MINUTES
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Macon-Bibb County Sales Tax Road Program
September 12, 2002                   10:00 A.M.  

A meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee of the Macon-Bibb County Sales Tax Road Program was held in the Bibb County Engineering Conference Room.  The following people were in attendance:

MEMBERS	
Bob Fountain, Chairman
Bill Causey
Thomas Howell
Vernon Ryle
Frank Sanders
Bill Vaughn
Bill Wikle

OTHERS
Van Etheridge 
Hale Almand
Isabel Davis
Tonya Davis 
Steve Duval
Dave Foulson
Lisa Golphin
Julie Groce
Lindsay Holliday
Joe Johnson
Lee Martin
Cam Oetter
Joe Patterson
Mrs. Joe Patterson
Tom Queen
Michael Ryan
Sherrie Sawyer
Tom Scholl
Ken Sheets
Jim Thomas			Robin Webb
1.	Call to Order Bob Fountain

Chairman Fountain called the meeting to order.  There was a quorum present.

The following is a verbatim account of the agenda items.  Numbers may not be written out and abbreviations may be used for the sake of time saving and understanding.  Language may be changed to make it grammatically correct, not changing the context of the speech:

2.	Approval of Minutes (July 11, 2002 Meeting) Bob Fountain

FOUNTAIN: We will call our September 12th meeting to order.  We did not have a meeting in August but we have our July minutes.  Were there any corrections, deletions, or additions to our minutes?  Can we have a motion for approval?

WIKLE: So moved.

FOUNTAIN: and a second?

VAUGHN: Second.

FOUNTAIN: Second.  And discussion?  All in favor say aye.

ALL MEMBERS: Aye

FOUNTAIN: Opposed?  So carried.

3.	Community Comments Bob Fountain

RYAN: I would like to ask you and question some of this information about the South Downtown Connector project.  What is the current status of the design or planning for that project?

FOUNTAIN: We are still in the concept development of that project.  
RYAN: Concept development.  Has the concept that was presented to the public back in March at the public meeting, has that been changed in any way?

FOUNTAIN: It’s being worked on, it has not been (finalized?) yet.  

RYAN: A month ago there was some publicity given to a letter from former Chairman Justice to the State DOT regarding removal of Federal Highway Right of Way requirements from Bibb County’s agreement with DOT.  What was that about?  What requirement did you not want to comply with or have removed from the agreement?

ETHERIDGE: The County on two occasions has asked DOT to waive the Federal requirement for the acquisition of Right of Way and the reason was they thought they could work better in the neighborhood, in getting people relocated possibly in the neighborhood, or getting some houses moved if necessary. . . 

RYAN: Since that meeting in late March, has the Road Program had any other meetings with the people in that area or interested parties, either public meetings or announced meeting or other kinds of meetings and if the Road Program officials, County officials, DOT officials met with any interested parties?

DUVAL: We had a meeting at the church.

CAUSEY(?): April18th wasn’t it? 

FOUNTAIN: April 18th meeting . . . subsequent meeting asked for by the church.

DUVAL: They invited us to come over.

RYAN: What church was that?   Was that the same church where the meeting was held?

DUVAL: No, this was the church on Liberty Street.

RYAN:  There hadn’t been any other meetings between any of the Road Program officials, DOT officials, and County officials with anybody in that area?

FOUNTAIN: (too faint to hear) 

RYAN: Any OTHER meetings, I’m not talking about just public meetings.

FOUNTAIN: I don’t know.

RYAN: Who would know?

DUVAL: I set up meetings.  I’m the PR for the Program.  We haven’t had any  other public meetings.

FOUNTAIN: We met with everybody in the neighborhood.

RYAN: Any PRIVATE meetings?

DUVAL: What do you mean, as far as interested parties calling or something like that?

RYAN: No.  Any meeting with anybody officially connected with that project on the Bibb County level, State level, on the Road Program level with anybody not connected with that project who has an interest in the project.  Either on the property or living in the area.  You haven’t had any other meetings?

FOUNTAIN: We have met with every party involved on an individual basis.

RYAN: On an individual basis.

FOUNTAIN: individual basis.

RYAN: That’s been going on since the public meeting?
FOUNTAIN: That’s right.

RYAN: You met with every party involved?

FOUNTAIN: Every party that we could find.

RYAN: that you could find.

FOUNTAIN: That’s correct.

DUVAL: That have had an interest in the project.
RYAN: Would that include people whose property may be within the public Right of Way?

FOUNTAIN: That’s correct.

DUVAL: Yes.  Who might be displaced by the project. . . There’s probably one or two property owners that we have not been able to contact simply because we can’t find them.  We’ve made a lot of effort to find them.  

RYAN: What’s the substance of those meetings?  Are you negotiating Right of Way?

