Loading...
2008, 07-15 Study Session MinutesPresent: Councilmembers: Rich Munson, Mayor Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember Diana Wilhite, Councilmember [arrived at 6:50 p.m.] Absent: Gary Schimmels, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Tuesday, July 15, 2008 Staff: Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Mike Basinger, Senior Planner Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Ken Thompson, Finance Director John Whitehead, Human Resources Manager Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Lori Barlow, Associate Planner Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Bill Miller, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Munson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the meeting. Mayor Munson announced that Councilmember Wilhite is scheduled to arrive by 7:00 p.m., and therefore to allow her the opportunity to participate in the action items, the agenda will be reversed. It was then moved by Mayor Munson, seconded and unanimously agreed to move agenda items numbers one through four, to follow agenda item number nine. [Agenda items are in the order taken at the meeting.] Employee Introductions: Parks and Recreation Director Stone introduced Chris Dobbins, Maintenance Worker for Facilities, and explained that Chris previously worked at the Davenport Hotel for the last seven years. Council greeted and welcomed Mr. Dobbins. REGULAR STUDY SESSION ITEMS: 5. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Quarterly Update — Greg McCormick Planning Manager McCormick briefly explained that the Growth Management Act (GMA) allows jurisdictions to update the comprehensive plan no more than once a year; and that the 2008 comp plan amendment cycle is almost completed, and the new cycle will begin toward the end of August with issuance of a sixty-day notice to the public that we are accepting comp plan amendment requests for 2009, and that the due date is November 1, 2008. Mr. McCormick said staff will start processing those requests and a list will be formed over the next few months and processed over the fall or winter months and worked through the progression early next year. 6. Park Properties Update — Mike Stone Parks and Recreation Director Stone gave a brief PowerPoint presentation giving an update on the grant application process for Phase II of the Greenacres Park Development project; and mentioned that the City is seeking $500,000 in matching funds from the State Recreation and Conservation Office with a total project cost development of $1.2 million. Mr. Stone said $300,000 has been secured from the 2008 State Legislature and that we have budgeted $200,000 of City funds for the project with a plan to ask the 2009 State Legislature for the remaining needed $200,000, assuming we are successful with the grant request. Regarding the Children's Universal Park project, Mr. Stone said the consultant is under contract and staff is developing a list of stakeholders who can be involved in the project by providing input to the Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 1 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 consultant. Director Stone explained that a universal park is a facility open to youth and adults of all ability levels, and that this park will be the first of its kind in this area. 7. City Hall Program — Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten briefly discussed the City Hall Program, which program he said was explained by Bernardo Wills and GGLO at the June 24 council meeting; and said that the City Manager had suggested considering placing Council and Council chambers on the upper level with the permit department on the first level; and he asked for Council's input on that idea, along with bringing Council's attention to the floor plans on pages 80, 81, 82 and mentioned that this is just the programming stage; that he would like council input to get a feel for which floor plan to follow and whether staff should move into the design phase. After brief Council discussion, Council concurred they saw no reason not to move forward. 8. Sprague /Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan — Kathy McClung /Lori Barlow Mayor Munson gave some background on the process for eventual adoption of the Sprague /Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (SARP); and said that there will be several meetings this month for council to discuss the Planning Commission's Daft Program, including a public hearing set for July 29 at CenterPlace, and added that the location of the hearing was changed to CenterPlace in order to comfortably accommodate more members of the public; and said that tonight is just an initial look for Council to ask clarifying questions, and that Council deliberation will not take place until after the public hearing. Community Development Director McClung introduced Associate Planner Lori Barlow who works with Scott Kuhta on the Plan. Ms. McClung said that the purpose of tonight's update is not to go into detail, and mentioned that many of the items are housekeeping items, and to let Council and the public know what to expect as Council goes through this Plan. Director McClung said the Planning Commission started their public meetings on this project in February of this year where they started with an open house to take questions and comments; that the Planning Commission conducted two meetings where public testimony was given; then held seven additional meetings where the Commission held deliberations on the plan; and that one of those meetings included a meeting from Michael Freedman; that the plan review was completed June 26 and over 300 pieces of written correspondence were received from citizens, adding that staff placed the meeting notices in the newspaper, on the city's website, and sent e -mail to over 400 people who had expressed interest in the Plan, and that group was given almost weekly updates along with the Planning Commission agenda, and were given additional information as it became available. Ms. McClung explained that the special study session with Michael Freedman is set for July 23, and the Council's public hearing is set for July 29 at CenterPlace. Director McClung mentioned that the "Plan" is actually three different books, with Book I being the goals and policies, Book 2 the Development Regulations, and Book 3 the transportation component; and that the Plan will be reviewed in that order. Ms. McClung also mentioned that it is too early to tell if additional meetings will be needed, and that will depend on the level of review of the details of the plan; and she asked Council if they have any additional items they would like staff or Mr. Freedman to address, to please get those ideas to her, or to Lori or Scott before July 18 so that Mr. Freedman can be prepared to address those concerns. Council discussion included mention of their desire to have copies of the previous public comments and Planning Commission minutes. Ms. McClung said the minutes are or will be on the website, and that she will check about the minutes and about making the public comments available Mayor Munson asked about the notebook and said that it is not divided into three sections like the "Plan," and that while helpful, the tabs don't fit in those three books; and he also asked about having definitions. Ms. McClung said she will check into the definitions, and Ms. Barlow responded that the notebook recently distributed contains the proposed changes for Book II, and the end of that contains suggested changes for Book 3; Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 2 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 and said there were no recommended changes to Book I. Attorney Connelly stated that Council will eventually consider one ordinance to pass all three books. It was also mentioned that like the Comp Plan and the UDC, this "Planning Commission Recommended Draft" will be on the city's website, and will not change until the Council has formally adopted the Plan. Councilmember Gothmann suggested having the public comments indexed to the relative Plan section, as the comments were done with the UDC. Mayor Munson mentioned that additional meetings may need to be scheduled as Council deems necessary. In other business, Mayor Munson gave a very brief update on the recent fire; and thanked all the responders for their work on this emergency; and said that he attended a briefing today on how the matter was handled; and he then gave a synopsis on how the fire occurred and how it was tackled, and said that there will be a public forum this Thursday which will also be an opportunity to thank everyone for their work and cooperation on this emergency. [Councilmember Wilhite arrived at 6:50 p.m. ] It was moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Schimmels from tonight 's meeting. