HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 07 - Traffic Signal Improvements ProjectITEM 0 - I EMMOMM.ft
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BRUNO RUMBELOW, ACTING CITY MANAGER O�—
MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2005
SUBJECT: LOCAL PROJECT ADVANCE FUNDING AGREEMENT (LPAFA)
AMENDMENT WITH TXDOT FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council consider adopting a resolution approving the Local Project Advance
Funding Agreement amendment with TXDOT to increase the total funding for this project
from $555,600 to $762,600, authorize the staff to execute said agreement, and take any
necessary action.
FUNDING:
Funds for the City's incremental increase in this project cost ($36,674) are available in
2003 GO Bonds, Account # 178-78113-015.
Funds are currently programmed as follows:
Description
Current
Proposed
Additional
Funds
Federal funding
$375,047
$514,778
$139,731
State matching funds
$82,117
$112,712
$30,595
City Matching funds
$98,436
$135,110
$36,674
Total Project Cost
$555,600
$762,600
$207,000
BACKGROUND:
The project is funded in large part by a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
federal grant. The additional funding was requested to retrofit all the traffic signals in the
City (including state owned) signals with energy saving Light Emitting Diode (LED) bulbs.
A detailed memo explaining the costs and benefits of this program is attached.
This project is being administered by the State. A Master Agreement, adopted by the
City (by resolution) and the State in November 2000, establishes general terms and
conditions for transportation projects of this nature. The LPAFA and the proposed
amendment formally establish the funding participation level and scope for this specific
project.
October 5, 2005 (2:46PM)
Once the City Council passes a resolution approving the LPAFA amendment, TXDOT
will authorize the City to proceed with the project.
Staff recommends approval.
RC/rc
O:\agenda\10112005\agmemo.LPAFA Amendment 2.doc
October 3, 2005 (9:30AM)
MEMORANDUM
City of Grapevine, TX
TO: Matt Singleton, Director of Public Works
Stan Laster, Assistant Director of Public Works- Engineering
FROM: Ramana Chinnakotla, Manager of Transportation
DATE: September 30, 2005
SUBJECT: LED (Light Emitting Diode) Retrofit Program
This memorandum provides background on the use of energy saving LED (Light Emitting
Diode) technology in traffic signals, the costs involved in retrofitting existing signals with
LED technology and the resulting savings.
1. Background
A majority of the traffic signals in the City of Grapevine are equipped with incandescent
signal heads. Incandescent bulbs expend between 69 watts (for pedestrian indications) to
135 watts (for vehicle indications) and need to be replaced every year. In addition, 5% of
the signal heads are subject to early burn -out leading to emergency call -outs. LED
technology has been used in traffic signals since the early 1990s. National and state
agencies have adopted technical specifications to standardize the use of this technology in
traffic signals. Some of the initial problems have been solved and the technology is now
very mature. There are several advantages to LED technology:
LEDs save energy — they consume 87%-95% less energy as compared to
incandescent bulbs. The table below shows average energy savings for each type of
signal indication.
Indications
Incandescent
LED
Energy
Percent
No•
(Wafts)
(Wafts)
Savings
Savings
1
Circular Red
135
7
128
95%
2
Circular Green
135
18
117
87%
3
Circular Yellow
135
14
121
90%
4
Green Arrow
135
7
128
95%
5
Yellow Arrow
135
7
128
95%
City of Grapevine LED Retrofit Program
09/30/2005
Page 2
• LEDs have much longer life compared to incandescent bulbs — they have a five-year
warranty and their typical life is between six to eight years. LED malfunctions are rare.
This reduces both routine and emergency maintenance costs.
• LEDs can be retrofit into the existing signal heads with minor modifications to existing
traffic signals.
• The current pricing of LED technology allows agencies to pay for the retrofit out of the
energy savings. The acquisition and installation cost can typically be paid off in three to
four years while the energy savings last six to eight years.
• Energy rebates are available from a federally funded program called Loan Star to
implement LED retrofit programs. These rebates are proportional to the energy savings
resulting from the retrofit.
