Loading...
2006, 10-03 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 Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Absent: Gary Schimmels, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Tuesday, October 3, 2006 Staff: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Morgan Koudelka, Administrative Analyst Marina Sukup, Community Development Dir Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Greg, "Bing" Bingaman, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded, and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Schimmels from tonight's meeting. Mayor Wilhite announced that tonight's agenda is amended to include as a last item, an Executive Session to discuss land acquisition. 1. Regional Site Selector — Robin Toth Robin Toth of the Economic Development Council, gave some background on the proposal which has been in process for approximately six years; she explained that a GIS -based regional economic development website called the "Site Selector," is a tool which would place real estate listings on a web - based interactive map to allow potential commercial investors to research sites; and she invited the City of Spokane Valley to participate. Ms. Toth explained that this website would allow the region to be seen nationally and internationally; that it is currently sponsored by consortium partners City of Spokane, Spokane County, Washington State University, Avista, Spokane Area EDC, and the City of Liberty Lake. Jamie Miller Traeger of JMA Commercial Real Estate voiced her support of the project, and she mentioned the Pinecroft Business Park as an example of something which many people would be interested in, nationally and internationally; adding that as Pinecroft grows, so grows the Valley. Ian VonEssen and John Bottel of Spokane County then went through the remainder of the PowerPoint presentation to explain why this is important to do over the internet; that it is a powerful marketing tool with layered information on vacant parcels, utility providers, and area demographics. Council discussion and questions ensued. It was mentioned that the data is updated three times a year on the GIS, and the commercial real estate site is updated daily. The application allows for custom searches; that the group continues to recruit more players and the city of Cheney has expressed interest; and as more partners join, the per -share cost is lowered. Councilmember Munson asked how much of the $65,000 the City pays the EDC, is used to develop this project. Ms. Toth indicated that the EDC provides $5,000 of their overall revenue toward this project. She stated they are asking everyone to commit additional funds to have full regional collaboration. Mr. VonEssen added that people are working to ensure that this system will come up in a GOGGLE economic search. He also stated that since they want the realtors on board, they are not charging them; that the cities will be linked to their website with screens created to make it appear as though people are coming right into the valley. Meeting Minutes: 10 -03 -06 Page 1 of 3 Approved by Council: 10 -10 -06 In response to council's budget question, Ms. Regor replied that this project has not been budgeted, and staff seeks council direction. Councilmember DeVleming recommended we move forward. Councilmember Munson stated he feels this is a good tool, but is concerned about paying the EDC $85,000, and feels the budget issue needs to be researched. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned that it appears at the present there is little incentive for local businesses to get involved, and he would like that examined further; and he expressed concern about tradeoffs of not having streets fixed. Deputy Mayor Taylor said he would also like to see more direct participation and a larger part of the price picked up by prime beneficiaries as he too would not favor cutting back on some road maintenance services; yet feels this is a good tool and the project should be further researched. Councilmember Denenny expressed concern if we don't participate, how the project will deal with our City's data. As this will have an impact on the budget, it was Council consensus that staff conduct further research as mentioned above, including the capability of the software, how long the system will be viable or would it be outdated in a few years, and to determine which funds would pay for the City's share of the project. 2. Amendment to JUB Contract for Street MasterPlan for Street Development Standards — Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained that Council has received two informational memos regarding the update of the Uniform Development Code, and as part of that process, we will also update the existing Spokane County Road and Sewer Construction Standards; that staff does not have the capacity to complete a project of this size so they are therefore proposing a contract amendment to JUB Engineers who are in the process of developing the City's street masterplan and are familiar with the streets. Mr. Kersten also mentioned looking at ways to slow the traffic in residential neighborhoods, and to find better ways to integrate new developments as they are placed in current neighborhoods. Mr. Kersten stated that staff has started to implement requirements for notification; and is examining ways to require some type of developer sign to include the name and contact information for the developer and contractor. It was Council consensus to place this item on the next council agenda for motion consideration. 