Loading...
2015, 01-06 Study Session Meeting MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington January 6, 2015 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Dean Grafos, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Mark Calhoun,Deputy City Manager Rod Higgins, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Ed Pace, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Eric Guth, Public Works Director Cary Driskell, City Attorney ABSENT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Bill Bates, Councilmember Ryan Broadwater, Stormwater Engineer Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Sean Messner,Traffic Engineer Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present except Councilmember Bates and Councilmember Hafner. It was moved by Councilmember Pace, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Bates from tonight's meeting. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Hafner from tonight's meeting. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Amended Agenda. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Planning Commission Appointments—Mayor Grafos Mayor Grafos explained that nine applications were received for appointment consideration to the Planning Commission; he thanked everyone who applied and said that after consideration, he recommends Michael Phillips and Heather Graham for three-year terms, and Timothy Kelley and Susan Scott for one year terms. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to confirm the following Mayoral appointments to the Planning Commission: Michael Phillips and Heather Graham to the Planning Commission for three-year terms beginning January 1, 2015, and Timothy Kelley and Susan Scott to the Planning Commission for a one-year term beginning January 1, 2015. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 2. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Appointments—Mayor Grafos Mayor Grafos explained the committee composition and the two openings, and said he recommends Lee Cameron for a two-year term as the entity required to collect the tax, and Peggy Doering for a two-year term as the entity to receive the funds; and he thanked all those who applied. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to confirm the following Mayoral appointments to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee: Councilmember Wick, Council liaison for the 2015 calendar year, Peggy Council Study Session 01-06-2015 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council:01/27/2015 Doering for a two-year term representing an entity authorized to be funded by the tax, and Lee Cameron for a two-year term representing a business required to collect the tax. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Councilmember Wick said he agreed all the applicants are good candidates, but was looking toward a candidate with strong sports background. Mayor Grafos said his decision was based on his desire to balance the committee among all the applicants. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Pace and Higgins. Opposed: Councilmember Wick. Motion carried. 3. Public Participation Plan—John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve the Public Participation Program. Community Development Director Hohman explained the purpose of this program in association with the City's Legislative Update of the Comprehensive Plan; he noted the steps taken and planned to process and develop the Public Participation Program, and stressed the need to gather as much public participation as possible. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3a. Delegation of Authority to City Manager—Mike Jackson[added agenda item] It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to delegate authority to the City Manager to appoint qualified representatives to the Spokane County Law and Justice Council. Mr. Jackson went over the history of the recently rejuvenated Spokane County Law and Justice Council and of the position open for a representative of the city legislative authorities within the County; he explained that the City wrote to the numerous jurisdictions to request their approval for a representative from our city to fill that position; he said all except two of those jurisdictions responded and of those responding, all expressed support for Spokane Valley filling that role. Mr. Jackson said the position is currently a four-year term and he anticipates seeking someone for the long-term; said he hopes our appointment would have discussions with Council and said he can give direction to that appointee to represent us at the committee, and said we would share information with the other municipalities. Mr. Jackson said the composition of the council is established by statute and that the Board of County Commissioners can add representatives, and agreed with Councilmember Pace that ideally in the future there would be an additional representative from one of the smaller cities. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 4.YMCA Contract Update—Mike Stone Parks and Recreation Director Stone explained that since 2005, we have contracted with the YMCA for the operation, maintenance and programming for our three outdoor swimming pools and that the YMCA is the only viable option for operation of those pools, and he said that the YMCA has successfully managed the previous contract, and that the 2014 management fee of$34,000 will remain the same for 2015. Mr. Stone said staff recommends placing this contract on the January 27 consent agenda for approval. Council concurred. 