2. City's Previous LED Implementations
In 2001, the City replaced all red signal indications with LEDs. At the time, it was not cost
effective to retrofit green and yellow signal indications. In addition, we have adopted LED
technology as a standard for all new signal installations and future signal modifications.
Consequently, we have used LED signal heads exclusively on all signal installations since
2003.
3. Proposed LED Retrofit Program
Staff is proposing to retrofit all remaining signal indications with LEDs. This includes all the
City owned signals and the state signals maintained by the City.
The table below summarizes the savings of retrofitting all the signals (City and State) over
a five year period. A total of 1669 signal indications are available for retrofit. The project
will result in a net savings of $153,223 over a five year period. Additional savings will result
due to reduced emergency call -outs. Following are some of the assumptions Staff made
as part of the analysis.
• The LED retrofit cost includes materials and installation. Installation will be done
by an outside contractor.
• Based on an analysis of our existing signal energy costs, we are currently paying
$0.08 per KWH. This was used as the basis for calculating energy savings.
• The annual energy cost was calculated based on a standard on-time per day for
each type of signal indication. For example, it was assumed that a circular red
indication was on approximately 59% of the day while a Red Arrow was on 81 % of
the day.
• A five year LED life cycle was assumed since this is the normal waranty period that
all vendors provide. The ITE and TXDOT specification also call for a 5 year
warranty period. In reality, most LEDs last six to eight years.
City of Grapevine LED Retrofit Program
09/30/2005
Page 3
To estimate current maintenance costs, it was assumed that all incandescent signal
indications would be re-lamped once a year. A cost of $7.50 per signal indication
was assumed ($5.00 for labor and $2.50 for the bulb). It was assumed that once all
the signals are retrofit with LEDs, only one LED replacement per signal per year
would be needed.
Savings due to reduced emergency callouts have not been included in the
calculations.
LED Retrofit Project
4iA
Product
Price
Qty
Total Cost
Red Ball
$ 75.00
300
$
22,500
Green Ball
$ 140.00
433
$
60,620
Yellow Ball
$ 86.00
463
$
39,818
Green Arrow
$ 103.00
106
$
10,918
Yellow Arrow
$ 68.00
104
$
7,072
16" Ped (Walk & Don't Walk)
$ 149.00
263
$
39,187
TotalJeri
Project Savings Summary
Total 5 Year Energy Savings
$
244,447
Total 5 Year Maintenace Savings
$
61,450
Estimated ONCOR Rebate
$
27,440
Total Savings
$
333,338
Net Savings (Total Savings -Project Cost)
$
153,223
Project Funding Summary
State Participation
City Participation
lFederal Funds
'---T2-07,001
$30,595
$36,675
$139,731
ITotal Funds Available
xJOT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS AUTHORIZING A LOCAL
TRANSPORTATION PROJECT ADVANCE FUNDING
AGREEMENT AMENDMENT WITH THE TEXAS
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AMENDING
FUNDING PARTICIPATION LEVEL AND PROJECT
SCOPE FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT WITHIN THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE TO
INCLUDE THE RETROFIT OF EXISTING SIGNALS WITH
LED TECHNOLOGY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE
WHEREAS, a Master Agreement between the City of Grapevine and the State
was adopted by Resolution No. 2000-60 on November 21, 2000 and the agreement
states the general terms and conditions for transportation projects developed through
this Local Transportation Project Advance Funding Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Texas Transportation Commission passed Minute Order 107737
that provides for the development of, and funding for the Traffic Signal Improvements
project in the City of Grapevine; and
WHEREAS, the Grapevine City Council strongly supports the efforts of the
Metropolitan Planning Organization and Texas Department of Transportation in
developing a system of highways in cooperation with local governments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS:
Section 1. That all matters stated in the preamble of this resolution are true
and correct and are incorporated herein as if copied in their entirety.
Section 2. That the City Council of the City of Grapevine approves entering
into this Local Transportation Project Advance Funding Agreement amendment for the
purpose of amending the scope of the Traffic Signal Improvements project within the
City of Grapevine to include the retrofit of existing traffic signals with LED technology.
Section 3. That this resolution shall become effective from and after the date
of its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS on this the 11th day of October, 2005.
ATTEST:
1:4