3. Right -of -way Permit Process Update — Morgan Koudelka Administrative Analyst Koudelka went through his PowerPoint presentation explaining the right -of -way history, purpose, current requirements, process, reasons for change, proposed fee structure and various permits, and the highlights of the draft ordinance. After brief council discussion concerning the one or two million dollar insurance requirement, it was Council consensus to place this item on a future agenda for an ordinance first reading. It was also suggested that Mr. Koudelka send the members of the Ad Hoc committee notification that this issue is coming up for approval and requesting any final response to the draft ordinance. It was also determined that the definition of "mobile" be clarified; and that Mr. Koudelka examine the cost recovery to determine if there are enough permits to change the fee consideration. 4. Police Emphasis Areas Report — Cal Walker Prior to Chief Walker's police report, he mentioned that concerning the right -of -way process, that he needs a mechanism to deal with emergency responders so their process is not impeded during an emergency; and that he would like clarification on the overweight and over - height vehicles as part of this same process, as there have been haulers who stop in the center of a roadway or on the road sides, and he would like to include something to address what is or is not a viable time or location to handle haulers. Chief Walker then went over the highlights of his "Special Emphasis Report." Council asked if in the future, the SCOPE annual community services banquet could be held on a night other than a Tuesday so members of council could attend. Councilmember Munson asked if they could receive a further briefing on gangs at a future study session. After a brief discussion of speeds allowed in front of schools, Deputy City Manger Regor mentioned that school zones are included in the traffic ordinance amendments set for the October 17 meeting. Meeting Minutes: 10 -03 -06 Page 2 of 3 Approved by Council: 10 -10 -06 5. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor Wilhite Mayor Wilhite reminded Council and the audience of the upcoming Revitalization Community Workshop set for October 11; and of tomorrow's "Conversation with the Community" at the Valleypoint Baptist Church. Mayor Wilhite also mentioned that Councilmembers Denenny, Gothmann, and Munson will be absent from the October 17 meeting, and she will check to see if Councilmember Schimmels will be in attendance so that it will be possible to have a quorum for that meeting. Councilmember DeVleming mentioned he would like to add to a future meeting, the Student Advisory Council Bylaws; and an agenda item to discuss a modified crime check system. 6. Council Check -in — Mayor Wilhite. Other then advance agenda discussions as noted above, there were no further Council comments. 7. City Manager Comments — Nina Regor. Deputy City Manager Regor had no comments. EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed, to adjourn into Executive Session until approximately 8:30 p.m. to discuss land acquisition, and that no decisions will be made afterwards. Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:00 p.m. At 8:34 p.m. Mayor Wilhite declared Council out of Executive Session. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn . The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. ATTEST. Christine Bainbri . ge, ity Clerk ctifiataL (51,10:t_Aa_ Diana Wilhite, Mayor Meeting Minutes: 10 -03 -06 Page 3 of 3 Approved by Council: 10 -10 -06 Spokane Regional Site Selector Leveraging the Internet for Economic Development Washington State University Spokane Area Economic Development Council Spokane County Avista Utilities City of Spokane City of Liberty Lake Site Selector Presentation Participants Washington State University Dr. Kerry Brooks (Project Director) Avista Utilities - Randi Rich City of Spokane - Craig Ferris Spokane County - Ian Von Essen & John Bottelli Spokane Area Economic Development Coundl - Robin Toth JMA Commerdal Real Estate - Jamie Miller Traeger Economic Development Web Sites Tennessee Valley Authority (www.TVAsitcs.cOtl) 1 Answer 3 basic questions (and a lot of others) 1. Is there available Property? 2. Is there a market for my business to succeed? 3. What is the competition or synergy for my business at a specific site? Why is this Important to do over the Internet? 63% of Americans use the Internet 85% of college graduates use the Internet 87% of businesses say it should be a priority for government to invest in making more information and services available over the Internet. The e- Government Reality • Reality: Business is demanding Web - based government services • Source: Civic Resource Group Study "Cities on the Internet: E- Government Applied" (2002) Civic Retpurce Group Civic Resource Study Findings 1. Businesses are calling for online availability of permits, licenses, and information about economic development 2. Governments increasingly believe that if they can project their localities as tech -savvy regions, they will be better positioned to attract businesses. 