5. Code Enforcement Lien Authority—Cary Driskell,Mike Jackson Concerning the issue of property mitigation, Mr. Jackson explained that he and City Attorney Driskell will be meeting with our lobbyist next week, as well as a lobbyist from the Bank Association and Senators Pam Roach and Mike Padden, and he what he would like to hear what is Council's degree of latitude concerning the issue of lien authority; he mentioned the idea of working with the County Assessor to send out statements, and said the goal is to have the property owner pay for the mitigation; said if the property owner doesn't pay now, we have no other recource; he said this would not put the property into foreclosure, and said he feels the greatest option for success is with the assessor's billing. Mr. Jackson said he feels it is important that all taxpayers don't pay for these mitigations. Mr. Jackson said he and Mr. Driskell would like to be able to explain at the Olympia meeting next week, of what we Council Study Session 01-06-2015 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council:01/27/2015 are willing to do or forgo. Mr. Driskell added that we are responsible for pursuing court actions to get the properties cleaned up as they represent life and health issues and detract from the property values of surrounding properties. After giving his PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Driskell said we are trying to get the same authority as the County concerning lien authority. Mr. Jackson said his hope is to argue that the banks should be willing to do this, as the City is willing to spend its own funds; he said the majority of homeowners carry a mortgage and this process would help protect the bank's assets, adding that the banks also likely own the surrounding properties. In response to a Council question of how much we lost over the years, Mr. Driskell said we spent about $60,000 on abatements, and collected back about $20,000; we lost between $10,000 and $13,000 to foreclosures and bankruptcy and in those instances, we are not able to collect any reimbursements for our expenditures. Mr. Jackson said we have a limit on how much we can spend and he hopes to never have to impose the lien, but having that option is strong incentive; he said staff is willing to have payment plans to have the homeowner pay us back over time; and said the courts expect us to take action on these cases that go before the courts. Mayor Grafos and Councilmember Pace said they favor going for the lien authority even if pursuing it would take another few years, and Deputy Mayor Woodard and Councilmember Higgins agreed. Mr. Jackson asked Council about the idea of setting a cap, and if they were in favor of a cap, what amount should be used. Mr. Driskell said he prefers no cap as the larger cases are the ones we don't want capped; but perhaps the legislators would be willing to consider a higher lien authority in exchange for a cap. After further brief discussion, Mr. Jackson said he would not bring up a cap unless the need arises, and asked if that does occur, would Council be comfortable with $10,000. Mayor Grafos said he feels most of the cases likely would not be as high as $10,000; and Mr. Driskell said he feels a cap would give us more negotiating strength. 6. Broadway Avenue Storm Drain Retrofits—Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth said that this project is currently on the CIP(Capital Improvement Program), that we recently received a grant from the Department of Ecology (DOE), which is the second round of grant allocations, adding that we were not awarded a grant during the first round. Mr. Guth said the DOE contacted staff and said there were some funds not spent, and asked if we wanted to use some funds for the Broadway Project, Havana to Fancher, to eliminate and retrofit some of the drywells and improve the water quality. Mr. Guth said staff told the DOE we would like to take their grant money up to the $975,000, which is 75% of the preliminary construction estimate of$1,300,000 for improvements. Mr. Guth explained the project funding and timing and said two project concepts were developed: option #1 for stormwater only improvements; and option #2 to incorporate additional streetscape improvements. Mr. Guth said that the stormwater improvements only includes retrofitting all existing drywells; white the additional improvements under option two include converting an existing four-lane to a three-lane,adding a pedestrian/bike path, installing grassy swales and street trees, and an optional gateway sign. Continuing with the PowerPoint presentation, Stormwater Engineer Brodwater showed some examples of additional streetscape improvements, followed by an explanation from Traffic Engineer Messner of what some of those traffic improvements could entail, and included the conversion of the four-lane to three- lane road,crash data,and traffic volumes; which was followed by Mr. Brodwater's explanation of the pros and cons of both options. Thereafter council/staff discussed the options and possible expenses, as well as whether there is a need for a pedestrian/bike path. Concerning funding, Mr. Guth explained that the funding ratio is 