DUVAL: No.  We’re letting them know that their property might be displaced  as a result of that project and there is a possibility that they might lose their property.  

RYAN: Based on the design or concept that was presented in March?

DUVAL: That’s correct.

RYAN: Thank you 

MARTIN: I’m just curious.  You didn’t do that on Ingleside and Wesleyan and I’m wondering, do you plan to do that on Forest Hill and why would it be in a low economic neighborhood that you would choose to go out and have dialogue with each individual property owner when you haven’t done it in the higher income neighborhoods on most projects.  It seems like that is some sort of (reversed) discrimination or something going on there.  I don’t quite understand what the difference would be.  Please explain that.

DUVAL: My explanation is that . . . people know about this property being  affected by these different projects.  So when you say we haven’t notified them, yes we have.  

MARTIN: I meant having individual conversations with them about the project.

DUVAL: Oh, yeah.  We have individual conversations with them.  People along these projects, a lot of them come to the meetings. 

MARTIN: The difference is that they came to you.  I’m asking, it sounds to me what Michael had ascertained was that you had gone to them and that’s the difference there.  I mean if it’s a public process, it’s a public process, if it’s an individual process then be big enough to stand up and admit it’s a private process for you.  I mean its an individual process.  You’re going to each and every individual and talking to them about a project without the (   ) of public process.  After the public meeting that didn’t give you the results that you wanted.  Because Van had stated that if the neighborhood doesn’t want the project they won’t build it.  That’s what the neighborhood said and now you turn around a have gone to each and every individual person out there to try to convince them one-on-one.

FOUNTAIN: Lee, thank you for your comments.

4.	Public Meeting Steve Duval 
	Project No. 5240-15 Zebulon Road at 1-475, Held July 18, 2002 

DUVAL: Good morning everyone.  I am reporting on the public information meeting held on July 18 in reference to the Department of Transportation’s project from Zebulon Road to I-475 the Zebulon Road interchange and the Lamar Road relocation.  (noise in background) along with those 65 people we have some public officials in attendance, the County Engineer, and our Assistant County Engineer, and also Commissioner Olmstead.  We had some 24 comments out of that 65 people in attendance and out of those comments 17 were for the project, with three conditional comments that were for the project and four people were against the project.  I’ll entertain any questions about the public meeting that was held by the DOT.

FOUNTAIN: Van and I met last week with Georgia DOT last week concerning that interchange.  They tell us that project is on line and we should have the right of way acquisition hopefully by December\ January.  We should be able to start actual acquisition.  As you know that money is set up in this current (fiscal) budget. It’s not many parcels but we need that time line to be successful with that project.  

5.	Minority Business Enterprise Report Steve Duval 

DUVAL: I refer you to tab five in our agenda package.  (I’ll give the) synopsis of our minority businesses participating in the program.  I’m not going to go through the whole thing but on page three, out of some $88M that have been awarded contracts . . . you can see that’s about 21% minority participation on our contracts.  One of the contracts that have been let recently, contract 65-1 Intown Sidewalks one of our local MBE firms was awarded that contract and  is in fact working on that particular project right now.  I’ll entertain any questions about the MBE report.

FOUNTAIN: Any questions of Steve?

DUVAL: Thank you very much.

6.	Request to Let Van Etheridge 
	A. 	Project No. 5240-12, Log Cabin Drive, Demolition of five Buildings 

Under tab 6A is some information concerning the demolition of five buildings along  Log Cabin Drive from Mercer University Drive to Eisenhower Parkway.  This is the project that the DOT is reimbursing the County for the Right of Way  and we will reimburse the County for these demolitions. . . We are advertising for bids to get a contract . . . and expect that the bid will be received September 25th.  The contractor will have about 60 days to (complete the demolition with the contract letting) probably about the first of the year.  We request that the Request to Let be approved.

FOUNTAIN: You heard the recommendation of our consultant.  Is there a motion for approval?

WIKLE: So moved.

VAUGHN: Second.

FOUNTAIN: Discussion?  All in favor say aye.

ALL MEMBERS:	Aye.

B.	Project No. 5240-54B Millerfield Road Improvements from Bristol Drive to Shurling Drive. 

ETHERIDGE: Another project that will be ready for the County contract to be signed by the County (is the Millerfield Road project) and if we could we would like to get permission to let in November of this year.

FOUNTAIN: You heard the recommendation.  Is there a motion to let?

WIKLE: So moved.

FOUNTAIN: Second?

CAUSEY: Second.

FOUNTAIN: Discussion?  All in favor say aye.

ALL MEMBERS: Aye.

FOUNTAIN: Opposed?  What about the house at the corner of Park Street and Napier.  What is our disposition of this property?

ETHERIDGE: This property has been purchased by the County and will be needed on Project No.  10.  

