T&EItem#2
March 18,2015
Worksession
MEMORANDUM
March 16,2015
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee
Jeffrey
L.
zYOnJCgislative Attorney
Bill 3-15, Streets and Roads - Obstruction Signage
Background
Bill 3-15, Streets and Roads -.Obstruction Signage, sponsored by the Councilmembers
Berliner, Navarro, Floreen and Eirich was introduced on January 20, 2015. A public hearing was
held on February 10. The only speaker was a representative of the Maryland Building Industry
Association. He expressed concern about the implementation and enforcement of the requirement
to post additional information.
Bill 3-15 would require signage concerning a permit to obstruct a right-of-way. Currently
pedestrians faced with a closed sidewalk have no easy way to determine how long the sidewalk
will be closed and who to contact ifthey have any questions. At least 4 projects in the past 4 years
were authorized for long term sidewalk closures without an alternative pedestrian walkway on the
same side of the street. Increased information may have resulted in less disruption for pedestrians.
The fiscal impact statement provided in a memorandum to Council President Leventhal on
February 20, 2015 indicated that projected costs would be $200 to $1,000 annual due to printing
costs for additional signs.
Public Hearing
In memorandum dated February 9, 2015 the Executive supported Bill 3-15. He added:
While construction activity is an important and desired element of our economy, we must
work together so that construction impacts ofpedestrians, vehicles, bicycles, residents and
existing businesses are properly managed and do not become overly disruptive.
Construction that is carried out
in
a cooperative and sensitive manner is good for the
community and local business.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Issues
Should the law be more specific on the details for increased sign age?
As drafted Bill 3-15 leaves all of the details of signage to the Department of Pennitting Services
with direction from the Department of Transportation. Before the Director issues a permit to close
a
sidewalk~
curb lane, or shared use path, the Director of Transportation must approve a temporary
traffic control plan. Under Bill 3-15 the permit and the traffic control plan must require signage
during construction to, at least, inform pedestrians about the duration ofthe obstruction, the permit
number, and the permit holder's telephone number. The size of the sign, the size of the text, the
location of the sign, and the possible number of signs are all left to the Director. The County
Executive may issue regulations under method (2) to implement to implement Bil13-15.
Staff recommends approval as introduced.
This packet contains:
Bill 3-15
Legislative Request Report
Fiscal and Economic Impact statement
Circle #
1
3
4
F:\LAW\BILLS\1503 Streets And Roads-Obstruction Signage\T&E Memo March 18.Docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill No.
3-15
Concerning: Streets and Roads ­
Obstruction Signage
Revised: Jan. 6, 2015
Draft No. 1
Introduced:
January 20, 2015
Expires:
July 20, 2016
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: -'Nc.:,:o=n=e_--:-_ _ __
Ch. _ _, Laws of Mont. Co. _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
By: Councilmember Berliner, Navarro, Floreen, and EIrich
AN
ACT to:
(1)
(2)
require signage concerning a pennit to obstruct a right-of way; and
generally amend the law concerning a pennit to obstruct any public right-of-way.
By amending
Montgomery County Code
Chapter 49, Streets and Roads
Section 49-11
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double undedining
[[Double boldface bracketsD
* *
*
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfrom existing law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing
law
or the bill by amendment.
Existing law unqffected by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following
Amendment:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill
No. 3-15
1
Sec.
1
Section 49-11
is
amended as follows:
49-11. Permit to obstruct public rights-of-way.
2
3
4
*
(g)
*
*
Before the Director Issues a permit under this Section to close a
sidewalk, curb lane, or shared use path, the Director of Transportation
must approve a temporary traffic control plan.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
ill
A professional engineer must certify for the applicant that the
plan minimizes inconvenience to the public, provides necessary
warnings,
and
includes
safe
and
reasonable
pedestrian
alternatives in accordance with accepted engineering standards.
m
The permit and the traffic control plan must require signage
during construction
ill,.
at least, inform pedestrians about the
duration of the obstruction, the permit number, and the permit
holder's telephone number.
13
14
15
*
Approved:
*
*
16
17
George Leventhal, President, County Council
18
19
Date
Approved:
Isiah Leggett, County Executive
20
This is a correct copy o/Council action.
Date
21
Linda M. Lauer, Clerk ofthe Council
Date
@\law\bills\1503
streets
and roads-obstrudion signage\bill • road
code
bill signs for si
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Bil13-15
Streets and Roads
-
Obstruction Signage
DESCRIPTION:
Pennits that allow an obstruction
in
public right-of-way will
be
required to post infonnational signs. These signs will be intended to
infonn pedestrians about the obstruction and contact infonnation.
Pedestrians face closed sidewalks without knowing the tenns and
conditions of the closure or contact infonnation for the party
responsible for the closure.