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading: Proposed Ordinance 08 -011 Amending Comp Plan Text and Map — Mike Basinger After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Denenny and seconded to accept the Planning Commission recommendation and findings and to adopt Ordinance 08- 011. Senior Planner Basinger gave a synopsis of the process to date, and said tonight is the opportunity for Council to continue deliberations and either adopt Ordinance 08 -011 and 08 -012, or remand the Comp Plan revisions back to the Planning Commission for further consideration, or Council could conduct their own public hearing on proposed deviations from Planning Commission Recommendations, adding that any appeal to Council's decision would be heard by the GMA Hearings Board. Mr. Basinger went over the information again for CPA 03 -08 as noted in his PowerPoint presentation, which included data on trip generations, that the data is given to show comparisons of what could happen, and that Mr. Basinger confirmed those trips would not be on Marguerite, and confirmed that if the area were to be zoned Multi Family, adjacent properties could request that same zoning and such zoning would thus be extended. Mr. Basinger said staff looked at a gambit of issues, including that the applicant has five parcels aggregated for the Garden Office designation. Planning Manager McCormick gave a concise description of the proposed text amendments, most of which were minor changes, but did include the acquisition of Greenacres Park, and addressed potential annexation areas to identify and include within the comp plan. It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann and seconded to [amend the motion to] exclude CPA 03 -08 at the present time from the ordinance. Councilmember Gothmann said that residential uses should occur in residential zones, and that this is a residential use so it should be a residential zone; and that the only choice is to have the area remain residential, or to change it to Garden Office; and that he will vote in favor of his motion to exclude as it should remain residential. After further brief council discussion on this motion to amend and on the original motion and of the process in general, the maker and seconder of each motion withdrew their motion. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to accept the Planning Commission recommendation and findings and to adopt Ordinance 08 -011 with the exclusion of CPA 03 -08. Mr. Dick Behm came to the podium to address CPA 03 -08, and was asked to hold his comments until comments were called for that item. Mayor Munson asked for comments from Council on all changes except CPA 03 -08, and no comments were offered. Councilmember Taylor mentioned that CPA 05 -08 and 06 -08 are similar amendment proposals located on Broadway, they are next to a residential area with Cataldo on the north and no road separating this request on the west, and the request is to change the zoning from R3 to GO; and change the designation from Low Density residential to office, and that it is "ok" to gloss over these but said we will make a big deal over the other; and that this designation was recommended by staff to provide the project applicants with a great amount Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 3 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 of flexibility while at the same time reduce the potential greater impacts of having a multi- family designation where one doesn't necessarily have to exist; and that this is the development community working with development staff to come up with the best zones that will work best with the particular project, while helping to implement our comprehensive plan; and he urged Council to make consistent decisions and not those which would be made out of political expediency. Councilmember Dempsey mentioned that CPA 05 -08 and 06 -08 are natural progressions where one would expect the development to continue to the west; and once it was allowed to begin with, it was a natural progression; and this is not taking a small piece of land and pushing it into a neighborhood that is going to change the whole tenure of the neighborhood; and where these two pieces are, won't change much except the driving view from Broadway. Vote on the motion to accept the Planning Commission recommendation and findings and to adopt Ordinance 08 -011 with the exclusion of CPA 03 -08: Ayes: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded, to accept the Planning Commission recommendations and findings and to adopt CPA 03 -08. Mayor Munson invited public comment on CPA 03 -08. Councilmember Dempsey stated that council knows and likely many people know that 03 -08 is her neighborhood, the property that is involved is one block though, that she lives on Sargent Road and this is on Marguerite; and that she does not think this is a cause for her to have special preference for this neighborhood and that her feelings in what is going on would be the same whether it was her neighborhood or anybody else's neighborhood; and she hopes she would be able to continue. There was no objection from Council on Councilmember Dempsey's voting on this issue. Richard Behm, 9405 E Sprague: he mentioned that the past Chamber meetings held long ago were informative and contentious from some neighborhoods afraid of commercial development in the Argonne /Mullan corridor, and that was 35 years ago and much has happened since but the same argument stands today: they are afraid of encroachment of commercial into residential areas; that the final decision on that which satisfies the residents and the business community and the County at that time, was office residential, which meant office residential with no retail or anything else, just office; he said the neighborhood accepted that because offices are quiet after 6:00 p.m.; the traffic is gone and the employees are gone and the office is closed for the evening; that designation extended one -half block deep on the east side of Mullan and on the west side of Argonne; and that is still in affect in a lot of those areas; and if that helps Council make a decision as to the reasons why it was and is still that way, that is what happened; he said he does not know what Garden Office allows or if it is any different from Garden Residential, but it sounds as if it allows a little bit more than what the existing zoning was. Scott Smith, 5023 S Hillcrest Lane, Veradale, Attorney Representing Mr. Raugust: said he has lived in this community his entire life and there has been lots of change; he owns property down the street at Sprague and Pines; he watched the entire Valley and the County develop over his 52 years; he sat on a Spokane County Board of Adjustment years ago hearing zoning appeals; and said he feels it is critical to keep in mind what staff and Planning Commission says; and that he is impressed with a very thorough evaluation of this issue; he urged Council to be part of this change and said he feels the project fits the area and fits what's happening in the City and that Council should not get lost in the names, that garden office sounds new and different and it is; but this project is a residential facility for elderly people and that this is a great opportunity for this Council to allow an amendment to the comprehensive plan to allow this change. Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 4 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 Michael Mann, 505 N Marguerite: said that he and Kathryn asked their neighbors how they felt about what he and Kathy knew about the project, which wasn't as much as they know now; and between the first and the twenty -third of June, they collected 98 signatures on a petition handed to council a few weeks ago; that he thinks this is the wrong place to do this; and said that only two out of 98 didn't sign the petition as one was moving out of the area, and the other voiced an opinion that whoever had the most bucks would win anyway. Lorelle Storm, 5015 S Regal: said she is a regional operations director for a health care firm here in Spokane; said she has been doing this for 30 years and has had lots of opportunity working with seniors; that she most recently did a project and has done many of these projects from the ground up; that she was fortunate to do a residential community that harbors on 55 — Marian Vista, and they just added a three - story building there; and said she lives a block away from the community, so she has that experience of being in the community and being concerned about traffic; and said that what we're talking about is aging in place and bringing the services to the people in the community; 30 years ago there were no options and we only had nursing homes and no retirement communities; now we do and they are giving people the options to keep them more independent and therefore more successful; and said that people are medically stable and there are not a lot of ambulances nor high traffic, but that the area is quiet. Dwight, Hume, N 9101 Mountain View Lane, 99218: said he is speaking on behalf of the applicant; and has past experience working in the land use field; and said office use is a compatible use that co- exists with residential; he said that traffic is not the issue; that Argonne /Mullan was intended to be compatible with garden office uses and he urged Council to approve this, and to recognize staff's input; and he mentioned that he previously served on a Board of Adjustment whose members relied heavily on staff recommendations; and that the Planning Commission unanimously approved this proposal.. Joe Stoy, 1104 N Pureen Road, Spokane Valley 99206: said he wanted to make a correction about an article in the Valley Voice which stated the project was providing access on Marguerite; but he said they are putting the access so it goes out to Alki with a right only direction so they have to head toward Argonne; he said he relies on the planning staff to give recommendations about projects; what they can do and how to get there; and at that time they were directed that the best option was to go to the garden office; he said that the new zoning code came in two days before the CPA deadline; so the garden office zone was new to everybody; he said they were told that the garden office was the best bet versus the multi - family and that is the direction they followed; and he said he relies on the staff's recommendations to get the project completed; he said they are doing the same thing as 05 and 06 [CPA 05 -08 and 06 -08]; he said he lives less than a half block from the property and with the assisted living already there, the area is very quiet; and he feels this project will be the same type of attribute to the neighborhood, which will look like a big house, with the trees left along Marguerite, and with minimized traffic in the neighborhood with no access on Marguerite; as most of the in- and -out traffic will be from Argonne through the business complex. Linda Wasson, 13804 E. 20 Spokane Valley: she said her comments are really personal; she loves the Argonne /Mullan corridor and has been a part of it for over twenty years; she ran the "Gathering Place" which was formerly part of the Redeemer Lutheran Church building; and she lived in the parsonage for a while; she said she has watched the development put up by Mr. Raugust and everything he has put up has been beautiful and has enhanced the Argonne /Mullan corridor; she said she looked at the building plans and it is a beautiful building; that she is dealing with her aging 84 year -old mother and is personally involved with these needs; and said it is a growing need, and she encouraged Council to embrace this and look at it with new eyes and fresh look for those oppose it. Bobbi Beese, 3610 N Sargent:, said she is speaking for her parents who live on 8907 E. Alki, she read portions of the City Code where it states: "The City may approve comprehensive plan amendments if it Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 5 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 finds that (1) the proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety, and welfare, (2) the proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act and with the portion f the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment." She stated that this proposed change meets neither criteria; she said that excess office space is bad for any city; and that the Journal of Business has documented the City's office vacancy rate at over 20% for the last five years; she said that the line of over eighteen office- space- for -lease signs between Mission and Valley Way are embarrassing; and losing residential- designated to office bears no substantial relationship to the public health, safety or welfare; it hurts existing office owners and small homeowners alike; she said that Council has a petition from 98 residents and written comments from two office building owners, and said that these are the people who know the situation; she said the City's comprehensive plan calls for more housing: "Encouraging the preservation and improvement of existing housing stock in neighborhoods remains of paramount importance." She said that Washington GMA requires the housing element "ensuring the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods." She further stated that the City's comp plan's housing element presents housing challenges, discusses demographics in creative ways to house a growing population, and it concludes with goals and policies, but she said that no where does it suggest using an office designation to encourage housing development; and she said that assisted living facilities are a permitted use in this land's current low density designation as well in the multi- family, but she said that no comprehensive plan change is needed to build an assisted living facility on this land; she said to go ahead and permit assisted living facilities on land already designated office, but she asked that Council not change a residential designation to office and expect to get more housing; and she said that people are blinded by the prospect of a new assisted living facility, that Council is not deciding on a specific project but are only deciding on a comprehensive plan change and it doesn't meet the criteria. Greg Mott 8907 E Alki: said he wanted to talk about the four houses on this property; that Mr. Raugust bought four classic historical homes in a historical neighborhood and that we seem to have forgotten those four homes; that in the Comprehensive Plan it stated that it will encourage rehabilitation and improvements to conserve and upgrade existing properties and buildings; and throughout the comprehensive plan it discusses affordable housing; and he said that this has been ignored; and it is difficult to believe that Council will approve this plan and destroy these four homes; and that when others built large homes they moved the homes into residential neighborhoods and saved and rehabilitated and re -sold those homes; but he said that Mr. Raugust bulldozed those homes, much like buying a classic car and junking it when the battery dies; he said that Mr. Raugust promised people a look at the plan in an community meeting, and invited residents to an open house, but that he failed to show for that open house without a note or apology or notification of an additional meeting, and said that that is the type of person we are dealing with, and Mr. Mott ask that Council please not destroy his neighborhood. Brian Burtenshaw, 4216 N Vercler: said that in reference to the houses just mentioned, the reason some houses were removed is they had burned down and were in disrepair and were not able to be restored; he said that they researched moving the house and are looking at those options, and that it is not their goal to rip them down, but did not want to make a decision until tonight's matter was resolved; he said the houses won't be affordable houses if they are renovated to an insurable and rentable condition as there are extensive repairs needed to make them rentable for insurance reasons and to have long -term tenants; he said they want to keep the neighborhood as much as they can which is why Mr. Raugust has re- designed the building a few times after listening to the public; and changed the access to mostly Argonne except for the required emergency exit. He said they did schedule a meeting and they did