3. Projecting a tech savvy image and online services has become one of the most common issues talked about at economic development meetings 3 Importance of the Internet for Site Selection • Percent of expanding or relocating businesses using the Internet for site selection — Year 2000: 44% — Year 2001: 82% Sou A1r. N' .90, " ^ Site - Selection Consultants • 40% of all site - selection projects begin on the Internet • 84% of site - selectors access the Internet in the process • Top media for site selectors: "knowledge web sites" S.H. •,M, ...ij Site - Selection • 85% of Expansion & Relocation Decisions are made without the help of a professional consultant. • The site selection research by this group is performed after business hours & weekends 24/7 4 4 "If they (site selectors) can't find good information on your web site — forget about it — you're eliminated. You have to have a stand -alone web site and not hide information hoping they will call you, because they don't have the time." Dennis Donovan Senior Managing Partner The Wadley- Donovan Group August 3, 2001 Effective Economic Development Marketing Techniques: The top three • Planned Visits to Corporate Execs. • Public Relations /Publicity • Internet/Website Existing GIS Investment • PRISM Demo Leveraging GIS Investment • Site Selector Demo Economic Development Internet Breakthrough • Online Site - selection • Demographic & Business Analysis • Online Mapping • Real -time data GIS Planning's Economic Development Web Programs Featured in Media • The Wall Street Journal • NBC News • Los Angeles Times • San Francisco Business Times • Economic Development Commentary • Governing Magazine • American City & County Magazine (, Ain Tennessee Valley Authority Economic Web Site Award • Last week the International Economic Development Council (IEDC) announced the top economic development websites at Its Annual Conference in New York City. • The award-winning websites are impressive and their results are noteworthy. These best-practice websites are models for economic development organizations to follow. • For Population 200,000 or more: Tennessee Valley Authority (www.TVAsites.com) What could happen to economic developers that don't leverage the Internet Thank you! Washington State University Spokane Area Economic Development Council Spokane County Avista Utilities City of Spokane City of Liberty Lake View the Economic Development web site applications at www.gisplanning.com 7 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 3, 2006 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ® information El admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Developer Agreement for Vistas at Morningside Heights GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: The Vistas at Morningside Heights is a project being developed in the County by Summit Properties Incorporated. Rich Dahm is the principle behind Summit Properties. This project will contribute increased traffic volumes to Barker Road which will result in a lowering of levels of service below our adopted standards. The project has been conditioned to mitigate the impacts of the increased traffic volumes. The traffic study for the project determined the proportionate share of the future improvement at 8.7 percent. Public Works has identified two potential solutions: a standard signalized intersection similar to the ongoing project at Mission and Barker or a single lane roundabout. The potential costs of the solution have been based upon the signalized intersection option for the purposes of this agreement. This results in a contribution of $40,097. The draft agreement specifies the details of payment which would occur when the signal warrants are met in accordance with the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. OPTIONS: Accept or not accept the proportionate contribution towards a future improvement. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Forward agreement for motion consideration during the October 10, 2006 council meeting. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Voluntary Mitigation Agreement. VOLUNTARY MITIGATION AGREEMENT VISTAS AT MORNINGSIDE HEIGHTS PE- 1962 -05 This Mitigation Agreement ( "Agreement ") is entered into by and between Summit Properties Inc ( "Developer "), a Washington corporation, having offices for the transaction of business at 12720 E. Nora, Suite E, Spokane WA 99216, and the City of Spokane Valley ( "City "), a political subdivision of the State of Washington, hereinafter jointly referred to as "Parties ": RECITALS 1. This agreement is entered into by the Parties pursuant to RCW 82.02.020 to mitigate a direct impact identified as a consequence of the Spokane County preliminary plat application, PE- 1962 -05. 2. The Developer is the owner /developer of certain real property of approximately 120.62 acres and generally located east of and adjacent to the intersection of Chapman Road and Windsor Drive, northerly of Morningside Heights Drive; and is situated in Section 30, Township 25 North, Range 45 EWM, in Spokane County, Washington. Said property is more specifically described in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 3. The Developer has received approval of the preliminary plat identified as Vistas at Morningside Heights (the Development) a residential development which will increase traffic congestion and directly impact existing transportation infrastructure at the intersection of Sprague Avenue and Barker Road located within the City of Spokane Valley. Mitigation of these impacts has been required as part of the approval process for the final plat pursuant to the Hearing Examiner Findings, Conclusions and Decision (PE- 1962-05) entered into on the 18th day of April, 2006 and approving the preliminary plat Vistas at Morningside Heights which contains the following condition of approval: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY TRAFFIC ENGINEER 1. Prior to any final plat, the applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Spokane Valley to make a proportionate share contribution towards improvements at the intersection of Sprague/Barker. 4. The Parties are desirous of entering into an Agreement which provides for the payment of a proportionate share of improvements deemed necessary at the intersection Page 2 of Sprague Ave. and Barker Road which are a direct result of traffic impacts associated with the Development. 