to $300 an hour at six or 12 hours. That's for.
Talker town green.
It makes it a substantial event.
What do you guys think about that?
Oh, there.
I think it's in line. In fact, it's still a little lower than some others around us, but I think it's in line.
Test it out.
Okay.
And then City of Tucker 501, C3s.
Giving them a little bit of a break.
Okay.
Can I ask a, maybe a dumb question on my part, but the deposit for 500 again is that for the town green or is that for all of the.
That's just a town green, right?
Just okay.
It doesn't make sure.
Just town green.
All right.
I raise give it up.
All right.
So you guys will come back with just a little nom, not a different maintenance for the other.
Yeah.
We'll work through it this week.
And unless you guys have a price that you want us to use, we can come back with a suggestion.
And it's just a simple edit that one fee when it comes time to approve the budget.
I just I have a question about the last part around following any permitting requirements that for the city of Tucker.
Given that on the example venues.
The Valdosta one lists the police piece.
So.
So my question is about security requirements.
And especially for Tucker town green.
Is that what does that follow in our other permitting requirements?
We were looking more like alcohol permitting if alcohol is going to be served.
They have to make sure they have the right permits to be able to do that at the town green.
I don't know about security.
If we would require it.
I'm not.
I don't even.
No.
Decision that would be.
Yeah.
We did discuss having some type of police presence at events at the Tucker town green.
Just to ensure safe and orderly.
Not only for the patrons, but also for the property itself.
Where is that fit?
Yeah.
Because that's for our events.
But what about it?
Another third party doing an event.
Taste of Tucker.
We also talked about it for our events and third party.
But I'm not sure if it made it into the fee schedule.
But it wasn't thing we discussed is needing to be.
So we're in.
They do mainstream events right now.
They get a permit from to cab PD.
And they work out the deal to pay them for officers.
So the car show does it.
You know, taste of Tucker.
Everybody else.
They do that currently now.
It's separate from the fee schedule.
Is that they would be required to pay to cab PD for off duty officers as part of the rental
agreement.
So yes.
So that's what I was asking.
Because I just want to make sure it is in those permitting requirements that we are
saying that to and matching whatever there's it's.
Yeah.
I believe parks is working on a.
Information packet for that permitting process.
And it'll be included in there.
But not part of the fee schedule.
But part of.
Okay.
Excellent.
All right.
Are you good with fees.
We gave you guidance.
Yes.
Okay.
One more.
All right.
Can I ask if these federal question, but not about this or.
Do I have to save it for it?
Okay.
I.
I think we had talked about this at the last meeting.
There was a lot going on.
But I wanted to see if I could get clarification on.
Do we have to change the code around trees before we can change the fee schedule around.
Cutting down trees because I was noting that it ranges from like 250 to 450 and.
I was surprised to see a bunch of trees get cut down recently that I wasn't expecting to see get cut down.
And so can we.
Are we able to amend the fee schedule and increase that if we wanted to without changing the code.
Because I know we also said we had to talk about code when it related to like percentages and things like that.
I'd have to do some research on the language in the fee schedule versus the language in the tree ordinance.
In the fee schedule may be related to violations.
Or tree bank donations.
Which would be different than the ordinance.
Yeah, it's I mean, the fee schedule is the violation of you cut down a tree of the size you pay.
So I think like six inches in above or something is like $450.
Could you pay to or what is in the fee schedule?
Yeah.
It's somewhere up there.
Thanks for all that.
I think it's at the bottom.
I'm going to come to the last.
Okay.
So I guess I assumed that that was if you would rather contribute to the tree bank rather than.
Keeping the tree.
So we always encourage people to keep as many trees as they can or to replant to the required density.
We require a certain number of tree density units per acre depending on if it's residential or commercial.
If they cannot fit all the trees on a site.
And we obviously want to make sure they're planting them appropriately, not just shoving them in there and then not surviving because of overcrowding.
You can contribute to the tree bank to hit that max density that's required.