75%/25%, and that the improvements associated with option 2 have not been designed yet, but he estimated a cost of$1.2 million for construction, and $100,000 for planning, and said 75% of that would be $975,000. Councilmember Wick said he would like to have further discussion on this project; Deputy Mayor Woodard stated that he does not want a three-lane road and his preference is option 1; and Mayor Grafos and Councilmembers Pace and Higgins preferred not spending the additional funds and instead, opted for option 1.Mr. Guth said staff will focus on option 1. Council Study Session 01-06-2015 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council:01/27/2015 7. Advance Agenda—Mayor Grafos There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda. 8. Information Only: The Commute Trip Reduction Plan Update, Response to Public Comments, Department Monthly Reports, and Street Sweeping Contract were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 9. Council Comments—Mayor Grafos Mayor Grafos mentioned the substantial increase in sales tax received as compared with calendar year 2007; and Deputy Mayor Woodard noted that the increase in excise taxes appears to indicate that Spokane Valley is selling homes better than elsewhere in the country. 10. City Manager Comments—Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson noted the two items placed at the Council dais: the letter for Spokane Valley registered businesses concerning keeping sidewalks cleared of snow and ice, which Council voiced no objection to being mailed; and the draft letter to the Department of Ecology (DOE) in response to that Department's draft report of the Marine and Rail Oil Transportation Study, and most notably, that it appears that our City was omitted from mention in the study, of the misplaced emphasis on population density as a measure of risk, and that DOE has an incorrect definition of First Class Cities. Mr. Jackson said if there are no objections, he would like to send the letter out Thursday, adding that representatives from our City spent all day at their September 9, 2014 meeting, yet none of our City's concerns were included in the report. Councilmember Wick suggested sending a copy to the Association of Washington Cities as perhaps other cities might share our concern. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:41 p.m. ATT_E` • e�f3ean Grafos,Mayor hristine Bainbridge, City C/k Council Study Session 01-06-2015 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council:01/27/2015 AGENDA ITEM#3a CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 6, 2015 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Delegation of authority to City Manager—Appointment of representative to the Spokane County Law and Justice Council GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 72.09.300, Spokane County Resolution 14-0392 the Spokane County Law and Justice Council. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: RCW 72.09.300 requires that every county in the state have a law and justice council, which under statute may address issues related to: (a) maximizing local resources including personnel and facilities, reducing duplication of services, and sharing resources between local and state government in order to accomplish local efficiencies without diminishing effectiveness; (b) jail management; (c) mechanisms for communication of information about offenders, including the feasibility of shared access to databases; and (d) partnerships between the department and local community policing and supervision programs to facilitate supervision of offenders under the respective jurisdictions of each, and timely response to an offender's failure to comply with the terms of supervision. Spokane County previously had a Law and Justice Council (LJC) from 1992 until approximately 10 years ago, when it went dormant. One of the recommendations from a study committee in 2013 was that Spokane County resume the LJC, which has now been done. The Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) appoint the LJC members, and most of the now-operational LJC were appointed in 2014. One position remains unfilled, a statutorily-required position for a representative of the city legislative authorities within the County, except Spokane, which already has several representatives appointed by the BoCC. The City wrote every other jurisdiction to request their approval for a representative from Spokane Valley to fill that position. All of those jurisdictions responded except two, who did not respond after repeated requests. Of those responding, all expressed support for Spokane Valley filling that role on their mutual behalf. OPTIONS: (1) delegate to the City Manager authority to appoint a qualified representative to the Spokane County Law and Justice Council; (2) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move we delegate authority to the City Manager to appoint qualified representatives to the Spokane County Law and Justice Council. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson; City Manager; Cary Driskell, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: Spokane County Resolution 14-0392 creating Spokane County Law and Justice Council NO. I LI-039 a BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF RE- ) ESTABLISHING THE SPOKANE ) COUNTY LAW AND JUSTICE ) COUNCIL ORIGINALLY ) RESOLUTION ESTABLISHED UNDER SPOKANE ) COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. 