5. The Developer's proportionate share shall be based on the total number of trips estimated for the Development and has been calculated in the manner set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. AGREEMENT D RAFT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereafter set forth, the Developer and the City hereto agree as follows: 1. Voluntary Agreement. This Agreement, including all attached documents, is a voluntary agreement as that term is used in RCW 82.02.020. The mitigation fees charged herein are proportional to the traffic - related impacts generated by the Development. The parties acknowledge that the project is reasonably necessary to mitigate the direct traffic impact of the Development. In the event this mitigation agreement is breached by the Developer, all of the City's obligations under this agreement shall terminate. In the event this mitigation agreement is determined by a court to be invalid, the City shall refund the unexpended portion of mitigation fees, and the City's obligations under this agreement shall terminate. 2. Project. The project shall consist of the installation of a traffic light at the intersection of Sprague and Barker or other traffic control device as deemed appropriate by the City of Spokane Valley. The mitigation fee shall be based upon the cost of the traffic signal. 3. Mitigation Fee. The Developer shall pay $ , which has been determined to be the Developer's proportionate contribution to the Project for mitigation of future traffic impacts related to the Development. (See Exhibit B) This traffic mitigation fee shall be used for the design and/or construction of the improvements to this intersection. 4. Payment The Developer agrees to pay all of the above identified mitigation fee at such time as warrants, as defined by the manual on uniform Traffic Control Devices ( MUTCD), for a-traffietraffic signal at the intersection of Sprague Ave. and Barker Road- .. are met.are The City Traffic engineer shall determine when signal warrants are met. Payment shall be made within 30 days after receiving notice from the City that warrants are met. If payment is not timely received the City may immediately access the funds secured by the letter of credit described below. A letter of credit, which gives the City a unilateral right to access the funds pursuant to this agreement from a financial institution, shall be provided to the City upon execution of this agreement and prior to acceptance of this agreement by the City. 5. Compliance with RCW 82.02.020. Payment collected by the City will be held in a mitigation fee reserve account and may only be expended to fund the design, right -of- Page 3 way acquisition, and construction of the Project. Payments shall be expended within five years of collection. The City shall be entitled to reimbursement from the mitigation fee reserve account for any funds it may expend for the design, right -of -way acquisition, and construction of the Project prior to the collection of the fee. Any funds in the mitigation fee reserve account not expended within five years shall be refunded by the City with interest as provided in RCW 82.02.020. • • 76. Notice: All communications, notices or demands of any kind which a party under this Agreement is required or desires to give to any other party shall be in writing and be either (1) delivered personally, (2) sent by facsimile transmission with an additional copy mailed first class, or (3) deposited in the U.S. mail, certified mail postage prepaid, return receipt requested and addressed as follows: If to the City: City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Fax: (509) 921 -1008 Attn: City Manager pit ts‘v` If to the Developer: Summit Properties Inc. 12720 E. Nora, Suite E S i ane WA 99216 -1197 1 87. Successors. This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the successors and the assigns of the Parties. 98. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Any action for enforcement of this Agreement shall be brought in a court of competent jurisdiction in Spokane County, Washington or as otherwise provided by statute. 1 -1-09. Modifications. No modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be valid until the same is reduced to writing and executed with the same formalities as the present Agreement. 1 41710. Waiver. No officer, employee, agent or otherwise of the City has the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions to this Agreement. No waiver or any breach of this Agreement shall be held to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach. 4 - 211. Representation. This Agreement forms a fully integrated agreement between the Parties. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the Parties hereto All Parties have read and understand all of the Agreement, and now state that no representation, promise or agreement not expressed in the Agreement has been made to induce any Party to execute the same. 4-312. Authority. Both Parties to this Agreement represent and certify that they have full authority and power to enter into and carry out this Agreement. The persons signing this Agreement represent that they have authority to act for and bind their respective principals. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement this day of , 2006. DEVELOPER: By: Its: Name: STATE OF WASHINGTON County of Spokane ) ss. Page 4 pR PF On this day of 2006 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared to me known to be the of , the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of the corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year in this certificate above written. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: David Mercier, City Manager NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington, residing at My commission expires: Printed Name