FOUNTAIN: We had an inquiry from somebody for us to give a house away.  To just get it off our hands, which I though was a great thing (but) they have not done so have they?  Can we follow back up with that?

ETHERIDGE: I haven’t talked to them in quite a while (faint) but I will follow up with them again.

7.	Project No. 5240-8&9 Forest Hill Road Van Etheridge
	Joe Palladi Letter Dated July 17, 2002 

ETHERIDGE: Under tab seven is a letter that Joe Palladi wrote Bob Fountain concerning the Forest Hill Road project.  It seems that the Department of Transportation in conjunction with the County is making the recommendations about design modifications to Forest Hill Road and if you’ve got just a minute, we’ll run through them.  The first one, the County will provide that all the utilities will be underground in the four lane section that would be from Vineville to Wimbish.  We’ve got some cost estimates on that now.  It’s pretty high to do that.  The second one, the County will provide landscaping in the project.  The third one, the County will request that street lighting be added to both projects.  The fourth one, the County will approve the sidewalks on both sides of that project.  The reason we had sidewalks from the section from Wimbish to Northside just on the east side (and) it was the recommendation to put (them) on both sides.   On the second page, the County supported a design that would  provide a flat landing place on a steep driveway.  Number seven.  They would support the utilization of 11' lanes on the project in lue of 12' lanes that are presently proposed on the Vineville to Wimbish section.  Then number eight, the County supports 12' lanes in the three lane section, before I think they were 13' wide and 14' wide.  Number nine, the County supports the Right In/Right Out for the Prado and Overlook Drive.  One time there was an alternate (proposal) that would close those two streets at Forest Hill.  Also Number 10, the intersection of Northminister at Wimbish.  There’s been concern about we want Northminister as close as we can to the intersection.  11, The design will maintain the dual left turn lanes from Wimbish to Forest Hill Road.  Also, Palladi asked for any comments to be submitted to him by August 9th.  On the next page is the letter that Mr. Fountain wrote Mr.  Palladi back and (wrote) of a couple of things.  One would be the maintenance on the road would be split between the City and the County (in there respective areas) also the landscaping and lighting would be part of this also.  The environmental document that we are working on will be modified to reflect these changes.

FOUNTAIN: Any questions or comments regarding that?  As I understand it, the status of this is that we are updating our environmental document to reflect  these changes and they are being forwarded to GDOT or the FHA.  Do we have any type of time line with this?  

ETHERIDGE: (faint) It is anticipated that the revised environmental document will be submitted to DOT by the end of September. 

RYAN: You’ll bring these back to the public?

FOUNTAIN: I guess GDOT would do that.  There’s no change in the concept other than (that).  It will be up to DOT if there is another public meeting.

(more than one person speaking at once) 

From this process we just need an FPR I think and get environmental clearance on it, and then start Right of Way acquisition early next year.  It’s a lengthy process.

8.	Project Update Van Etheridge 
										    Joe Johnson 
ETHERIDGE:  First of all, I’d like to talk about some projects we have under construction . . . the first is Bloomfield Drive Project No. 43 it runs from Rocky Creek Road to Eisenhower Parkway about 2 ½ miles long.  It’s 39% complete now.  The work that’s underway now is hopefully the final relocation of BellSouth and Georgia Power utilities on the project then the contractor can get started.  (The completion date is Spring of 2003) The next project is Ingleside Avenue, Riverside over to Pierce, Shepherd is working on that project and it’s about 30% complete now.  The contractor is presently placing  base for the road widening and I think the project should be done by the end of the year.   Also out at Macon State College they’ve been working on three intersections out there, two of them are complete and the third one is about 53% complete, they’re working on base work this week and I think next week they’re paving operation will start putting some asphalt down at the intersection with Eisenhower Parkway.  Northside Drive is one of the DOT projects.  It starts at Forest Hill and goes to Wesleyan Drive.  APAC’s the contractor there and it’s about 45% complete.  (faint) The work underway is  (stage) construction and utility relocations.   Also the new traffic signal at I-75 @ Eisenhower Parkway, the contractor has put up strain poles and traffic signal heads and is about 35% (complete).  Georgia Power has got to run a service line down about a block to provide power.   The Intown Historic District Sidewalks Phase I has 14 streets to it.  The contractor has been working on three of those streets and is about 7% complete.  Another project that DOT has let is our Phase 2 & 3 traffic signal.  It’s a $4½M contract to upgrade numerous traffic signals in the Bibb County area.  The project is 5% complete with a completion date of December (2003).  The work (that) has been on- going so far is the make ready work with the utilities moving their lines up getting ready for the fiber to be attached to the poles.

FOUNTAIN: We appreciate that.