wait until around 7:00 p.m. but no one showed up and finally one of the other neighbors came and told them it was the first reading that night here, which they were unaware of as they weren't notified prior to that meeting. Randy Smith, North Conn, Incorporated, 10615 N Government Way Hayden Idaho: he said that he is the builder who built three of the existing buildings that are on Argonne, and he is the builder who removed Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 6 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 one of the houses along Argonne, and speaking to the condition of the homes, he said it was full of rats nests in the attic, the house was laden with asbestos; and said to try to move or refurnish the homes was not advisable as they would be putting more money into the house than it would be worth the time to move; that the building conditions included rotten walls, dry rot, and some mold, and so far as Dennis bulldozing homes, that is absolutely not true; he said we looked at homes and if they were salvable, he would do so and re -use the homes; and architecture- wise, in looking at homes built by Mr. Raugust, that he never had an issue regarding the architecture as the buildings were aesthetically pleasing without taking any shortcuts; and said that one of the other homes back on Marguerite was completely re -sided and that there were 50 to 60 cats in that home when Mr. Raugust took that home, and that he has kept the home in a residential condition at this point; and that he does historical renovation for the federal government, but he is not sure those homes would be called historical homes in their present condition. Kathryn Mann, 505 N Marguerite: she explained that through the overture of a neighbor, over a month ago, she was approached and asked if she would be willing to sell her two- thirds of an acre to Mr. Raugust; she said she agrees with Councilmember Gothmann that we need to consider what the Planning Commission presented; that it is not four acres but is 3.1 acres; and she said there was one declining vote on the Commissioners for the planning and it was not a unanimous approval; she said she is polarized and not able to do other than what they are doing as a neighborhood because they have been fighting a fire for two months; she said those are not ugly houses across the street and there are people living in them; and she said she believes Council should move to suspend voting on this and demand that "we sit down together with the developer in a neutral setting and arbitrate this," that the development on Broadway as Mrs. Dempsey voiced, is next to another building built on that space, and beyond it are the trees that have been there for 40 years; she said that across the street is North Pines Junior High playing field and there is nobody there to say we don't like the idea; she said she is not against change and would love to see beautiful townhouses in there and wouldn't mind if her taxes were raised because it was such a spectacular development; but she said that office is not appropriate and not the right decision for that particular spot; and she said if we are not able to negotiate this, it will go into appeals for years; and she asked Council to help her. Mayor Munson invited further comments, and no further comments were offered. During Council deliberation, Councilmember Wilhite remarked that she walked the property in question and went inside the one house that was historical, that she noticed that the foundation is crumbling; and said that it would be difficult and extremely expensive to save it in a livable condition; she stated that she lives across the street from some open acreage, and she would not want multi family to go in there due to increased traffic; and said that the corner of this property across from the playing area already has a designation for higher usage; and if other property touches that they can request a zone change, and she said she would rather have a retirement home or an office building as opposed to having multi family, and added that the price is too high to be affordable housing due to the need to recoup money that would be put into reconstructing the home. Councilmember Gothmann said that he has relatives in assisted living facilities and feels those work well in a residential neighborhood, but that the question for council tonight is whether to keep Marguerite as it is or change to Garden Office as the City Attorney told him these are the only two options for tonight and there are no other choices; he said there is already an R4 lot there and it could easily be extended north, but that Council has to decide what is best for the City and for Marguerite; and he said we do have excess office space now, and said he prefers this area remain residential; and that he remembers the controversy on Cataldo when the office designation was extended west that there were people lined up opposing it and he feels this should remain residential as office is not appropriate. Councilmember Taylor said that the case on Cataldo proves his point, in that there was a lot of consternation on that prior amendment and people were lined up as they felt it would have a large impact, but that that feared impact never occurred; and said that the issue here is we know or have been reasonably assured of what will go in this place; and that this proposal does meet the list of criteria that the Planning Commission had to sign off on, that he feels the Planning Commission was correct in their Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 7 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 determination and that this will allow re- development to occur in an area that can remove structures that are beyond repair which will be good for the entire neighborhood, and said that it is wrong if people feel that by simply gathering signatures on a petition they can take away developments rights and that we need to see this redevelopment occur. Deputy Mayor Denenny said that Councilmember Wilhite's comments expressed some of his feelings; that he too drove and walked the area; that he pictures the Garden Office designation is a natural transition; that apartments would highly impact that area much more than a low impact office; in examining the restrictions and types of uses allowed, he stated this would help the neighborhood retain its character; that we can't tell people what they can do with their building; that he is aware of the cost of housing and feels there is a perception disconnect between the realty of development and cost of projects; and again stated he feels this is proper and a natural transition. Councilmember Dempsey explained that she hears what she thinks is a mistaken basic premises that someone can come into a neighborhood and purchase property and have the right to do whatever they want regardless of the surrounding neighbors; that this is a dreadful way to treat neighborhoods and citizens; that there was a petition with 98 signatures saying `please don't do this," and yet if the choice is to have garden office or multi family, she feels the sentiment is we should be happy with garden office as multi family would mean even more traffic; and she said she does not understand how this could be right; that she is a firm believer in talking, and said if Mr. Raugust had talked with the neighborhoods and shown them the plans maybe they would not be so upset, and added that she has not seen the plans. Councilmember Dempsey further stated that she is in favor of retirement homes, but she is not sure this is the right place for a retirement home or a good thing for the neighborhood, and if we disregard the people and their wants, the neighborhood and community will fall apart. Mayor Munson explained that initially he wanted to support not allowing this to occur, but when he asked for an explanation of why the Planning Commission approved this, and after reviewing the explanation of the line -by -line Planning Commission checklist, Mayor Munson said he is satisfied with that explanation, and is concerned that the result of not doing this could result in something that no one wants; that Garden Office is a transition to buffer neighborhoods from other types of commercial development, and that this project will provide needed retirement facilities; adding that to ignore the neighborhood's feelings and desires is troublesome, but that the law allows these things to occur if the proper thought and planning have been undertaken, and that he will support the motion. Vote on the motion to accept the Planning Commission recommendations and findings and to adopt CPA 03 -08: In Favor: Mayor Munson, Deputy Mayor Denenny, and Councilmembers Wilhite and Taylor. Opposed: Councilmembers Dempsey and Gothmann. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor Munson called for a recess at 8:12 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:20 p.m. 2. Second Reading: Proposed Ordinance 08 -012 Amending Comp Plan Zoning Map — Mike Basinger After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to approve Ordinance 08 -012. Senior Planner Basinger explained that this ordinance takes the comp plan amendments and further implements it to the zoning map. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. First Reading: Proposed Ordinance 08 -013 Special Permit Activity — Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to suspend the rules and adopt ordinance 08 -013. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that the staff recognizes the high value of the MDA (Muscular Dystrophy Association) and the firefighters regarding the "Fill the Boot" campaign, and that was taken into consideration as these materials were drafted; he explained that most of the ordinance relates to potential right- Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 8 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 of - way issues such as charitable solicitation in the right -of -way and has a broader context so as to apply to any group or person who would submit an application for a special event. Mr. Driskell brought Council attention to the noted permit exceptions in section 5.15.035; and he further explained that he contacted the City's insurance carrier WCIA to determine if they have concerns or suggestions, assuming they have addressed these issues in other jurisdictions, but to date he has not received a reply from WCIA. Mr. Driskell also distributed copies of materials from the City's newly formed ad -hoc panhandling committee, and said that there is a need to at least raise this issue as well, as this committee made tentative recommendations and has asked for legal advise on what they can or can't do; and while he has not had a chance for thorough review of those documents, it appears there could be some serious conflict between this draft ordinance and some of the Panhandling Committee recommendations. Deputy City Attorney Driskell also referenced the packet copy of the City of Tacoma's permit for the 2007 fill the boot event; and said the Spokane County Traffic Training Model is what the County uses to train people on how to operate in a right -of -way; and in doing the research on the safety training component, he said he had difficulty in trying to identify what would be the appropriate entity to conduct the training and provide certification; that we don't want to limit this to one organization from a commercial standpoint, but it seemed there should be some certifying agency to provide a baseline from a safety standpoint. Councilmember Gothmann said he believes the SCOPE people go through this training as well as the police department members, but he is not sure whom the training is from. Mr. Driskell said the Washington State Traffic Control Oversight Committee is the committee referenced in all their materials, and that perhaps this would be the best group to offer to conduct such training. City Attorney Connelly further explained that staff is trying to come up with some verbiage that would identify that training is required and some institution or firm that would provide the minimum training, as all the training manuals they have been reviewing state that people should not go out in the traffic. Further Council /staff discussion included adding that only fully trained first responders can enter the right -of -way; not including a process that artificially restricts just one group's use; the technical definition of "first responders," the required documentation from a approved training course; trying to include what the standard would be, and of staff's suggestion of not approving this tonight since there was only a week to draft the document and there are still a lot of unanswered questions. It was mentioned that to be effective in time for this Aug 2 campaign, and allowing for 5 days for the ordinance to become effective after adoption, and that an application for the special permit must be submitted at least five days prior to the event, it was determined that this ordinance should be addressed tonight. After further comment on the ordinance draft, the following three changes were suggested: (1) 5.15.010 F. to read as follows: Special event" means any use, parade, run, street dance, or other activity, demonstration and or exhibition of public property.; (2) 5.15.050 Permit — Application — Filing. An completed application for a special event permit shall be filed ... and (3) 5.15.080 J.2. The applicant fails to provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate that all persons who will be entering the roadway in any manner related to the event have successfully completed the Spokane County Incident Traffic Control Program or its equivalent and that certification is current. Mayor Munson also reminded everyone that this issue can be re- visited later if needed. It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to amend the motion to include these three amendments. Vote by Acclamation to amend the motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. Mayor Munson opened the floor for public comment. John Nelson, 10511 N Middleton Drive: he thanked Council for taking the time to work on this and for staff's work as well; and said that regarding training, during participation at the academy, a lot of these basics are reviewed; and he recommended looking at what they do; he mentioned the SERT training, and said that law enforcement and fire personnel all have annual training with heavy training emphasis when they are first brought onto the job. Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 9 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 Jeremy Dunlap, N 11007 McCoy Road Newman Lake: said he wanted Council to put a face to the need; that he is a safety director and that there is a great need for the fill the boot charity, and that MDA gets great benefits from this; he said his son has MD; and that funds raised by this campaign are funds which come from Spokane Valley citizens; and they are aware of the need to balance this need and the need for safety; and added he appreciates this effort. Travis Naught, 15610 S Normal Park Road, Cheney: he thanked Council for examining this proposal and of amending it with the amended statements; and said that as an individual with MD, if they were not allowed to have these special event permits, then charitable organizations would be hindered in their ability to gather donations from public because it would be taking them from public sight. Jana Worthington 9119 N Dusk Court: said she is the executive director of the local MDA and she has worked in Eastern Washington, in Northern Idaho and in Oregon, and they represent fifty fire departments; that they fight for some pretty amazing people; and that regarding her and John Nelson's decision to be pro- active with this, that there was never an intention of putting the city at risk or endangering members of the fire department or ruining any reputations or hurting any individual; and she said Council should be reassured that she and others hope to be part of a learning curve and help come up with solutions as the city grows; and said she is willing to work with city every step of the way; and that she has a board and a large legal department and an insurance carrier; and said they have never had an incident; that the participants are very safe, and they only allow people eighteen and over to participate; and that she doesn't allow her own staff on the street as they are not trained. Mayor Munson invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. Mayor Munson said he would vote against this because although MDA is a very worthy charity, he feels we are moving too fast and setting a precedent of having hard time in the future of sorting out other entities who are not as qualified. Vote by acclamation to approve the amended ordinance: In Favor: Deputy Mayor Denenny, and Councilmembers Taylor, Dempsey, Wilhite, and Gothmann. Opposed: Mayor Munson. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting to 9:15 p. m. 4. Motion Consideration: Authorization to Solicit Grant — Mike Basinger It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded, to authorize Mayor Munson's signature on the attached draft letter of support [letter to Ike Nwankwo, of CTED]. Senior Planner Mike Basinger explained that recently, the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) notified jurisdictions across the state that an emerging issues grant was available; that the goal of this grant is to provide financial assistance to local governments for projects that are critical to carrying out their Growth Management Act plan and occur outside of regular growth management grant application periods. Mr. Basinger said that project manager Susan Winchell found a way to capture more funding, and added that the deadline to submit the grant application to the State is July 18, 2008, and a requirement of the grant application is that a letter of support from each participating jurisdiction be included in the grant application materials; and that the project will require staff time for continued collaboration as in -kind contribution to the project, but that the City of Spokane Valley will not retain any portion of the grant funds to compensate for staff time, adding that we and the City of Liberty Lake will take the lead on these emergency issue grants, and that the main task is to eventually have a mutually acceptable interlocal agreement. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 10 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 9. Information Only - The Mayor's letter to Secretary Gutierrez, US Department of Commerce and the Splashdown Contract Update were for information only. Mayor Munson did mention the Secretary Gutierrez letter and there was no objection from Council in sending the letter as drafted. 10. Advance Agenda - Mayor Munson Mayor Munson said regarding the Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan, that Council might be adding some meetings as needed and as agreed upon by Council. 11. Council Check -in - Mayor Munson Councilmember Gothmann mentioned the additional notes on the panhandling committee reflecting what they have done and where they are headed. 12. City Manager Check -in - Mike Jackson. No comments EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved by Mayor Munson and seconded to adjourn into executive session until approximately 9:30, to discuss land acquisition and pending litigation, and that there would be no action thereafter. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:08 p.m. At 9:30 p.m., Deputy City Attorney Driskell announced the executive session would be extended for approximately 15 additional minutes. At 9:39 p.m., Mayor Munson declared Council out of executive session. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. ATTES 1� - C- hristine : ainbridge, . ity Clerk Study Session Meeting Minutes: 07 -15 -08 Page 11 of 11 Approved by Council: 08 -12 -08 Notes from Panhandling Committee 7 -15 -08 1. The Panhandling Committee has come up with the following findings: a. Police need more legal tools b. There are people with legitimate needs c. Social Resources are available, but are not unlimited d. We need a public education program on inefficient and efficient giving e. We need to build a coalition of public and private partners f. We need to settle legal issues before we devise the education piece 2. We wish to have legal give us advice on the following recommended changes to our ordinances. We should note that we have included possible changes with the idea that, after legal has commented, we will evaluate each change. a. Require a license /permit to solicit b. Curtail/prohibit cleaning windshields and then asking for donations c. Prohibit a driver from giving funds while driving d. Prohibit fraudulent solicitations e. Time and place restrictions i. Within 50 feet of an ATM, bus stop, or traffic signal ii. On business property where permission has not been granted iii. On medians or islands iv. On freeway exits or entrances (distance from freeway ?) v. Along major arterials at intersections that have traffic lights vi. At four way stops vii. At nighttime (dusk to dawn ?) f. Criminalization of pubic intoxication and open containers (change to misdemeanor) g. Redefine aggressive panhandling to include stepping into streets or onto a median 3. For next meeting (July 29, 9:30AM) a. Report from legal b. Talk to City Manager about the process of ordinance going from committee to adoption (Bill) c. Contact Liberty Lake and Spokane so this is a multi jurisdictional effort(Bill) d. Seek Carolbelle's advice on what the pieces of a campaign should be (Bill) e. Call Anchorage about their education campaign — how it was done and how it was financed (Bill) Tacoma City of Tacoma Legal Department — City Clerk's office August 7, 2007 Anna Burrows Muscular Dystrophy Association 633 North Mildred Street, Suite 0 Tacoma, WA 98406 Dear Ms. Burrows: SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT #07 -80 Subject: Special Event Permit No. 07 -80, Tacoma Fill the Boot Permission is hereby granted to Anna Burrows and the Muscular Dystrophy Association for Tacoma Fill the Boot, sponsored by Tacoma Fire Local 31, to be held on August 10 and 11, 2007, and August 24 and 25, 2007, from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. each day, at the intersection of South 38 and Steele Streets. Permit Number 07 -80 is hereby issued contingent on the following conditions: 1. That you arrange a meeting with Special Events Sergeant Rob Jepson regarding any changes from the approved permit, at (253) 591 -5932. This has occurred. 2. That you comply with all conditions on the enclosed memorandum from Ron Johnson, Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division, who can be reached at (253) 591 -5276. Note: The City of Tacoma no longer provides barricades, cones, and signs. Applicant will be required to provide all necessary barricading requirements. 3. That you comply with all conditions on the enclosed memorandum from Brian Trunk, Fire Inspector, Tacoma Fire Department, who can be reached at (253) 591 -5728. 4. That prior to the event you notify merchants and neighbors in the area of the upcoming event. 5. That you notify all participants to obey all rules, regulations and laws related to pedestrians. 6. Only fully trained and certified First Responders may enter the roadway for this event; and those individuals must comply with the First Responders who have been designated as Site . Safety Officers for this event. 7. Two Site Safety Officers wilt be used and they will be stationed on diagonally opposing corners to assure clear observation of all First Responders working this event. 8. The Site Safety Officers will use an air horn or other clearly audible device to alert the First Responders of signal changes; and wilt allow sufficient time for the First Responders to clear the streets before the signal turns Green. 9. All signs, as indicated in the permit request, must be clearly posted prior to First Responders entering the street. 10. First Responders may only be in the street during the times that the signal light for that section is Red, and must immediately clear the street when the Safety Officers indicates. 11. That you have this permit letter readily available during the event, and shall present this permit upon demand of any City official. 747 Market Street. Room 220 1 Tacoma.