And so that is the price per each tree caliber that calculates how much is contributed to the tree bank.
That then the city can use to plant trees on city property or city right away.
So this has nothing to do with tearing down a tree illegally, taking down a specimen tree.
This is just the contribution to pay into the tree bank.
But but they're doing that instead of having because that allows them to cut down a tree or not replant a tree.
But that is a code change on a fee schedule change.
So that's what I'm asking. So we cannot change this without changing the code.
Correct.
Okay. So have to come first and then we would want to look at adding if this is the attorney's support that, you know, finds or I just are amounts.
We're voting on the fee schedule and we're making changes to it.
But what we're saying is we're voting on something, there's something in this fee schedule that we're not actually in control of voting on the same way that we are.
Some of the other fees that we're talking about.
Yeah, I believe this was in here last year.
Yeah, it's not new.
But I would like to tackle it.
So I was trying to understand if there are any options for us when we are passing the fee schedule or it sounds like there aren't.
Get it ready for next year.
Or get the code ready because the code.
Yes, get the code ready for next year. We'll get it done.
Thank you.
All right.
Next.
Presentations.
All right, so now we.
Now, if the code is updated in the middle of the year, we can update the schedule.
The same the same meeting if we need to.
That would be a simple change.
So next item was our monthly financials for April.
Honestly, we're we're on the same path.
We've been on for the last couple of months.
A lot of the information is the same just updated numbers.
The executive summary pretty much all the same information you've seen the last couple of months.
I did want to give an update on at least the general fund.
As of the end of April, we are 83% of the way through the fiscal year.
Revenues are 83% too.
However, typically at the end of April, we're about 91% because probably taxes are all collected.
We have less collectible revenues at the last couple of months of the year.
And on the flip side of that too.
The general fund expenditures are at 76% of the budget number.
So I have been kind of picking with all of our departments and they can all complain about me all they want.
We're not spending money.
If we don't spend money right now, just because the revenues were not trending great.
We're still not back on the same track as we've been in the past.
So we are still being responsible with spending the money is.
Compared to what we're actually collecting.
The capital is same story.
Splost.
We are currently 76.
No, that's that's the general fund to have a number here.
We're about 5% sure of revenues on splost today.
So as of April and April, we collect marches or 75% way through of collecting fiscal years revenue.
And we're between 71 and 72% of what the revenues are budgeted.
So we're kind of there kind of short.
But we're still trending a little bit better than we are on the general fund side.
And then I will update.
I had no in our memo as well.
The hotel hotel revenues about 13% below where we've been.
What we have budgeted for for this year as well.
That's not on here but that was one that was a little bit significantly lower.
Which we've been hearing about even like the soccer events or not as popular as we thought they would be would.
Which would drive some hotel, booking in is not happening, so we just want to make sure we're prepared for not receiving some of that income.
All of this is on the city's website, on the finance page. You can all see it at any time you want and soak in the public.
We have any questions about the finances.
Are we making progress on the fees or the OTCs?
Yes, we're actually pretty high up there. We're in the high 90s at this point.
Okay. Sorry, I shouldn't say high 90s probably mid 90s I think.
It was 94 to 96 percent of what we were budgeted.
So yes, we've made great progress.
Excellent. Thank you on that.
Thank you. I'm curious, this is just kind of a point of clarification.
I know that I'm the one who continues to say last year's CIP, even though we didn't approve it.
But the expenditures is under 300 capital.
So everything for this year that was budgeted and is being spent is for this under 300, correct?
For capital, depending on the project.
So a lot of our projects are in 321, which is lost.
Okay. Right. Well, it's or 321.
So when you look at the numbers, we're showing some, you know, some things not being encumbered.
So I'm tracking this from the standpoint of.
And now I'm tired. So it's about two to three million.
I'm not going to add that quick.
Difference and I'm just curious before we approve the budget.
For next year, if we could just maybe.
Kind of see where we're at.
With that in case there's any wiggle room that.
