Loading...
2006, 05-02 Study Session MinutesMayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the meeting. Present: Councilmembers: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Steve Taylor, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Absent: Bill Gothmann, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Tuesday, May 2, 2006 Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Mike Jackson, Parks & Rec Director Ken Thompson, Finance Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Tom Scholtens, Building Official Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Marina Sukup, Community Development Dir. Greg, "Bing" Bingaman, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming, seconded, and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Gothmann from tonight's meeting. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming, seconded and unanimously agreed to amend the agenda to include an item at the beginning of the meeting, on the Student Advisory Council. Student Advisory Council Councilmember DeVleming explained that the Student Advisory Council has been working on a project since last year, to keep guns out of schools; they got 10,000 pencils printed with "keep guns out of school" and the phone number of 327 -5111, which is a special number students can call to anonymously report someone bringing a gun to school, or even threats of someone bringing a gun to school; and that the supporting group the students worked with is Partners in Crime Prevention. Police Chief Walker added that the students were frustrated they couldn't get the literature in the schools but with the assistance of Partners in Crime Prevention, that Board funded the pencils and made banners with the same message. Councilmember DeVleming then showed the public service announcement, filmed by the University High School students with the help of Comcast. Councilmember DeVleming explained that the announcement will air during the remainder of the school year and again next fall. Councilmember DeVleming also thanked Council for their support of the Student Advisory Council.. 1. Proposed 2007 -2012 Transportation Improvement Program and 2007 Annual Construction Program — Neil Kersten /Steve Worley Senior Engineer Worley explained that this is the first draft of the next, six -year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), and includes the 2007 Annual Construction Program; he then continued his explanation of the projects as shown on the backup materials, and asked for Council's comments and/or concerns. Mr. Worley said that this is the first year we went beyond what the County originally proposed as we try to look at other means within the area to develop further projects; that they examined the existing traffic volumes on arterials, accident history, levels of service at intersections, future growth as shown in the traffic model, and looked at the potential growth in the next six to twenty years. As they Meeting Minutes: 05 -02 -2006 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -2006 examined the many components, Mr. Worley said they also try to identify projects to improve the levels of service, especially in rapidly growing areas like Greenacres; and they also examined projects of other jurisdictions, such as Liberty Lake, Spokane County, and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). Mr. Worley said they research what state and federal grants might be available, and they try to match the grant criteria to their projects, and determine the possibility of joining in those regional projects, project such as light rail or Bigelow Gulch; then they score the grants and determine how many of the projects they can accomplish in the next six years. Council/staff discussion ensued regarding specific projects, or areas for consideration; round - abouts and what it would take to get one placed at 16 and State Highway 27, including the need for accident studies to determine the level of service; how much right -of -way would be needed, and the need to hire a consultant to evaluate all associated issues. Mr. Mercier added it might be beneficial to ask someone from WSDOT about their experience with round - abouts, and situations where it works and where it should be avoided. Other comments included the poor condition of 24 Avenue, specifically from Adams or Progress going east up the Veracrest hill; pedestrian crossing on 24 possible grants for a variety of projects; the affect on Sullivan Road of the Bigelow Gulch project; whether the Bigelow Gulch project and the N/S Freeway projects are mutually exclusive or if they compliment each other; and the need for a joint meeting with the County to address joint planning. Public Works Director Kersten suggested asking Spokane County staff Ross Kelly to come give a presentation concerning Bigelow Gulch, and Mayor Wilhite indicated there is a tentative date set of June 7 for a joint City /County meeting, and joint projects would be a good topic to discuss then. Mr. Kersten said the 2007 -2012 TIP is set for a public hearing May 23, with adoption set for June 13; and he mentioned he will put this information on our website to allow citizen comment. 2. Consultant Consideration for Street Master Plan — Neil Kersten Senior Engineer Worley gave his PowerPoint presentation on the street masterplan, explaining the three - phase approach of the project. Director Kersten explained that there are available funds in the Street Fund to cover the project, as there was a substantial savings on snow removal costs from last January and February; adding that the contract is scheduled for approval at next week's meeting. 