Loading...
2005, 12-20 Study Session MinutesAttendance: Councilmembers: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Rich Munson, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY STUDY SESSION Tuesday, December 20, 2005, 6:00 p.m. Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director Tom Scholtens, Building Official Cal Walker, Police Chief Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner John Hohman, Senior Engineer Tim Klein, Maintenance Superintendent Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Bing Bingaman, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed all in attendance. Employee Introductions: Building Official Tom Scholtens introduced newly hired Permit Specialist Jodi Main. Council welcomed Jodi to the City staff. 1. Administration of Oath of Office for Councilmembers — Chris Bainbridge City Clerk Bainbridge administered the oath of office to all returning councilmembers as a group; then to newly elected Councilmember Bill Gothmann, followed by congratulations and a short break to allow others to extend congratulations and partake in coffee and cookies. 2. 2009 World Figure Skating Championships — Dave Mercier /Toby Steward Toby Steward and Barb Beddor of Star USA gave a presentation on the 2009 Figure Skating Championships; and also went through a short presentation highlighting the 2007 event. Mr. Steward discussed the bid for 2007 and what is needed for 2009; stating that the goal is to get ten organizations to help support the 2009 event and suggests each entity contribute $30,000 over a three -year period. Ms. Beddor mentioned that figure skating is the most popular sport of winter Olympics generating the highest television ratings; and they are confident of hosting the 2009 event. They further explained that this would be a state -wide bid with Washington State bidding, with the site for events taking place in Spokane at the Arena and Spokane Convention Center; they discussed bid specifications for the event and spoke of the requirements for hosting; and asked Council for a commitment to help with the event by contributing $10,000 per year for 2007, 2008 and 2009; and stated if the bid is not won, the City has no financial obligation. Ms. Beddor stated that revenues generated in previous year when Vancouver hosted the 2001 event, resulted in an estimated $81.6 million delivered to their economy. They stated their bid deadline is February 1 and they would appreciate a determine as soon as possible. Discussion and questions followed concerning the number of hotel rooms necessary and if there is ample capacity. Ms. Beddor explained that this event would require 1,000 to 1,500 rooms per night for the week -long period; adding that more hotel rooms would be filled by fans than competitors. Council Study Session Minutes: 12 -20 -05 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council: 01 -10 -06 discussed continued about funding including the mention of the hotel /motel fund; and City Manager Mercier stated as a point of information, that other jurisdictions have used funding from hotel lodging tax for this type of event; and he would recommend convening that committee so they could pass a recommendation to council; adding that the first $10,000 would not be due until 2007. It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded, that the City of Spokane Valley show support of the world championships by promising $30,000 over the three -year period of 2007, 2008, and 2009. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mr. Steward mentioned that mid - March is when the selection committee will come here to appraise the bid and facilities; and that he and Ms. Beddor might be back then to ask council to be involved in process if possible. 3. East Valley School District School Resource Officers — Cal Walker Police Chief Walker introduced Christine Burgess, East Valley School Superintendent, and Jeff Miller, East Valley High School Principal, who will discuss their request for a School Residential Deputy. Ms. Burgess explained that they seek support to establish a school residential deputy at East Valley School District, and that the Deputy would be housed at East Valley High School for improved community safety. She explained some of the history of safety problems in the past including an incident involving a gun; of their budget and their willingness to help support the program; of the neighborhood presence, prevention, and education, and continued with her presentation as per the distributed handout. Principal Miller said he spoke with other area principals who have commissioned officers in their schools and of the multitude of benefits. They indicated the cost of the program to the School District would be $15,000; with a total estimated annual cost of $100,000; and stated that the County and City could share the remaining cost through available grants and other local funding. Council discussion included that such a request for a funded officer has not occurred in the past; the percentage of funding sought from the City and from the County; and that this would be an addition to the contract and not a re- negotiation. It was Council consensus that Chief Walker approach the County to see if they would be willing to split evenly the $85,000 with the City; and that Chief Walker will report later to Council concerning his discussions with the County; and that Council wants the School District to remain involved. 4. Ad Hoc Sign Committee Update — Dave Crosby Sign Committee Chair Crosby explained the issues concerning the business directional signs located on Appleway, and the Sign Committee's recommendation not to replace the existing signs. Via his PowerPoint presentation, he explained that the Committee's concerns were (1) are the current signs effective in directing traffic to businesses advertised; (2) are they ineffective and if so, why; (3) how could the signs be more effective; (4) what alternatives should be considered; (5) what are the implications for other one -way commercial streets where the same conditions exist; and (6) what are the cost implications and how should business be charged. In response to Councilmember Denenny's question concerning gifting of public funds; City Attorney Connelly responded that the current signs are likely illegal, and signs could be placed in the right -of -way but they would need to be similar to the official blue /green state highway signs; and the issue of gifting could be resolved by charging for the signs. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the effectiveness of the current signs; sign ordinance prohibiting off - premise advertising; and if the signs are replaced will businesses in other areas want the same kind of consideration later. It was Council consensus that since there will be a fairly extensive study completed on the Sprague /Appleway Corridor in the near future, to add this element to the study and have the chosen consultant examine the issue for recommendations; but to leave the situation unchanged for now. It was also mentioned that staff should make sure the chosen consultant receives a copy of the Sign Committee's report. Study Session Minutes: 12 -20 -05 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council: 01 -10 -06 5. Pavement Cut Policy — Tom Scholtens After Building Official Scholtens gave his PowerPoint presentation, discussion included (1) inspections and what they entail; (2) whether the current bond requirement is necessary; (3) time limits on an obstruction permit; and (4) right -of -way patches being done without a permit and associated violations; and issuing larger, project type permits for sewer or utility installation. It was Council consensus that Mr. Scholtens will continue to gather data and report back in February after he is able to observe the current process to get a better feel of what should occur next year and in future years; and that additional data will include information concerning the four points mentioned above; staff requirements, and Spokane Valley business licenses. 6. Draft Request for Proposals for the Sprague /Appleway Corridor Subarea Plan — Marina Sukup and Greg McCormick Planning Manager McCormick explained the request for proposals as per his Request for Council Action form, highlighted some of the work items within the draft Request For Proposal (RFP), and mentioned the tentative schedule as shown in Section VIII of the draft. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the boundaries in question, whether to phase the project and if so how to designate the phases; funding and other budgetary issues; the concept of a City Center; auto row; ample commercial land designation; and the corridor as a whole. It was Council consensus that staff move ahead looking at the whole corridor, with phasing being determined where best suited; and to move forward to publish the RFP, adjusting the timeline as necessary. Mayor Wilhite called for a five minute recess at 8:15 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 8:20 p.m. 7. Draft Scope of Work for Street Masterplan and Related activities — Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained that Council expressed a desire for a well- defined Street Master Plan that identifies the current condition of the city streets and recommends appropriate improvements and maintenance to preserve the value and structural integrity of the transportation system. Senior Engineer Worley then explained the Scope of Services phases and tasks. In response to Council inquiry concerning a timeline, Mr. Kersten said he expects the project will take about a year to complete, that the grant dates are not finalized, and to be eligible for some grants, data will be needed on all sidewalks on all arterials. Mr. Mercier added that staff feels it important to have the outside consultant do the first pass at gathering all the information to have external validation of the amount of resources that would be needed for the actual infrastructure improvements, to help rationalize the criteria system that would be used to determine which projects should require attention first; that the outside assessment will accomplish the task quickly and provide that external validation should council determine that voter approval is required for some capital improvements. Mr. Mercier asked concerning Transportation Task #2, if we anticipate the consultants completing their study September to December, then the next year TIP which needs approval in June of 06, will that be a product of in -house staff? Mr. Kersten replied it would with the possibility of enlisting the consultant's assistance. Mr. Mercier suggested staff might want to confirm the dates of the TIP if the consultant won't be able to prepare the full six -year TIP until September or December of 2006, that perhaps the TIP dates would be for the years 2008 to 2013 rather than from 2007 through 2012. Mr. Worley said he would examine that issue. It was Council consensus to move forward with the Request For Proposal. 8. Road Maintenance Update — Neil Kersten /John Hohman Public Works Director Kersten explained that there was a joint meeting with the Board of County Commissioners last October which discussed the road maintenance contract; and that Mr. Hohman has been working with County staff to lay out a draft plan for review; that our staff went through this PowerPoint presentation with staff from the County to make sure they were comfortable with our statements; that they suggested some changes and those changes have been incorporated into tonight's presentation; adding that there were a few changes in direction since then as the County has stated its willingness to contract with the City as long as we need them, and if we proceed with contracting, as we receive and evaluate bids, if we decide it is best to go with the County, we can always opt not to award the bid and stay with the county. Mr. Mercier added that he attended the County's meeting this morning, Study Session Minutes: 12 -20 -05 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council: 01 -10 -06 and each Commissioner said they were in support of continuing services under reasonable conditions, adding that there is no economic disadvantage or grievous union issues associated with the contracts, but there are some portions of the contract to re- examine in coming years. Mr. Hohman then went through his PowerPoint presentation, and stated that they received validation that the transition plan is really an optional plan with no forced conclusions. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson, seconded by Councilmember Taylor, and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting to 9: 15 p.m. Councilmember Flanigan asked if we talked with the City of Spokane as they might be interested. After the presentation of the PowerPoint, it was Council consensus to move forward. 9. Service Recognition — Dave Mercier Mr. Mercier relinquished the floor to Mayor Wilhite, who then spoke of Councilmember Flanigan's service, that tonight is his last meeting, and in bidding adieu she presented Councilmember Flanigan with a plaque honoring him for his part of the First City Council of the City of Spokane Valley. After congratulations were given, Deputy Mayor Munson spoke of the jested "Flanigan Statue" often referred to in the past, and presented Mr. Flanigan with a statue memorializing the two of them during past Mayor's balls. Each Councilmember then spent a few moments to thank Councilmember Flanigan for his work as part of the first Council of the City. 10. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor Wilhite: No comments 11. Council Check in — Mayor Wilhite: No comments 12. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier brought Council attention to the memorandum distributed to Council tonight concerning the upcoming schedule for handling the Comprehensive Plan; and that the break between tonight and January 12 will give Council opportunity for further review of the Plan, as well as a reminder of what is needed to accomplish timely adoption. Councilmember Flanigan said that he heard from a citizen concerned about banning sledding in the Mission Park area, and stated that no such ban would take place without Council consensus; with Mr. Mercier adding that staff is undertaking measures to make the sledding experience a safe experience. Mr. Mercier stated that it is his understanding that the County has decided to close their offices at 1:00 p.m. on Friday, and if Council desires to do likewise, tonight would be the last opportunity to make that decision. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming, seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, and unanimously agreed that City Offices will close at 1:00 p.m. Friday. It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 9:19 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Study Session Minutes: 12 -20 -05 Approved by Council' 01 -10 -06 p c ckx\cx W tife‘kr(2 Diana Wilhite, Mayor Page 4 of 4 S o1 Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager, and Members of the Spokane Valley City Council From: Marina Sukup, AtCP, Community Development Director Cc: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: December 20, 2005 Re: Comprehensive Plan Consideration - Process Suggestions 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhatl ?spokanevalley.org The deadline for the adoption of the City's first Comprehensive Plan is March 30, 2006. In order to expedite City Council's review of the Plan to meet this deadline, but to allow for the very important and thorough review of policy issues, staff would make the following recommendations: 1. A seating arrangement around the table, rather than at the dais is the most productive in facilitating discussion amongst the members of the Council. Public hearings should be conducted from the dais. 2. Council has held three public heanng to date. Additional hearings should be reserved for the period following Council deliberations, whether or not substantive changes are made from the original draft. Substantive changes to date include the Arterial Road Plan and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The schedule should provide opportunity for a second hearing, if necessary, depending on the comments received at the first. 3 A number of the chapters probably deserve a brief introduction from the staff relating to the organization of the chapter and the underlying constraints. A little more staff facilitation may be able to move the discussion forward and help Council to focus on the significant policy issues 4 Council review of the chapter or chapters pnor to the meeting, with the development of specific proposed language would expedite discussion at the meeting itself. In other words, if re- wording a goal or policy should be considered, identify the language which should be substituted, added or deleted Being prepared for the next scheduled chapter will allow the Council to move into that discussion if some time is left at the end of the meeting. The suggested schedule below provides for this possibility 5. Utilization of the 2' and 4 "' Thursdays for Council deliberation provides additional weekday time. The Planning Commission would hold its meetings at a separate location. Although the Commission would not be able to attend the deliberations on that day, individual members could be available to the Council on relatively short notice. Planning staff would need to cover both meetings, but the scheduling will allow the staff person responsible for drafting the chapter to be available to the Council. 6. The order of consideration is suggested as follows. January 12 Land Use plus Land Use Maps - Chapter 2 January 17 Land Use Maps - Chapter 2 January 31 Utilities plus Economic Development — Chapters 6 and 7 February 7 Economic Development — Chapter 7 February 9 Housing and Neighborhoods — Chapters 5 and 10 February 21 Housing and Neighborhoods plus Natural Environment — Chapter 10 and 8 February 23 Parks and Recreation — Chapter 9 March 7 Parks and Recreation plus Capital Facilities Plan — Chapters 9 and 4 March 9 Capital Facilities Plan - Chapter 4 March 21 Final Public Hearing March 23 Wrap -up remaining items March 28 Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities should be considered last, in large part because the proposal includes the summary of proposals for various element for which policies may have been addressed. Parks & Recreation in many respects is allied with the natural environment, while Housing and Neighborhoods are closely inter - related. Parks & Recreation should be considered following discussion of housing and neighborhoods.