Of projects that didn't.
That weren't spent as high as budgeted.
Or came in over.
Have you sailed that as we continue to work on the CIP?
You've account it for that money, though, in the budget.
Yeah. I mean, in the budget.
Because it all rolls forward.
Okay. And now you're speaking of like projects that have finished.
And if they've come under budget, we put them back into fund balance so that we can.
We had those available for this upcoming.
This budget that we've been, we've kind of accounted for some of those.
Okay.
Some of them are still in progress and maybe at the tail end.
So we don't have the final number of some of those projects.
But it just kind of depends on which.
You give a specific project.
We can look into it and back to you.
Okay. I'll ask some questions.
And after in the coming weeks.
Yeah, you've got to, they've got to account for all of that money.
No matter where it is.
Yeah.
I sort of have a follow up, though.
So because.
Yes, but if we're our revenues aren't coming in, but we are giving it up.
We are spending things as if the revenues are going to come in and they don't come in.
We have to pay those bills.
So we have to pull from future.
Future revenue that we may may may or may not have depending on how the trends are going.
So like, I think it's a very relevant question.
They can show to us asking if we're saying.
Our expenditures and our spending is ahead of where our revenues are.
And it's specifically when it asks about splost as it related that.
So when we talk about.
5% short of where we are.
That would be over the entire six year splost account or just this year's budget for what we thought.
That would be this fiscal year.
Okay.
So.
Also, math not math thing.
How many years do we have left on this last?
This was approved in 23 started in April of 24.
I believe.
So we're in year two.
So we have it was a six year.
So we have four years left.
Okay.
So don't have to fully answer this all tonight.
Although I believe you have it in your head.
But I guess that's part of what I'm getting on is like funds for capital that are in splost.
If we are beginning to see a trend that splost revenues are going to be down.
And we're trying to think through what the next four to five years are going to be.
I just want to understand like when our approach is in terms of because I know I brought this up the last.
Meaning is that we have a lot of capital expenditures in next year's fiscal year.
Like more than any of the years following and I'm concerned about us.
I'm concerned about the trends we're seeing.
Taxes being down and expenditure being up because people are still losing their jobs.
Cost of living is still going up gas prices are still going up.
So I just can you kind of just talk about the spost piece of it in terms of what we're doing this year versus future years.
From a revenue site.
Yeah.
And we have been conservative on our our revenue especially in the out years.
I don't account for a lot of growth out in the out years.
I think we had a 1% growth which.
And when we go into 28 budget.
Years pass it was like a three to four because that was the trend in years past.
So we bumped it down to 1% we continue to see it.
Maybe not be as even as the last few years.
So.
Every year we're looking at all of the out years again.
So yes we are going to edit what our revenues are out in the out years once we've finished this year.
And we will make those edits so.
What we not have as much money funds for projects in in splost in in those like out years.
Possibly depending I do know that last year we came in over budget of what we had budgeted so.
We didn't allocate those funds to a project because we didn't know about it until the end of the year.
So they went into fund balance so as this moment we are okay on those those projects.
For 27.
As long as we keep staying at the 5% sure if we jumped down more which they've been pretty consistent last few years.
We should be okay.
But we're always analyzing if you ever get to a point where we say, oh we don't have funds.
We will be coming back with a budget amendment to less than a budget.
That's where we kind of wanted to have those priority.
Projects so we know like which ones maybe we want to less in this year push off in the area.
And we'll affect the whole CIP that we approve each year as well.
Okay I appreciate that.
I have thoughts about that for the next next next meeting.
And then you also mentioned property taxes being down or that that's where our revenue is.
So I didn't think they have has it come in yet have the the roles come in yet.
When you were checking about the revenue is being down.
You didn't say property taxes.
I didn't say property taxes.
So we don't want to know about that yet.
We're still training pretty good in that.
Okay.
It could change where you know we're still we still have some room but there's always collections throughout through the end of the year.
Before it picks back up again when the tax goes go out.