3. Railroad Quiet Zone - Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained the history of the current quiet zone railway crossing at University Road. In April 2005, he explained, we were notified by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) of the need to renew the quiet zone; and renewal notifications were sent May 2005 to continue the quiet zone beyond the June 24, 2005 expiration date. Mr. Kersten stated that the renewal will expire June 24, 2006; and while researching the requirements for this year's renewal, we learned that the existing median does not comply with the FRA's new requirements, that the southern median should be 100 feet rather than 30 feet, and the intersection of Fairview is closer to the crossing than what is allowed by the federal guidelines. Director Kersten explained that there are two options: one is to hire a contractor to rebuild the median to 100 feet and close the intersection of Fairview /University with concrete barriers; and the other option is the City could initiate the longer approval process to get approval of the existing median, as explained in Mr. Kersten's April 24, 2006 memo. Additionally, staff and FRA discussions will continue concerning the temporary closing of Fairview and lengthening the median; with the intent to re -open the intersection later. Mr. Kersten suggests option one: close Fairview; and if there is a great deal of opposition, it could be re- opened but then the train whistles would be allowed to blow. Discussion followed concerning the possibility of buying needed right -of -way; trying to get a waiver to leave the current situation as is; bridging the valley and the affect of that crossing. It was Council consensus to seek the waiver, and work for option one; put up the barrier and get notice to all the neighbors beforehand explaining the situation. Meeting Minutes: 05 -02 -2006 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -2006 4. Sign Code Update — Mike Connelly Attorney Connelly explained that the goal is to have a sign ordinance that works and is enforceable, and the only way to do that successfully is to be willing to meet semi - regularly to modify the ordinance until it accomplishes that goal. Mr. Connelly reported that he met regularly with Planning and the code compliance officers and identified problems resulting from the first waive of enforcement, which focused on temporary signs. Mr. Connelly then explained the sign code enforcement guidelines issued to date and their focus; exceptions to the code; what requires a temporary permit; what is a flag, permanent versus portable signs; and that the next step in enforcement concerns the number of permanent signs allowed, adding that he realizes issues will be raised during that process. Mr. Connelly mentioned that code enforcement officers have seen approximately 90% compliance, and are giving people time to make adjustments to their signs to make them legal; adding that the goal is to try to help solve problems rather than merely citing for violations. Attorney Connelly mentioned that one of the changes to make to the sign ordinance is to include a definition of a sign, and of the need to define those signs which are or will be regulated so it will be clear we are not regulating elephants or other things used to attract business. Mr. Connelly also mentioned clarification is needed in the exempt sign section of the ordinance as some terms are old or don't have clear application; he mentioned the options to keep or phase out nonconforming signs; and said that auto row signs need to be further researched as we don't want to disallow something now that might be changed to something allowable once the corridor study results are completed and implemented. Council/staff discussion ensued regarding the best recommendation for continuing to research the sign ordinance: a three- person councilmember ad -hoc committee to make recommendations to the full council; direct Attorney Connelly to make changes and bring back for further discussion; or use of the former sign committee for their further ordinance change recommendations. It was determined that Councilmembers will contact Mr. Connelly individually, to accompany him in a drive along Sprague so Mr. Connelly can point out what is and is not currently allowed; that the focus will be on cleanup of the ordinance, and Mr. Connelly can start writing some proposed changes; the current regulations' impact will be re- examined; and the enforcement of the permanent sign will wait until after Councilmembers have an opportunity to view those signs. Mayor Wilhite called for a recess at 7:55 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:02 p.m. 5. Property Maintenance Code Update — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained the rationale for repealing our adoption of the Property Maintenance Code, as per his May 2, 2006 Request for Council Action form. After such explanation, it was council consensus to send this matter to the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing. 6. Draft Ordinance Regulating Use of City Logo - Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell gave the background for the reasons for an ordinance regulating the use of the City logo; that the City logo is a registered trademark and as such, any time someone wants to use the logo, Council approval must