ETHERIDGE: Next I’d like to mention some products that we are purchasing Right of Way on.  First the Project 12, Log Cabin, Eisenhower to Mercer.  Twenty-three parcels out there.  We have them all expect the Sofran parcel.  We have an agreement with them but we haven’t gotten the deed and all straightened out yet.  DOT is planning to let this project about the first of the year.  The second project is Log Cabin/Bloomfield, which is the extension of the project south from Eisenhower to Rocky Creek Road.154 on it and we have acquired 18 so far. Another project is Mercer University Drive from Log Cabin at  I-475. 157 parcels out there.  71 have been acquired.  DOT is looking to let this project in the middle of ‘03.  Also out on Houston Avenue we have a Phase I and Phase II project out there.  Phase I has got 157 parcels, we’ve acquired  111.  Phase II, which is Newburg into town has 125 parcels and we’re just getting started with it.  

FOUNTAIN: When will you anticipate a let date on Houston Avenue?

ETHERIDGE: I think it’s going to be probably early next year.

(too faint to hear) 

ETHERIDGE: Also, out on Millerfield Road ( from Bristol Drive to Shurling Drive) we’re still talking to two owners out there trying to work out a deal . . . also out on Bass Road, we have two intersections we’re trying to get signals and turn lanes on, Bass @ Forsyth and Bass @ Rivoli.  That’s a total of 20 parcels out there.  We’ve made contract with all the owners at Bass @ Forsyth and then Right of Way plans are just being completed on the other one . . . also on Brookdale Avenue new sidewalks there in front of the school.  10 parcels total with three acquired to date.  Also another sidewalk project on Napier that starts at Park and goes to Siddik Road.  There are 22 parcels on that and we’ve acquired three of those.  Tucker Road, the multi-use path design and all, 73 parcels out there are being acquired.  If you’ve got just a minute I’ll ask Joe (Johnson) if he would talk about some of the projects we have under design.

JOHNSON: Good morning.  I’ll go quickly through these projects, if you have any questions, please stop me.  We’ve already mentioned our South Downtown Connector project.  Currently working on a new concept  based on comments we’ve had to date.

FOUNTAIN: Timelines, Joe.  When do we expect to get (these)?

JOHNSON: It’s still going to be a month, maybe two.  The Railroad issue with the 2nd Street bridge has thrown a little curve at us.  We don’t want to take the 2nd Street bridge with our alignment . . . also in our tying in with MLK the Railroad crossing over Martin Luther King. . . The next project, 5C which is Poplar Street  right past Martin Luther King up to Civic Square, our consultants are McLees, Boggs, & Selby.  There working on that and have (had) some discussions with property owners recently about some design features there.  We are expecting a bid package by late this fall.  We still have to hold the FPR  so I’m waiting on plans.  We can work out architectural features later.  

FOUNTAIN: What’s our proposed let date?

JOHNSON: First of the year.  The next project is Jeffersonville Road , 6,7& 54A which is Millerfield Road and the Railroad bridge on the lower part of Jeffersonville Road.  Our design is complete on this project, we are waiting on approval of a draft environmental document.  This has been submitted to the Department of Transportation, they’ve resubmitted to us comments and we’ve since addressed those.  The State Historic Preservation Officer has determined that Lakeside Park is a historic area.  We have had to readdress that and develop a new AOE, which is an Assessment of Effect.  That is to be submitted back to the State by September . . . and then forward the document along to the FHA.  We’ve already mentioned Forest Hill, we’re working on revisions to our environmental document for approval of the FONZI.  Our next project is Northwest Parkway at Log Cabin, 10&11.  The design is complete on both of those projects, the environmental document is at the Department of Transportation to be forwarded to the FWA.  We are working on the Memorandum of Approval.  That is a document between  the local govt, state and your State Historic Preservation Officer on how to deal with impacting historic areas and that’s the Park Street area and Northwest Parkway . . . that letter needs to be approved by the residents of Park Street and has not yet been sent out.  Log Cabin (is) Project No. 12 the Right of Way  is almost complete there.  We will have a FPR on September 26th at the DOT area office.  That project is well underway and we should be ready to bid on that shortly.  Project No. 22, our Western Loop project, we had our 1st stakeholders meeting . . . we are working on two intersections that Van discussed.  We have had a FPR on our Bass/Forsyth intersection, the plans are just being finished on Bass/Rivoli and will be ready shortly.  Van mentioned that Tucker Road is in Right of Way acquisition.  We do have final plans on that.  We do expect several changes during Right of Way negotiations so we’re ongoing dealing with those changes as we talk to property owners.  Houston Avenue Phase I construction plans should be in hand in the next month or so.  We should be ready by the first of the year to let that section.  Sardis Church Road Connector, the project between the new interchange and SR 247. We’re still waiting on the environmental documents, the State is handling that.  Their  consultant has turned in the environmental document to them, they are expecting to forward it to the FHA.  The FHA (is going through some) personnel changes and it is probably going to be as little late, probably spring before we can buy Right of Way out there at the earliest.