To provide infonnation for pedestrians.
Department of Pennitting Services, Department of Transportation
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be researched.
JeffZyontz, Legislative Attorney, 240-777-7896
Applies to all areas where County issues right-of-way obstruction
pennits.
Revocation of a pennit and a cease and desist order concerning the
obstruction.
PROBLEM:
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMP ACT:
ECONOMIC
IMPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORMATION:
APPLICATION
WITHIN
MUNICIPALITIES:
PENALTIES:
f:\law\bllls\1503 streets and roads-obstruction sjgnage\legislative request re
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
ROCKV~U..E,
MARYLAND
February 20 , 2015
TO:
George Leventhal,
President.
County Council
Jennifer A.
tor,
Joseph F.
Beach,
DIrector,
Departm
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Hllghes~ Dire~. Offi~e
TnAMhtBudget
..
mancl.J'R.U . . .'
FEIS for Bill 3-15, StreeJs and
Roads - Obstruction Signage
Please
find
attached the
JscaI
and economic impact statements for the above-
referenced.
legislation.
.
JAH:fZ
cc: Bonnie Kirkland. Assistant Chief
Administrative Officer
Lisa Austin, Offices of the County Executive
Joy
Nunni, Special Assistant to the
C{1unty
Executive
Patrick Lacefield, Director. Public
Information
Office
JosephF. Beach, Director,
Departrnet1t
of Finance
Diane
Jones,
Department
of Pernlitting
Services
Christy Contreras, Department
of
Penn
i
tting Services
David Platt, Department of Finance :
Alex Espinosa,. Office of
Managemen' and Budget
and
Budget
Dennis Hetman, Office
of
Felicia Zhang,
Office
0
d Budget
Naeem Mia, Office of M.anagement
Budget
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
,
'
Council Bill 3-15
Street~
and Roads - Obstruction Signage
}'iscallm~act
Statem.ent
'
1. .Legislative Summary:
Bill 3-15 provides a means for requiring signage to
be
placed by pennittees when
obstructions to the public right-of..
~ay
occur due to penniUed construction, As noted in
the BiB,
pedestrians
faced \"lith a
cl~sed
sidewalk have no easy
way
to
determine how
long the sidewalk
will
be
closed an4 who to contact if they have questions. Furthermore,
at times construction interferes
'V\rit~
access to local businesses, The Bill requires that a
phone number for the permittee be
~cluded
as a point of contact.
2.
All
estimate
of
changes in
County Jvenues and expenditures regardless of whether the
revenues or expenditures are
assum~d
in
the recommended or approved budget. Includes
source of information,
assumptions~
and methodologies used.
Changes to
County
revenues and expenditures
are
negligible as
the bilI
only requires
printing
of
sl!,lllS
to be handed (lut by DPS Right-of-Way Inspectors for posting when
closures occur per the permitted
COlfStruCtiOll.
DPS estimates the need for approximately
1,500
signs per
year
at a cost
of$2~000
annually
($1.33
per sign). Maintenance
of
Traffic
Plans
typically
extend over
a
period of
18
to
24
months.
In 2013 there
were
144
Maintenance
of Traffic Plans and
in 2014
there were .159. Assuming one to five signs
per project
annually~
the signs woulp. cost the department approximately
$200 - $1,000
which would be recovered through the penuit process.. The
department
is already
required to inspect implementation pfthe Maintenance of Traffic Plans therefore DPS
would not
incur
additional inspection costs.
3.
Revenue and
expenditure
estimatesicovering
at least
the
next
6 fiscal years.
The only expense is for
creation
and
printing
of the signs. Based
on
the historic number
of Maintellunce ofTraffic Plans am1roved per year, and the possible
need
for mUltiple
signs, the
Departm~t
expects
to
issue 150
to
750
signs
per year.
'TIle
expenditure
estimates would be as follows
over
~he
next 6 fiscal years:
....
~
......
.
Fiscal Year
FY16
._
..
­
I
FY17
$200 .. '
$1,000 _
$200 ­
$1,000
FY18
$200-
$1,000
$200 ­
$1,000
I
FY19
~
,
--_..·_·...-f
!
Expenditure
$200­
,
,
I
~-
......
­
$1,000
$200 ­
$1,000
·..·,,·t
1$200 -
i
$1,000
I
$200·­
$1,000
.J
--+--'- _ .
t
1
$200-
1$200 ­
j
1$1,000
1$1,000
I
,
FY20
,..
!
­
i
FY21
i
i
Revenue
-,­
$200 ­
$1,000
1$200-
i
$1,000
_..J
i
4. Au actuarial analysis through the
edtire
amortization period for each bill
that
would affect
retiree
pension
or
group insurance
costs.
Not applicable.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
5. Later actions that may affect future revenue mid expenditures
if
the bill authorizes future
spending.