So there's it's not 100% just yet but we still have another.
What six weeks because they haven't paid us this for this week.
So we click payment that comes out.
So.
All right.
Thank you.
Thanks for your work.
I appreciate you.
All right, John.
Yep, man.
I'm going to just.
Quickly.
Some.
I mean, I didn't.
I don't think that was budget coming up.
Next meeting.
For adoption.
And I'm going to have a number.
All right.
Special ladies permits on the horizon.
We've also got.
We've got.
Budget.
Well.
I'm literally.
If you're looking at.
Number.
So one minutes to a fourth.
Speak light initiative.
We speak like this.
The relationship will be missed us saying.
Number.
Meant next contacts.
School.
Water.
I'm.
and then as we come around on the street skip standards as well as what comes out of
publicly as you can see and move forward with that as a part of Master Plan and in
that relationship.
All right, questions for John.
All right.
Mary and Council comments before we go into executive session.
Well, real quick, two things.
I brought some flowers from the community garden.
They are dailyers that are blooming and there are so many, so I decided I should share.
They're beautiful.
I like there are a few here, whoever would like to take them home and I will be
beginning to bring more and more.
So I have for them.
And then the second thing is I went out and purchased this wonderful book about the
Beltline by Mark Pendergrass.
It's a little dated, but I wanted to share it with Council and let us kind of
flip through it.
I don't want to expect everybody to read it word for word, but there are some
good stories in here about building Beltline and the trail system.
And it is now also for the city.
So I wanted to stay in this city manager's office, but I thought we'd kind of pass
around this year and figure out what we need to collaborate on or some really good
stories.
And our very own and remorse for her is mentioned in one of the chapters.
Thank you.
I started my references earlier, but several of us got to,
we're invited.
We've actually been getting to do a lot with our Tucker Middle School students over
the past couple of weeks because they're just brilliant.
But anyway, we got to see a presentation.
Two presentations on Friday.
And the depth of knowledge of these 13 and 14 year olds is just really impressive.
And it gives me a lot of hope for the future.
And I'm very appreciative of so many of their teachers are also Tucker residents.
And they are really investing in both the students themselves, but also in the city.
And encouraging that sort of like active civic participation.
And using science for good.
And I know that sometimes there's a tendency to be like,
oh, it's just a kids project and that's nice.
And, you know, it's a box.
But I think they give us some really actionable ideas.
And on Friday.
And so I'm just really one grateful for everybody who was able to come.
And I tell you, again, obviously I haven't eighth grader who is graduating tomorrow from eighth grade.
But the amount of time and effort they put into.
Not just the project itself was something separate that they were doing on their own.
But when they found out they had the opportunity to present to us.
They just went really deep on like building their presentations and doing research.
And, you know, I just.
And I'm just very hopeful for the future.
After seeing that, but I also hope that we all will continue to think about ways that the city can not just come.
You know, kind of the table at the end of the project.
But think about what are some of the ways that we can see and keep partnering with them throughout, you know.
Throughout the year.
I know it's late.
But just super briefly.
Oh, echo what Councilwoman.
We've already said about this hooker middle school STEM program.
It was absolutely remarkable.
Great kids.
Great content.
I really couldn't have imagined anything better out of them.
And then also I missed the last meeting.
I wanted to congratulate the Tucker Art Alliance for achieving nonprofit status.
So that's going to give them a lot of flexibility on what they can do in terms of money and.
Outreach.
And so we definitely have a I think we're on the cusp of a great arts kind of Renaissance and Tucker.
So very much looking forward to that.
Can I get a motion for executive session motion to adjourn for executive session for the purposes of personnel real estate and litigation.
Second.
All right. All right. All right.
All right.
I moved to.
Bring us out of executive session.
All second.
All those in favor.
All right.
Can I get a motion to adjourn.
Motion to adjourn.
All right.
Everybody seconds.
All those in favor.
All right.
Thank you.
Have a good night.
Thank you.