SANDERS: (Faint) We need to put a water main (out on) Liberty Church (Road).

JOHNSON: I spoke with Lisa (Golphin) of your office (not understandable) 
Our Ocmulgee East project on Weaver Road.  We’re working on those plans.  Plans our due from our consultant by the end of September to go to an FPR.  There’s only two parcels of Right of Way on that project, so we should be in pretty good shape.  The next intersection project we are working on is 2nd Street at Mulberry Street, in front of the Courthouse.  Van and I met with our consultant last month, Claxton Architects, and we reviewed the plans and had him do some changes . . . and that pretty much the run down of the projects.  If anyone has any questions.

SANDERS: We’ve got to put a water main down Houston Road also from Sardis Church down through (    ).  Do y’all have any plan on what is being planned in that area?

FOUNTAIN: I think it will be widened and I’d set that back . . . 

SANDERS: How wide?  

FOUNTAIN: Same width.  I think it may be some time out but it will happen.  On our Forest Hill plans, are you ok with starting back on those plans?

JOHNSON: No sir, we haven’t yet.  We still have a few things that we have to change on the typical sections, like the lane width (not understandable)

GROCE: What’s the status of Georgia Avenue and Washington?
JOHNSON: We have been talking to our consultant on that project.  They’ve submitted a price to redo those intersections from what they had done before.  We think it’s extremely high so we’re looking into some different alternates on how we’re going to get that project  designed.   (We) suspect it’s going to be several months before we have a good design on that.

FOUNTAIN: We’ll handle those in-house and let Russell (Claxton) work with us.

GROCE: So the problem is that Russell is wanting too much money?

JOHNSON: Not Russell.

FOUNTAIN: Russell is not our consultant on that, it’s Post Buckley.

GROCE: Where are they?

FOUNTAIN: Atlanta

GROCE: So that’s design as opposed to concept?

JOHNSON: Russell will be doing the enhancements, landscaping that sort of thing.  On actual design, showing drainage or curb lines anything to do with construction, we had plans that were almost completed(but) since the concepts been changes over the past several years we had to go back to our preliminary plan and that’s the big problem.

WEBB: When would you estimate that we might go to a FPR on Sardis Church?

JOHNSON: Sardis Church will probably be after the first of the year.  Talking to the folks at (the) environmental department, they’re not too enthusiastic about getting an environmental document approved anytime in the real near future.  They still haven’t had the draft approval to go to a public hearing and then the project will go from there.  Early spring.  Thank you.

FOUNTAIN: Thank you.  Back to one other project.  Civic Square.  (Under) a  prior administration, we had talked about something if that land ever came available to the public that we may use our forces in taking those structures out and just landscaping and grassing.  As I understand it, we have had some negotiations between Newtown and the City.  If that property title comes to the City, could you get the Mayor to talk to Chairman Olmstead about that? This administration is not familiar with that.  That was a prior administration.

CAUSEY: Demolition, rough grading and grassing.

FOUNTAIN: Yes.  We’re going to try to do that in-house as a partnership between the two public works depts.  I don’t think that issue has been briefed with Chairman Olmstead.  

CAUSEY: Ok.

FOUNTAIN: Do they have a designated use for that structure?

CAUSEY: Not to my knowledge.  I have not heard of it.

FOUNTAIN: Any other questions or comments on our project updates.  We got our most recent update on the Road Program and its kind of just a look at the projects we have completed and the projects we have on the way.  It’s been a mammoth task.  Almost overwhelming to look at.  Another thing, and Bill (Causey) left, is the Forsyth Street project.  We’re trying to let that project again, Bill, we had talked about the possibility, I think Van was going to check it out, the traffic signalization of that project, to get a contract from the State if at all possible.  The reason I figured you told me was that it wasn’t in the original plans.  At the time it was such that we could incorporate into the big project, so we will let that one for ½M at local cost to do it because we could (not put it in that project).  So I think what we want to do Thomas is ask for just a materials contract of two intersections.  If we could get that then we could pick up the labor cost for that installation and that would make a big difference to us.  Do you think that’s practical, Bill?

WIKLE: I had not thought about it in the context that you put it.
FOUNTAIN: Is that a do able proposition, Thomas?

HOWELL: That’s a good question.  We do that from time to time.

FOUNTAIN: We’d like for y’all to consider that at these two intersections and help us fund this project, if that’s what keeping us from funding it.  It’s a good project, goes all the way from I-75 to City Hall.  We are about $200,000 off on this project.  If we could get that it makes all the difference in the world.  How do we need to get that ball rolling? 

WIKLE: (The request should go to Marion Waters and Frank Danchetz)

FOUNTAIN: We’ll send it up to them.