92-0769 ) AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED ) THERETO ) WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington (sometimes hereinafter referred to as the "Board" or "Board of County Commissioners") has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 70.48.020, the Board of County Commissioners passed and adopted Spokane County Resolution No. 91-0235 wherein the Board established a Confined Population Management and Review Board and clothed the Confined Population Management and Review Board with certain powers and duties; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 72.09.300, the Board of County Commissioners passed and adopted Spokane County Resolution No. 92-0769 wherein the Board re-designated the Confined Population Management and Review Board as the Spokane County Law and Justice Council(the"Council") and provided for other matters related thereto; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners and City of Spokane formed the Spokane Regional Criminal Justice Commission (the "Commission") with a mission of conducting a comprehensive review of the entire Spokane regional criminal justice system by examining the entire spectrum from pre-arrest (prevention programs), arrest, prosecuting and defense, sentencing, incarceration (including alternatives to incarceration), re-entry and recidivism. The goal of the Commission was to make specific recommendations to the City of Spokane and County which would address the reduction of crime, the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system, the effective use of detention and alternatives to detention,the effectiveness of re-entry programs, and ultimately to put in place a criminal justice system which is efficient, effective and guarantees strict adherence to the mandates of the Constitution of the United States and the State of Washington. Recommendation 5.1(2) of the Commission's "A Blueprint for Reform" is to "Re-establish the Law and Justice Coordinating Committee& Supporting Workgroups"; and WHEREAS,as provided in RCW 72.09.300 and recommended by the Spokane Regional Criminal Justice Commission, the Board of County Commissioners desires to re-establish the Law and Justice Council, clothe it with certain responsibilities, and provide for other matters Page 1 of 6 related thereto. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6) and RCW 72.09.300, that the Board of County Commissioners does hereby modify Spokane County Resolution No. 92-0769 as more particularly set forth in Attachment "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and is so doing does re-establish the Law and Justice Council and provide for other matters related thereto. per, PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4/ /day of /77a � ,2014. "c ca sr X11 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS i `k- ECo '•.q Fi i �°�. o'A tri,. 1) OF SP o • •NE COUNTY, WASHINGTON y . o -� /„a, p��� ....._. .„ .„..•........ ..,,,v. AL FRENCH, air ATTEST: `,t```��.� � ' TODD MIELKE, ice-Chair All(?) )6%(/(6i6ti ' — , i 7 Daniela Erickson SH L Y O'QUINN, Commissioner Clerk of the Board Page 2 of 6 ATTACHMENT "A" Section 1: ESTABLISHMENT OF SPOKANE COUNTY LAW AND JUSTICE COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE There is created a board, to be known as the Spokane County Law and Justice Council, hereinafter referred to as the "Council", which shall supersede and repeal all prior measures regarding bodies established pursuant to RCW 72.09.300. The Council shall have the following composition (the 13 italicized members are required by RCW 72.09.300): a. Two (2) members of the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners selected by the Board of County Commissioners; b. Spokane County Sheriff, c. A representative of Municipal Police Departments to be selected by the Municipal Police Departments; d. Spokane County Prosecutor; e. A representative of Municipal Prosecutors to be selected by the Municipal Prosecutors; f. City of Spokane Council President; g. A representative of the City Legislative Authorities, other than the City of Spokane, to be selected by the City Legislative Authorities; h. A representative of Spokane County Superior Court to be selected by the Spokane County Superior Court; i. A representative of Spokane County Juvenile Court to be selected by the Spokane County Superior Court; j. A representative of Spokane County District Court to be selected by the Spokane County District Court; k. A representative of Municipal Courts to be selected by the Municipal Courts; 1. Spokane County Jail Administrator (Detention Services Director); m. Spokane County Superior Court Clerk; n. Spokane County Risk Manager; o. Secretary of Corrections; p. Spokane County Public Defender; q. City of Spokane Mayor; r. Spokane County Pre-Trial Services Director; and s. Such other member(s), including at-large member(s), as the Board of County Commissioners may hereinafter determine to be beneficial. Any member of the Council may in writing appoint a designee. All designees shall be speaking representatives on behalf of the member and a voting member on any matter coming before the Council. Page 3 of 6 There is also created a Spokane County Law and Justice Administrative Committee, herein after referred to as the "Administrative