I
This Sill does not authorize future spending.
i
6.
An
estimate of the staff time needed to implenitent the bill.
There is no additional staff time requited in
or~er
to implctllcnt this bill as it is part of an
inspe.ction process that is already occurring. .
i
7. An explanation of how the
addition
of new
.wk
respon.,ibilities would a
ffect
other duties.
This bill does not affect other duties. It
assist~
the DPS
Right-of~Way
Inspectors and
County staff as citizens \\111 be able to have direct contact
with
the penn it holder
representative to
disc\.L<:;s concerns
over
sidew~lk
closures. The public 'Will also be
informed on the sign as to closure duration. .
8. An estimate ofcosts
....ll.el1
an
additional appropriation
is
needed.
No additional appropriation will be needed
9. A
description of any variable that could affectlrevenue
and
cost
estimates,
Revenues and costs would be impacted by thelnumber of signs required per project. The
department can fully recover the costs of the
signs
for a negligible fiscal impact.
The following is the number
of
Maintenance
df
Traffic Plans over the pa'3t 7 fiscal years:
RY12
FY13
+
.f.YQ~'
__
iFY09
1
FY10
FY11
FY14-­
..
~9._~_.__
60
99
101
t
1100
144
159
1be number of signs \\111 be impacted by the e;xtent ofpath, sidewalk. or lane closure and
the duration of construction.
'
10.
Ranges
of
revenue or expenditures that are un9crtain or difficult
to
project.
Not
applicable.
1 L If
a
bill
is
likely to have no fiscal impact, why 'that is the case.
This bilI
is
for public right-of-way permittee placement of a sign
(non-metal~
weather
resistant) that is provided by the Departmetlt olf Permitting Services Right-of-Way
Inspector to pemlit holders when obstntction closures occur. The signs
will
inform
pedestrians of the duration of the closure, whoito contact regarding the closure, and will
be
provided
as part ofan already occurring inspection.
.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
12. Other
~fiscat
impacts or comments.
I
Not applicable.
13. The
follo'Vving contributed
to and
concurred
with this analysis:
Diane Jones, DPS
Rick Bmsh, DPS
Christina Contreras, DPS
Barbara
Suter, DPS
Dennis
Hetman, OMB
&nnifur::HugheS,
Difet{;
Office of Management
and
Budget
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Econonlic Impact Statement
Bill 3-15, Streets a*d Roads - Obstruction Sign age
Background:
This legislation would require
signag~
included in the pennit and traffic control plan.
During construction, the signage wouIkl inform pedestrians about
the
direction ofthe
obstruction,
the
permit number, and
~e
telephone number ofthe
pennit
holder.
1. The sources of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
Sources of information include
thd
Department ofPennitting Services (DPS). The
assumption is
that
signage will be required for projects currently under permit and for
any future projects.
Data
include tjhe number of commercial permits and the average
construction cost for each permit :There
are
no methodologies used
in
the preparation
ofthe economic impact statement.'
2.
A description of any variable that could affect the economic impact estimates.
The variables that cou1d affect the bconomic impact estimates are the number of
current and future pennits issued
bY
DPS, the average construction costs, and the
costs ofpreparing and erecting sigitage for each current and future pennit. While
there are
data
on the number and c9nstruction costs for
currentpennits,
similar
data
on future pennits cannot easily be
~timated
with any certainty. The uncertainty
is
attributed to the year-to-year
high
volatility
in
terms of the number of permits and the
construction costs.
.
In
2014, there were 1,886 commeJial pennits issued
total project costs of
$1.063 billion for
an
average construction cost ofapproximately $564,000. During
the same year, there were
3,818
residential permits (units) with total project costs of
$0.625
billion for an average cost
!?f$163,701.
Based on data provided by
DPS,
the
average cost for preparing a signage for each permit is approximately
$1.50.
Therefore, based on approximately 5,700 commercial
and
residential permits, the
additional cost..:; are
$8,600.
.
3. The Bill's positive or negatilre
e~ect;
if
any on employment, spending, saving,
investment, incomes, and prope-1Y values
in
the County.
V\~th
Based on the data provided in paragraph #2, Bill 3-15 would have no significant
impact
on employment, spending, saving, investment,. income, and property values
in
the County. The cost of preparing the signage is very minimal in temlS of the overall
.
costs of
the
project.
4. H
a Bill
is
likely to bave no econo,mic impact, wby is that the case?
See paragraph #3.
'Page
1
of2
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Impact Statement
Bill 3-15, Streets and Roads - Obstruction Signage
5.
The following contributed to or
~oncurred
with this analysis:
David Platt and Rob
Hagedoom, Finance; Christina
cqntreras,
Department of
Penllitting Services.
Econo~ic
Director
Department of Finance
: Page 20f2
(f)