HOWELL: Traffic safety and design.

GROCE: If they pay for that, does that mean that we don’t have to cut the project back?

FOUNTAIN: Yes.  Basically, yes. . . . We’ll have to fine tune it a little bit but we’ll get out of that project what we want.

GROCE: What we want out of that project is for the landscaping not to get cut  and I know the landscaping was behind cost in that so if, for some reason, there is some question that DOT needs some encouragement to pay for this, we will be glad to forward the letters of support because it is fundamental to the success of that project that the landscaping be completed because it is the critical gateway from 75 all the way through the historic district downtown and without that landscaping it will simply be a big wide messy corridor in an area that is otherwise being reinvested and it’s not acceptable to us.  So whatever we can do to encourage you to do that, we will do.

FOUNTAIN: We will prepare some cost folders to Thomaston.  We will make a trip to do that because we would like to let that project again and probably advertise it this year and try to get a complete project out of it because we are still backed in a corner . . . in trying to get it funded.  But if that makes sense we will pursue that avenue.  We’ve done that before, Thomas, it will be a great help to us (coughing in background) so we can maybe move along with that project. Moving through quickly here.  Bill (Vaughn), the next thing is on our Mulberry Street project.  We’re stopping this project basically at the alley going into the old parking lot.  Thinking that there may be other work from there out to 1st Street in such a short time line.  Is that a reasonable thinking?

VAUGHN: I think it is.  There’s been no money to do that.  That’s a possibility.

FOUNTAIN: So we may have to phase it and just do this phase and if it doesn’t occur from that planning up by the Courthouse up to the 1st little entrance to the County parking lot and let that be the first phase of it.  If nothing happens to the parking there we just have the (       ) landscaping from there to the Mulberry Church.
All right, any other comment on our projects that Van or Joe have done?

RYAN: Oh, I thought you were going to Community Comments.

FOUNTAIN: No, I was talking to the Committee.  

9.	Community CommentsBob Fountain 

SCHOLL: I don’t see your usual reporter from Joiner Services here today.  Have you made a decision against the verbatim minutes?

FOUNTAIN: No.  We had a scheduling problem.

SCHOLL: I’m glad to hear there’s no change in that.  

FOUNTAIN: No.

SCHOLL: The 2nd thing.  I wanted to point out that on the Forest Hill EA your traffic accident numbers were in complete error.  Instead of 10% over the statewide average, it was 20% less than the statewide average and that was documented by Harvey Keepler as well.  Your traffic projections on Forest Hill Road is based on erroneous and inaccurate information as well and nobody has ever provided documentation or justification for your traffic projections on that road and with those two serious errors in your EA you have not given any kind of explanation of why the traffic hasn’t changed more than it has and so the information that is provided in this letter from Palladi will be completely unacceptable, I can guarantee you that.  (coughing in background) I highly recommend that you do bring them back to the public in some way.  The opposition is going to continue on this project and given the erroneous information that you’ve provided in the EA, I believe you do owe the people a  justification, explanation of your plans for the road.  

FOUNTAIN: Thank you for your comments.

PATTERSON: (Faint) (             ) called me and told me that if the Forest Hill project goes through a retaining wall will be right in front of his house 15'
from his front door.  (coughing in background) (too faint to hear) 

FOUNTAIN: I’d rather have him call Van or our Right of Way people, but historically if there are damages the government pays for the damages caused. . . 

MARTIN: . . . In the discussion about Forest Hill Road, the words environmental document were used a number of times and the comments were, “we need this approved,” I think Van said or you said, once its approved.  I assume your talking about the draft EA when you speak of the environmental document, is that right?  So when its approved and it is approved sound to me like a done deal.  Is there an alternative?

FOUNTAIN: Not to my knowledge.

MARTIN: I mean you just do a draft EA and that’s it.  It’s automatically approved?  Is that correct? 

FOUNTAIN: We’re reacting to other people.  It’s going to be out of our hands.  We’ve done what we’ve been asked to do with the document.  We’ve forwarded these changes.  Next in the process, if they approve, then we have an FPR, then start Right of Way acquisition.
MARTIN: But my question is, it was said when it’s approved and once its approved, is there not an alternative to the draft? I can’t believe I’ve got to explain this to y’all.  Is that it?  You do a draft EA and it’s automatically done and its approved.  I mean, I think Mr.  Queen wanted to address that.  Maybe you can explain it to all of us.  

QUEEN:   We had a draft EA when we went to the public hearing, and at this point we would be revising the EA and submitting the filing of notice of impact  requested by the FHA.  Based on the information we submitted to them, they’ll either approve it or not approve it.  

MARTIN: Ok.  I guess that was my point.  It can also not be approved.

FOUNTAIN: It would be a no build option.