Committee", which will have up to a maximum of seven (7) members. The Administrative Committee shall be members of the Council and have the following composition: a. The two (2)members of the Spokane County Board of County Commissioner; b. City of Spokane Mayor; c. City of Spokane Council President; d. A representative of Spokane County Superior Court; and e. Up to two (2) additional members with agreement from the majority of the Administrative Committee. The role of the Administrative Committee is to (1)receive the process,policy, administrative and budgetary recommendations of the Council members, (2) analyze, authorize and implement resource allocations in alignment with those priorities, and (3) advocate for priority reforms recommended by the Council members and the community at large. Section 2: PU''' !'OSE The purpose of the Council is to provide a permanent on going forum and structure to coordinate and enhance the administration of justice in Spokane County. Section 3: TERMS The terms of the members of the Council and Administrative Committee who are elected shall run as long as such individual retains the prerequisite elected position. The terms of members of the Council and Administrative Committee who are designated by a selecting authority shall be renewed by the selecting authority every four(4) years. The selecting authority has the ability to designate a different representative provided that the underlying qualifications for the position are satisfied. Members may be removed by their selecting authority. Except in the case of removal, each member shall continue to serve until a successor has been appointed. Any non- elected official member shall have a four year term. Section 4: COMPENSATA,IIN Members of the Council and Administrative Committee shall serve without compensation and/or per diem of any kind or nature whatsoever, including compensation for travel to and from the usual places of business to the place of a regular or special meeting of the Council or Administrative Committee. Page 4 of 6 Section 5: MEETINGS,RULES AND REGULATIONS The Council and Administrative Committee shall hold meetings as deemed necessary by the Chairperson or a majority of the Council or Administrative Committee, respectively. The Council and Administrative Committee may adopt rules and regulations governing the transaction of business. The Council and Administrative Committee shall keep public records of all actions as may be required by applicable laws. All meetings of the Council and Administrative Committee shall be open and accessible to the public as provided by law. A quorum for doing business by the Council or Administrative Committee shall be established by the presence of at least 50%of the members or their authorized designees. Section 6: OFFICERS The chairperson of the Council and Administrative Committee shall be a Spokane County Board of County Commissioner member. The vice-chairperson of the Council and Administrative Committee shall be a Spokane County Board of County Commissioner member. The chairperson(s) shall preside over all meetings, and in the absence of such chairperson, the vice- chairperson shall preside. Section 7: MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Council is to coordinate the criminal justice system through the collaboration and shared responsibility of criminal justice and elected officials by (1) reviewing significant information relative to immediate and future needs, and by (2) identifying and recommending alternatives to total incarceration which are consistent with the law and community objectives of public safety, accountability, punishment, treatment and public awareness so as to reduce recidivism in the community. Section 8: POWERS AND DUTIES The Council, in conjunction with carrying out the above mission statement, shall make recommendations to the appropriate elected officials and the Administrative Committee on the following issues: (a) Maximizing local resources including personnel and facilities, reducing duplication of services, and sharing resources between local and state government in order to accomplish local efficiencies without diminishing effectiveness; (b) Reviewing data and reports with a goal of ensuring that departments are reducing recidivism, increasing program completion, engaged in more efficient practices, generating cost savings, expediting cases when appropriate, and contributing to a reduction in crime; (c) Jail management; (d) Mechanisms for communication of information about offenders,including the feasibility of shared access to databases; Page 5 of 6 (e) Partnerships between the department and local community policing and supervision programs to facilitate supervision of offenders under the respective jurisdictions of each and timely responding to an offender's failure to comply with the terms of supervision; and (f) Developing a Local Law and Justice Plan for Spokane County. The Council shall design the elements and scope of the Plan, subject to final approval by the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners. The general intent of the Plan shall include seeking means to maximize local resources, reduce duplication of services, and share resources between local and state government. The Council may establish work groups and/or subcommittees to assist in carrying out its powers and duties. The Council has no authority to appropriate/expend any moneys or execute any agreements. Section 9: STAFF SUPPORT Spokane County shall provide staff support for the Council and Administrative Committee as is deemed necessary. Page 6 of 6 /\.., stiokane Valle K11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106!I Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 -: Fax:509.921.1008 :: cityhall(aspokanevalley.org Good for business.. Good for our community! 