be obtained; and that this draft ordinance is in response to several past requests; he also pointed out that section 5 has two options for council consideration. Mr. Mercier mentioned that he feels there should be appropriate planning on the requestor's part, as Mr. Mercier said he would rather tell someone no, then make a bad decision on the use of the logo. Council concurred. After brief council discussion it was determined to use option one, to modify that option to omit the "at least 10 days" clause, to insert "or designee" after the Mayor, Manager, and City Clerk; and to further modify the ordinance by changing Section 3, #2 to omit the word "letterhead" and insert the words "stationery and plaques;" to change #5 by deleting the word "annual" and to include the Chamber's use of the logo for the State of the City Address. Meeting Minutes: 05 -02 -2006 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -2006 7. Hazard Inventory Analysis Report — Toni Scholtens It was determined that in the interest of time, this agenda item will be presented at the next council meeting. 8. Proposed Precinct Building Purchase — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier explained the proposal to purchase the Valley Precinct building, as per the May 2, 2006 memorandum from Morgan Koudelka; that he briefed the Board of County Commissioners a week ago and they directed County staff to finalize the terms of the transaction; and that the proposal will be brought back to the Board of County Commissioners for approval. It was council consensus to proceed. 9. Council Budget Items Councilmember Munson mentioned that issues move quickly in Olympia, making it difficult to keep pace with the latest measure, such as limited increment tax financing; and suggested having a lobbyist to represent Council's interests in Olympia; that he estimates $50,000 for a lobbyist, and mentioned the added possibility of sharing that lobbyist with another municipality. Mr. Munson recommended adding this to the budget. Discussion ensued regarding budget impact, functions of AWC (Association of Washington Cities) and our dues to that organization; the need for representation, and for putting together an agenda to pursue issues; being pro- active rather than responsive; and to have someone knowledgeable of bills and the necessary process. Mr. Munson mentioned 900 bills were submitted to committee in the last short session. Mr. Mercier recommended not including this particular item on the upcoming budget amendment, as adjustments can be made at the end of the year. It was determined this issue will be further discussed at the May 16 council meeting. 10. Advance Agenda Additions Items to add to the advance agenda include lobbyist issue for May 16 study session; to move the pending issue of traffic and traffic studies to one of the meeting dates; to place converting Broadway to three lanes on the May 16 agenda; to confirm if National Night Out is the first Tuesday in August, and if so, of the possibility of cancelling that council meeting; and the mention that budget items, including goals for 2007, will be on the June retreat agenda. Items 11 and 12 (Converting Broadway to Three Lanes; and Hearing Examiner Agreement Modification) were for information only. There were no issues to discuss under agenda items "Council check -in" and "City Manager Comments." There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:52 p.m. ATTEST: c- ristine Bainbridge, City Clerk D-utpA:6, W ax,t, Diana Wilhite, Mayor Meeting Minutes: 05 -02 -2006 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -2006 Cty Council May 3 PhaE Street Vaster Plan J-U-B Engineers, Inc. Study Session 2, 2006 2006 #1 Budget Goal Draft a well-defined Street Master Plan, with Funding Op 6ons, that identifies the a/Trent condition of city siirees and recommends appropriate improvements and maintenance that preserve the value and structural integrity of the local transportabbn system, e Approach Phase I — Pavement Management Plan Phase II — Transportation Planning (TIP) Phase III — Street Master Plan Report Phase I — Pavement Management • Task 1 — Needs Assessment • Task 2 — Inventory Data Collection • Task 3 — Network Definition • Task 4— Condition Assessment • Task 5 — Database Development • - Phase 1 — Pavement Management • Task 6 — Software Evaluation & Develop • Task 7 — Six Year PM Plan/Reports/Maps • Task 8 — System Maintenance Eval, • Task 9 — Council Presentation • Task 10 — Training, System instailation Additional Task • Roadway Structural Component Analysis - Evaluate 4 fairty new roadways - Abnormal Deterioration - 8 Drill Holes Geotechnical Evaluation - Laboratory Testing - Recommendations for Future Projects 2 Phase II — Transportation Planning • Task 1 - Review & Evaluation • Task 2 - Database Development • Task 3 - Six Year TIP Project List • Task 4 - Six Year TIP Cost Estimate • Task 5 - Six Year TIP Funding Proposal Phase II — Transportation Planning • Task 6 - Six Year TIP Report • Task 7 - Grant Applications • Task 8 - Resources Report • Task 9 - Public Involvement Phase III — Street Master Plan Report • Summarize Phases I & II • Existing Conditions • Proposal to Maintain Conditions • Recommended Street Capital Projects • Recommended Budgets /Staffing Levels • Maps & Visual Aids 3 Services Not Provided • Traffic Data Collection • Bridge Condition Inventory • Sidewalk Inventory • Traffic Forecast Modeling Proposed Fee Phase I $232,270 Phase II $186,400 Phase III 5 16,8QQ Total $435,470 4