MARTIN: Ok.  That’s what I wanted today because y’all didn’t say “if it’s approved” you said “when it’s approved, and “once it’s approved”.  And I just wanted to make that clear.  The other question I have is how many power poles will have to be moved on Forest Hill Road?

ETHERIDGE: The plan was to put power underground from Vineville Avenue to Wimbish.  I don’t know how many that is.  The lines would be underground, none on the Right of Way.  The section from Wimbish on out  I think the poles are far enough out of the way that there would be very few that would have to be moved.

MARTIN: Georgia Power, if I understand correctly, is not putting power poles in the Right of Way anymore because of the lawsuits with the Road Program about whose going to pay for them.  So that means that the power poles are going to have to have easements for their own Rights of Way in excess of the Right of Way of the roadway.  I believe its a 15' (easement) if I’m not mistaken.  It would be interesting to know exactly how many would be moved and who is going to pay for them being put underground between Vineville, Forest Hill Road, and Wimbish.  

ETHERIDGE: The Road Program would have to pay for those.
MARTIN: Underground.  Georgia Power said on Ingleside it would be way to expensive to do it on that short stretch, just in the Village.  It’s going to be awfully, awfully expensive out there.

ETHERIDGE: Yes, it is.

MARTIN: My other point was, I just want to make a clarification in the discussion about the South Downtown Connector, the reasons those two letters were written by Mr. Justice, County Chairman, was that the County regulations  were more strict that State regulations.  I spoke to the FHA about that just for my own knowledge and in fact federal highway regulations for purchases of Rights of Way and all the regulations and conditions that go with it were more lenient than the State of Georgia’s at that time.  So your comments don’t really hold water about that but also, just for your own information the State of Georgia has now federalized the Rights of Way to match that of the FHA. 

ETHERIDGE: That’s not what I said, I said the local regulations for (buying) Right of Way weren’t to be used out there.  We would have more flexibility with local regulations.  We didn’t want to use state regulations we wanted to use local regulations. 

MARTIN: Why (would local be better than) Georgia DOT?

ETHERIDGE: They have project oversight.  That’s where the money’s coming from.  

MARTIN: They don’t consider their regulations have to be effect if they’re going to give the money?

ETHERIDGE: They can turn it down if they like.

MARTIN: If I was going to give you money I’d want to have some sort of regulations myself.

ETHERIDGE: They’ve turned it down twice.  
RYAN: I’d like a little clarification on some of the issues touched on after the meetings that the Road Program or the County officials involved had with people affected by the South Downtown Connector.  Do you keep any records of those meetings? When they were held, who was present?

UNKNOWN MALE: No.

RYAN: No written records at all?

DUVAL: When you say written records, I met with property owners.

RYAN: Do you have a list of who you met with?

DUVAL: Oh, yeah.

RYAN: Have you met with the Quick family at all?

DUVAL: I sure did.

RYAN: You did?

DUVAL: I talked to her privately.  She had no knowledge of the meeting.  

RYAN: Prior to this meeting?

DUVAL: Prior to the public meeting.

RYAN: Back in March?

DUVAL: That’s correct.

RYAN: Have you spoken to her since then?  

DUVAL: No.  I went by there personally to let her know people would be talking about that particular project and she was informed of the meeting. . . I made a personal appearance at her house to let her know that her property might be affected, and to let her know to come to the meeting and get some understanding of what was going to be done out there.

RYAN: Since the public meeting in March, the Road Program has met with all people who might potentially affected by that project again?

DUVAL: Those that weren’t at the meeting.

RYAN: Those that weren’t at the meeting.  Did you determine that by looking at the names of the property owners in the proposed Right of Way and then matching them with the sign-in for that meeting?

DUVAL: We had a drawing of all the property owners that were going to be affected and I researched to see who needed that help.

FOUNTAIN: Let me say this as Chairman, as far as addressing our committee this is set up for comments, not question and answers.  If you want to meet with Steve after the meeting Michael you are welcome to do so.

RYAN: Will there be another public meeting on this project once you finalize  the concept?  I was wondering if you could tell me, Mr. Etheridge or Mr. Fountain, regarding a pair or related projects, Edgewood Avenue extension project, if you could tell me what the independent utility for that project is? 

ETHERIDGE: We’ll be happy to give you some information.

RYAN: It does have independent utility?

ETHERIDGE: Yes.

RYAN: Finally, I’d like to address this to Mr. Queen, here with the DOT.  How (is) your department able to deal with the issue of environmental justice when it comes up in the projects that y’all are involved with?

QUEEN:   This has been one of the areas they are concentrating on in the past year, year and a half.  Over in Columbus we’ve had a series of meetings on the Federal projects with environmental justice issues.  South Down Connector entails some meetings.