4.1° Keep sidewalks cleared of snow and ice. Akan~ .0jVauey. City of Spokane Valley Code Enforcement, 509-921-1000. Online reporting at www.wwwspokanevalley.org/CARES Keeping your sidewalks cleared of snow and ice is good business! • Makes it easier for customers to come in and do business with you. • Makes your business more attractive to new customers. • Leaves a positive impression of your business and our community. • Decreases the likelihood that someone could fall and get hurt. • Helps avoid liability issues. • Avoids possible fines of$500 or more for failure to remove snow and ice. Thank you to those Spokane Valley businesses and property owners who already work hard to keep sidewalks adjacent to their properties cleared of snow and ice. Your efforts are very much appreciated! (See back of this page for helpful tips for keeping your sidewalks cleared) When we all work together, we make Spokane Valley a friendly place to work,play, shop and stay! With our sincere appreciation, Dean Grafos, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager ! /--, - / ,' Tips for Keeping Sidewalks Cleared of Snow and Ice • Prepare in advance to be sure you have the right tools that are in good condition. Most hardware/home retailers should be able to recommend tools and equipment that are the right size and type for your needs. • Shovel early; shovel often. It's much easier to remove small amounts of snow more often than a lot of snow all at once, or trying to remove it once it's packed down into ice. • Clear a path wide enough for pedestrians and for those using wheeled mobility devices. A minimum of three feet wide is suggested, with four feet wide preferred. • Apply deicer to melt ice, or scatter sand or kitty litter to provide traction on frozen surfaces. Your hardware/home retailer should be able to recommend something that is right for your situation. • Store snow and ice on your property and out of the public right of way, where it could obstruct traffic. • If you don't do your own snow and ice removal, contact a local service provider in advance of the next snowfall to get on their list for service. • Check in with other businesses nearby to see if you can work together to share resources and/or costs. Thank you for your attention and assistance in keeping our community safe. Please continue doing your part in making Spokane Valley a friendly place to work, play, shop and stay! *Spokane Valley Municipal Code 07.05.040 defines snow or ice not removed from a public sidewalk within a reasonable amount of time as a prohibited nuisance that may result in fines of $500 or more. BROADWAY AVENUE HAVANA TO FANCHER SD RETROFIT j r � EB Broadway at Havana WB Broadway at Fancher v..1 ,_ 3 ackground • State required City to perform an assessment and retrofit plan for City-owned drywells. • City staff completed the required assessment and retrofit plan in February 2013. • Broadway stormdrains discharge through drywells with no pre-treatment, targeted as a high-priority retrofit area. • Project identified in City's Stormwater CIP 1 Project Funding and Timing 0 • City applied for Ecology grant in June 2013 • Project was not selected in first round, additional funding came available in May 2014 • Grant documents finalized with Ecology in August 2014 • Grant application included preliminary construction estimate of $1,300,000 for improvements, up to $975,000 (75%) reimbursed by Ecology • Proposed schedule: • Design: Fall 2014- February 2015 • Bid/Award: March-April 2015 • Construction: April- June 2015 • Construction must be completed by June 30, 2015 to receive reimbursement Pr e ct 'tee el Amen[ • Identified stormwater improvements to meet grant requirements • City staff coordination and brainstorming meeting • Stormwater, Traffic, Capital Projects, Street Maintenance, and Economic Development Divisions discussed additional improvements • Two separate project concepts were developed: • Option #1: stormwater only improvements • Option #2: incorporate additional streetscape improvements 2 Option #1 0 • Stormwater improvements only • Existing drywells will be retrofitted to fulfill intent of grant • All improvements will be underground Option #2 0 • Upgraded stormwater system with additional streetscape improvements • Convert existing 4-lane to a 3-lane street section • Addition of multi-use pedestrian/bike path • Installation of grassy swales and street trees • Improved Economic Development • Improved traffic safety • Optional Gateway 3 Option # 1 Stormwater Only Improvements O -4„",, Option #1 Stormwater Design CD • Existing drywells will be retrofitted to eliminate direct-injection and improve pre-treatment. 4 9 60' 3' _2' ——0.5' 3' —2' 12' 12' 12' 12' — 4.5' --6.0'-- -------E___, -6.0'----E___, DRIVING DRIVING i DRIVING DRIVING SIDJ LANE LANE LANE LANE WALK V .Z". - zZ V ;] W & EXISTING SECTION & 54 LOOKING EAST © FAIRGROUNDS a 1 O Option # 2 Additional Streetscape Improvements • 0 1 ,.....,.