%VA 98402 -3768 1 (253) 591 -5111 1 FAX (253) 591 -5300 www.cltyaftacoma.org SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT #07-80 This permit is granted subject to all other applicable laws and ordinances. This permit does not constitute a waiver by the City of any laws or ordinances that may apply to the permitted event or any activities associated with the permitted event. If I can be of further assistance to you, please contact me at (253) 591 -5178. Enclosure City of Tacoma — Public Works TO: Doris Sorum, City Clerk FROM: Kurtis D. Kingsolver, P.E. Assistant Engineering Division Manager DATE: August 2, 2007 Memorandum SUBJECT: TACOMA FILL THE BOOT Permit: 07 -80 Date of Event: August 10/11/24/25, 2007 Event Location: S. 38th and S. Steele St. Applicant's Name: Anna Burrows MDA and Matt Frank TFI) The Engineering Division has reviewed the application for the "Tacoma Fill the Boot" special event. The application is approved under the following conditions: • All personnel must follow the "Tacoma Fire Safety Measures" as outlined in the application. • Only fully trained and certified First Responders may enter the roadway. • Fire fighters will not collect donations when the traffic signal is green. • Fire fighters will not impede traffic in any way. • Safety vests must be wom at all times. • If traffic begins to back up such that it impedes flow off of Interstate -5, fire fighters will cease collecting donations until traffic clears. Date: July 19, 2007 CITY OF TACOMA FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To: Matt Frank, Tacoma Fire Department From: Brian Trunk, FPB #168 Event: Special Event Permit #07 -80, Tacoma Fill the Boot. I have reviewed your Special Event Permit Application #07 -80, for use of the intersection of South 38' Street and South Steele Street, or the intersection of South 74 Street and South Tacoma Way, on August 10, 11, 24 & 25, 2007, from 8:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., for your event. The Tacoma Fire Department does hereby approve your application, with the following provisions or exceptions: 1) All aspects of the event must comply with the provisions of the enclosed Tacoma Fire Department Special Events Policy. 2) The event contact person shall determine if, by the Special Events Policy, any event participant's activity requires a Fire Department permit. 3) The event contact person shall make sure that each participant needing a permit, submits a timely application for that permit, to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 4) By the information submitted in your application, it does not appear your event needs any further Fire Department permits. 5) Good luck with your event! Please note that other City Departments may have further requirements. Thank you, for allowing me the privilege of serving you. Please call the Fire Prevention Bureau at (253) 591 -5740 if we may be of assistance. L7 City of Tacoma - Police Department Date: July 27, 2007 Memorandum To: Doris Sorum, City Clerk From: Captain Michael Miller, Homeland Security Operations Commander Subject: TACOMA FILL THE BOOT Permit: 07 -80 Date of Event: August 10 /11/24/25, 2007 Event Location: S. 38th and S. Steele St. Applicant's Name: Anna Burrows MDA and Matt Frank TFD The Tacoma Police Department has no reason to deny this event from being held. The Department recommends approval of this permit with the following stipulations: 1. Sponsor shall arrange a meeting with Special Events Sgt. Rob Jepson regarding any changes from the approved permit, at telephone number (253) 591 -5932. This has occurred 2. One week prior to the event, sponsor shall notify merchants and neighbors in the area of the upcotning event. 3. Contact Ron Johnson at 591 -5276, in the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineers' Office, for traffic control requirements. 4. Sponsor will ensure that the street closure is monitored throughout the event. 5. Sponsor will notify all participants to obey all rules, regulations, and laws pertaining to pedestrians. 6. Only fully trained and certified First Responders may enter the roadway for this event; and those individuals must comply with the First Responders who have been designated as Site Safety Officers for this event. 7. Two Site Safety Officers will be used and they will be stationed on diagonally opposing corners to assure clear observation of all First Responders working this event. 8. The Site Safety Officers will use an air horn or other clearly audible device to alert the First Responders of signal changes; and will allow sufficient time for the First Responders to clear the streets before the signal turns Green. 9. All signs, as indicated in the permit request, must be clearly posted prior to First Responders entering the street. 10. First Responders may only be in the street during the times that the signal light for that section is Red, and must immediately clear the street when the Safety Officers indicates. Spokane County Incident Response Traffic Control Training Training Requirements Federal Guidelines for traffic Control are listed in the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices). These guidelines are for traffic control when maintenance or construction in the road or right of way occur. Although originally established for maintenance and construction work, these guidelines provide methods to safely control traffic and reduce the risk during incident response traffic control. State Regulations for traffic control are found in WAC 296 -155- 305. This is the construction standard for traffic control and only applies to Washington state. Reducing The Risk is the primary goal for traffic control training. County personnel must be trained in the hazards associated with the task of traffic control. The information in this manual will provide traffic control techniques that align with current state and federal requirements and make incident response traffic control at Spokane County a safe task to perform. A Certificate of Completion will be awarded to each participant who successfully completes the training and passes the test with 80 % efficiency. 2 Flagger Qualifications /Responsibilities Safety is your most important responsibility You are responsible for yourself, county personnel, motorists and pedestrians. The flaggers job is to move traffic safely and quickly while allowing incident response personnel time to do their jobs. In addition, flaggers will be expected to assist with sign and device set up and take down. Benefits of proper flagging Less confusion for motoring public Fewer accidents Less injuries to county personnel and the public Fewer claims and lawsuits Qualifications for Flaggers Be in good physical condition Respond to danger quickly Have good vision and hearing Able to remain on duty for several hours Be mentally alert Adapt quickly to emergencies Anticipate potential hazards Be professional Always courteous, but to the point Gives signals that are clear and decisive Never argue with motorists Be respectful to motorists 3 RCW 46.61.015 Obedience to police officers, flaggers, or fire fighters 1) No person shall willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any duly authorized flagger or any police officer or fire fighter invested by law with authority to direct, control, or regulate traffic. 2) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor. Rules Of Conduct Be clearly visible to approaching traffic from 500 feet Always be aware of oncoming traffic Stand-on the shoulder by the fog line; do not stand in the traveled way Stand alone and project your authority as a traffic controller Be courteous and professional Plan an escape route in case of an emergency Choose a position that will give you the greatest color contrast between you and the background Do not stand in front of stopped vehicles in the road Do not turn your back on traffic Do not do any other work while flagging Do not flag from inside a vehicle Do not flag from bridges or overpasses Do not use distracting devices such as walkman headphones, cell phones etc. Do not get involved in unnecessary conversations with others Do not leave your assigned position until appropriately relieved 4 Hazards of Flagging Speeding Motorists Flaggers must recognize that speeding motorists present a hazard not only to themselves, but to other personnel at the incident site. Traffic approaching the incident must be warned in advance that the traffic pattern is altered ahead. To accomplish this, signs must be placed in advance of the incident site. Placement of signs is dependent on posted speed limits. When a flagger notices vehicles approaching the flagger station too fast for conditions, they should give the "slow down signal ". Inattentive Drivers Drivers may be inattentive due to distractions in their vehicle. Make eye contact with approaching drivers to identify if they are paying attention to your signals. Inattentive drivers are likely to invade the incident site despite the signs and flagger's efforts. The flagger must have a predetermined escape route in the event of an emergency. Hostile Drivers Drivers become hostile because they are delayed. Their hostility is often directed toward the flagger since the flagger is the closest and most visible representative of their annoyance. The flagger needs to avoid antagonizing the hostile driver. Be polite and avoid being personal with the angry driver. If the hostile driver persists, take down the make and model of the car, the license number, and a description of the driver and contact the person in charge at the incident site. Drivers Under The Influence Drivers who have used drugs and alcohol are a particular hazard to Faggers. Drivers who have taken prescription drugs may not be alert, may be drowsy and slow to react to a flagger's signal. Drivers affected by drugs may be encountered at any hour. Drivers affected by alcohol are more common in the late afternoon and evening when people are traveling home after an evening out. Boredom and Fatigue Standing in one spot for extended hours can cause boredom and fatigue. Flaggers should stay alert at all times in case of an emergency. 