RYAN: Are y’all going to host the meetings?

QUEEN:   The South Down Connector is a local project so it doesn’t fall into  the federal highway.

RYAN: Any Federal income?

QUEEN:   Well, it’s not a federal Aid project.  We consider environmental justice issues in the projects thru out  the state.

RYAN: The State of Georgia doesn’t consider environmental justice unless the federal government is spending money on it?

QUEEN:   Well, environmental justice is an extension of the civil rights act.  It not only protects based on race but (also) the poor in lower economic areas.

RYAN: Doesn’t that have some effect on the State of Georgia regardless of

(more than one person speaking at once) 

FOUNTAIN: Y’all can meet after the meeting (to continue) this dialogue and we  are welcome to accept comments from anybody.

HOLLIDAY: Is anybody taking minutes?

Tonya Davis raised her hand.

HOLLIDAY: My comment is that this meeting time is extremely inconvenient to me.  I want to know who to talk to from the DOT that asked that this meeting time be changed, if he’s here today.  

HOWELL: It came from my office.

HOLLIDAY: (                       ) he’s not here.  We changed in response to his letter and he’s not here.  OK.  

HOLLIDAY: Next issue.  

FOUNTAIN: For clarification I think what Thomas was saying was that David wrote it for Thomas’ signature.  He just wrote the letter for his signature.

HOWELL: I signed the letter.

HOLLIDAY: My comment then would be, you public agency service people are paid by the tax dollars to be here and right now this is taking a hit on me financially.  If I could be at work, I could be making more tax dollars to support these efforts, and its counter (TAPE RAN OUT) 
It obviously discourages participation from people around here reducing the GNP for which you are all paid.  The next item, Zebulon Road, somebody wrote me back.  Is the engineer here from DOT that Thomas on Zebulon Road?  Well, this fella had written this (about) roundabouts.  His main problem with my idea was roundabouts need a 250' radius and that’s not true.  Most all of them are much smaller than that.  I spent about two hours studying the federal manual to make sure that I knew what I was talking about and I’m disappointed in the obviously ignorant or uneducated responses to my comments.  

FOUNTAIN: Any other comments?

HOLLIDAY: On the revised EA.  (When can I) see the revised EA on Forest Hill Road?

FOUNTAIN: When it will be made (available) to the rest of the public, I assume.

QUEEN?: You would need to talk to Harvey Keepler’s office.  His office is in charge of the environmental document.  

HOLLIDAY?: The public has an opportunity to respond to that?  A (time line?)
QUEEN:   Comments are accepted even up until it is approved.  

SCHOLL: If the DOT doesn’t make opportunity and effort to get comments they are not going to get comments (too faint to hear) 

HOLLIDAY: All right gentlemen this has been extremely expensive for me.  My comment is, I’m a dentist, when I stop working, all my staff has to stop working and I have to continue to pay their salaries.  I would really appreciate it if y’all  would make this thing more convenient so that you could get some real public input and this not be just some kind of sham show.  Thank you.

FOUNTAIN: Thank you for your comment.

MARTIN: About  the David Millen letter.  I assume that you did not see the letter.  It had David Millen’s signature and I called him and asked him if he signed it and he said, “yes.”  It had his name on it.  It did not have your name on it.
(more than one person speaking at once) 
The other comment I would like to make about that is interestingly, there were numerous errors in it.  The other comment I would like to make is I received a brochure from GDOT the other day and interestingly in that brochure, it commented that the GDOT was one of the few agencies instate government that regularly held their meetings in the late afternoons and early evenings.  I guess my question to you is, Are y’alls meetings more important than this meeting right here?  Is that your attitude about it?

(more than one person speaking at once) 

FOUNTAIN: This is a comment period not a question and answer period.

MARTIN: When did you change the idea about questions and comments?  We’ve been asking questions for six years, Bob.

FOUNTAIN: Any other comments?

RYAN: On another subject, on the Coleman Ave improvements, how much has the Road Program spent on that so far?

FOUNTAIN: If you’ll meet with us after on that we’ll be glad to give you those numbers.  

RYAN: Do y’all have any ballpark figures on that at all, Mr.  Vaughn?

VAUGHN: Not at this meeting, Michael.  I don’t have the details with me.  

RYAN: I’m making a formal request for information on that.

VAUGHN: Be happy to provide that.

FOUNTAIN: Any other comments?
Can we get a motion for adjournment?

RYLE: So moved.

FOUNTAIN: We are adjourned.

 10.	Old or New Business  Bob Fountain 

None.

11.	Next Meeting Dates Bob Fountain

Technical Advisory Committee 	October 10, 2002     		10:00 A.M.
Citizens Oversight Committee 	October 24, 2002     		2:00 P.M.
Executive Committee 			TO BE ANNOUNCED      	5:00 P.M.