5 Extreme Weather Conditions The flagger can expect to experience extreme and varied weather conditions. It is recommended that flaggers prepare in advance for all weather conditions and make sure you have the appropriate items in the vehicle. Distraught Drivers Flaggers can expect to be confronted by distraught drivers at accident scenes. Friends and family members who arrive at the scene may be hysterical at times. Contact the person in charge at the accident scene when dealing with distraught drivers. Flagging During Hours of Darkness Flagging during hours of darkness is more hazardous and requires more clothing and /or equipment than daylight flagging. Hours of darkness are 1 /2 hour before sunset to 1 /2 after sunrise. Rear - end Collisions are the leading cause of crashes at flagger stations, due to the slowing and stopping of traffic. Clothing and Equipment A highly visible vest (ANSI class II vest is recommended) Stop /Slow paddle (retro reflective, high intensity or diamond grade facing) Flashlight with a red nose cone Pen and notepad White coveralls are recommended for night flagging or fluorescent pants Two way radio 6 Positioning for Safety flake yourself visible to approaching traffic for several hundred feet Avoid standing in the traveled way Do not stand in the shade Never flag from inside a vehicle Do not create tripping hazards where you stand Do not stand in a location where you will be trapped between vehicles Do not involve yourself in unnecessary conversation Develop an Emergency Escape Plan Plan for an emergency In the event that you must make an emergency escape, do not attempt to carry the paddle, drop it away from your direction of exit. Exit 90 degrees to the path of the oncoming vehicle. Be alert at all times Anticipate every reasonable hazard that could happen at the work site. It is important to remember that approaching drivers may not see you may be unable to stop, or may lose control of their vehicles, Be visible Expect the unexpected Identify potential problems 7 Motorists Safety Never assume that a driver sees you Directions given must be clear, firm and courteous Avoid confusion Communicate a clear message to approaching drivers You must coordinate flagging with street lights when you are controlling traffic in an intersection when possible. Traffic Elements The flagger must be familiar with existing traffic elements in order to safely direct vehicles and pedestrians around a work site. There are several things to consider when setting up a flagger station Traffic Volume Traffic Speed Visibility Cross- traffic Movement Pedestrian Traffic Type of Road Road Conditions Weather Detours (traffic diversions) 8 Drivers Stopping Distance Drivers must perceive, react and brake before your flagging location ❑ Perception Time (3/4 second) ❑ Reaction Time (3/4 second) ❑ Braking Distance (slide to stop) ❑ Feet Per Second • 40 mph = 58 FPS • 45 mph = 65 FPS • 50 mph =73 FPS • 55 mph =80 FPS • 60 mph =88 FPS Driver Reaction Distance 1 1 /2 second = 88 feet 1 1 /2 second = 100 feet 1 1/2 second = 110 feet 1 1 /2 second = 120 feet 1 1 /2 second = 132 feet Reaction distance is based on the speed of traffic and add the first number to the speed. 50 mph + 5 = 55 feet Traffic Control Zone Advanced Warning Area Transition Area Activity Area Buffer Space Incident Area Termination Area 9 Collision Area (Aotto seirde). 1) Advance Warning:Area • Warns; . traf6t _What, to.dkpett ertivally.a of advance warning signs • Only -fiedessary equ4mnent and :materials permitted in this area :4) TerilibiOicm Area trathc resume normal drivitg 4 *.COntainS.theLdoWnstrearn. taper' .0 Atteizilbiz) (Dewibes $4iiatiqn) -(S.Wes Specifi*iim). 'FLAGGING STATION 2) IlwisitiOn Area • Moves.traffic out Of the nornial with. channeliziO g .deVi ceS 3)s Activity Area - Buiffe Space • Allows 'rnotoiists extra, space-to regain cdntrol Iitf they inis'sed,theWarning sighs CLEAR ;1'4 c•rt • • - • Jest Adyance Warning Sign .gequence, - Accident Ahead 1 " • i3e.pieparecf.to 3td -FlaggerAhead . t • 1 .1 ;Stop sign: • -Ad vance waning sign Channelizing ❑ Stop ❑ Proceed Flagging STOP and Signals PROCEED ❑ Alert and Slow o To further alert Qr slow traffic, motion up and down with the free hand, palm down WARNING SIGNS ❑ Diamond shape ❑ Orange background ❑ Black lettering ❑ 36 inch vs 48 inch signs ❑ Minimum of one foot above the ground ❑ Designed to yield on impact SIGN SETUP AND TAKE DOWN ❑ Set up signs in the direction of traffic ❑ Take down signs in the opposite direction of traffic CHANNELIZATION ❑ Diverts traffic from its normal path ❑ Safely guides traffic around a collision ❑ Provides maximum safety to investigators ❑ Channelization devices ❑ Taper length chart ❑ Tapers Minimum distance between cones in the taper is speed to feet (speed limit 30 mph- spacing is 30 feet) Retroreflective Bands • Merging • Shifting • Shoulder 13 Suggested Advance Warning Sign Spacin Road Type Speed Urban (low speed) 25 30 Urban (high speed) Rural 35 40 45 55 g Distance Between Signs B A C Reference: MUTCD Merging, Shifting and Shoulder Taper Lengths And Number of Channelization Devices (Cones) Used (All minimums) MPH 12 Feet Lane Width 44129 _ Merging Taper Merging Cones "1/2 L" = Shifting Taper Shifting 1 Cones Shoulder Tapers (Assume 10' shoulders) "1/3L "= Shoulder Taper (ft.) length Devices _ i 3 L = WS (only for 45 mph and above) (i.e., 12 ft. lane and speed is 55 mph — L = 12 x 55 = 660) 100 feet max. — Two -way Taper 100 feet min. — Downstream Taper Minimum distance between cones in a merging or shifting taper is SPEED TO FEET (i.e., speed limit is 30 mph — spacing is 30 feet). Buffer S . ace Data Buffer Space length based on s osted s • eed minimum distance Speed (MPH) Length (Feet) 14 MERGING TAPER merges two lanes into one SHIFTING TAPER Shifting Taper (- 1 /2L 1/2 L > Shifting Taper Shifts two lanes around an occupied lane SHOULDER TAPER �r�... ;t om_» x,41:4 Shoulder Taper 1/3 L Shows road users the shoulder is occupied and closed ONE LANE TWO WAY TAPER ---� f Buffer (longitudinal) Two -way is used to position Work Traffic Taper the taper in advance Space 50-100 feet of the curve One -bane, two -way taper Necessary on two lane roads when one lane is closed 16 USING ONE FLAGGER Note: When one flagger is used on a two lane road the flagger should stand on the opposite side of the road from the closed lane. USING TWO FLAGGERS :N.OT E::._.:<.:_::: two way low volume ar low: sl�actlane do�n e > : sf Ott z?ce av nI hie fcrt a a is the use of :cre e flagger maybe su When a .. a flagge tse� . fl a f lagg er should be stsuoned on th shoulder opp"nstt a the obsti a o�work om a pc on goodvislality a of catl traffic control using. o �e : w volume / IoW s perm >irc 17 Two -way traffic control using two naggers USING THREE FLAGGERS Two -way : Beae:c is Work Traffic Taper d tQ pv ont e .taper Space 100 feet max, in advance the.curve Two -way traffic control using thr la er ADVANCED FLAGGERS Used to warn traffic in advance of a dangerous traffic incident Used to warn traffic in advance of a closed road 18 EMERGENCY TRIANGLES OR FLARES 26 Scene Preservation Emergency Personnel Law Enforcement Fire /Medic /Ambulance Risk Management Medical Examiner Tow Truck Other State Agency Personnel Traffic control personnel should make every attempt possible to preserve an accident scene. Do not drive or park too close to an incident scene. When in doubt, ask the law enforcement person in charge at the accident. News Media should not be allowed into the incident without approval of the incident commander. 19