(4.„-,. .. # ,P '3 04,s .1 Fi 4Cl -- 'l d I 1 5 Additional Benefits • Streetscape Improvements • Economic Development opportunities • Traffic improvements • Multi-use path • Gateway o 0 o D o 0 o • BROADWAY EXISTING CONDITION ON A-Existing walk 1 �*s 1 B-Proposed landscape statement ''" C-Westbound traffic D-Existing trees E-Eastbound traffic F-Proposed street trees West Broadway ley- BROADWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS 6 4 © c 0 ©', • O. ' ork .41F ,,,, 4--- . N• . , 1 e 1 ,. ^TSU I 2'6, '`ti �r BROADWAY EXIST]NG CONDITION t ,� -.am.Ell Y A-Existing walk ` j B-Existing tree .., Y c_Westbound traffic,single lane i+_ D-Eastbound traffic,two lanes • E-Proposed street trees F Landscape Planting G-Separated walk/bicycle path \'`` Mid-West Broadway _ - t ie' \ BROADWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS O 440 O`cG O .O O _—© t� t "" r : ate. -c, wiser-aiiK` w BROADWAY EXISTING CONDITION 111041+ W — 4r :F A-Proposed street trees a '�-T� > ..)_____?3,-„__ --' B-Existing tree C-Separated walk/bicycle path Il_ ` ;y,� e !' D-Existing walk i. - 14... - 4TF`f6e i E-Center turn lane d i vTr _r s 3 ,. i ts{ ; ��s F-Landscape Planting q I', G-Eastbound Traffic x F H-Westbound Traffic € I r Spokane Mid-East Broadway .....sNllcy \\ BROADWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS I 7 O° ,0l 4 O 040 L. _ , P .,.- rBROADWAY EXISTING CONDITION t Y , A-Separated walk/bicycle path _ B-Landscape planting C-Proposed Street Trees _ D-Eastbound traffic lanes E-Westbound traffic lanes F-Existing walk G Existing landscape c '^�� East Broadway jVal `BROADWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS Story Ater Design • South Side: Approximately 17 existing drywells will be upgraded to current water quality standards with the installation of irrigated grassy swales. • North Side: Approximately 19 existing drywells will be eliminated or retrofitted with catchbasins and spill protection control to eliminate direct-injection. 8 Economic Development �o Bene-is O • Enhances the area and may increase property values • Provides bike connection to City limits • Provides a physically separated path in a high truck traffic area • Provides a distinct view of City of Spokane Valley • Design could include: • Conduit to light up trees or bushes • Gateway Sign Economic Devel.opment 0 ,- t 110. R M f - oL1 Appleway Landscaping Pro et Sprague St e Upgrades 9 Traffic improvements a /h/ /f ,„ // 4-Lane With center turn lane Traffic Safety • Convert 4-lane to 3-lane road section • Up to 29% crash reduction by providing center turn-lane • Broadway east of Park is 3-lane section • Broadway before/after data = 2o% crash reduction • Allows center turn-lane for trucks to stack and wait for viable gaps in traffic to turn into/out of driveways • Single lane in each direction allows trucks to make right-turns into driveways without vehicles passing on the left 10 Traffic Volumes a • Traffic Volumes • Capacity of 3-lane section • 14,00o — 18,000 ADT • 7,000 - 9,000 in each direction • Existing traffic volumes are comparable to other sections of Broadway ! • 9,400 vehicles per day (about 4,70o in each direction) • 3-lane section will accommodate future needs and growth Multi-Modal Considerations O • Bicycle and Pedestrian Traffic • Provides bicycle and pedestrian connection to City limits • Provides a physically separated path for bicycles and pedestrians • Enhances safety by providing separation from vehicle traffic • Adheres to the City's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan • There is currently no bus route on this segment • Not part of any existing STA long range plans 11 Option #1 — Pros & Cons O • Keep the current lane configuration, all stormwater improvements will be underground Pros: • Stormwater function will be upgraded to fulfill intent of Ecology grant • No change to existing traffic configuration Cons: • Project will solely improve stormwater system • Not consistent with Bike/Ped Plan • No safety improvements Option #2 — Pros & Cons 0 • Narrow existing road section to allow installation of grassy swales, street trees, and a separated trail for bike and pedestrian use Pros: • Safer pedestrian and bicycle facilities • Safer vehicle turning movements • Aesthetics/Streetscape improvements • Improved Economic Development • Decreased cost for pavement preservation project • Decreased street maintenance costs • Gateway Cons: • Added landscaping costs for maintenance of grass and trees. 12 Initial1 Public LIolmrl efn S Q • Spokane County Fairgrounds (Rich Hartzell, Director) • Expressed concern regarding impact to event traffic flow. • Recently lost access to Fancher, now exits all fair traffic to Broadway • Spokane Indians (Chris Duff, General Manager) • Interested in beautification and improved pedestrian access as long as traffic movements are not adversely affected • LB Stone Properties • Opposes narrowing street. Feels that it is an industrial area that doesn't warrant increased pedestrian access, better to keep on Sprague. Feels multiple traffic lanes better serve truck traffic. Next Steps 0 • Need Council's approval to move forward: • If Option *1 (stormwater only improvements) is selected, staff will move forward with design • If Option #2 is selected (additional streetscape improvements), staff will move forward with public outreach Questions/Discussion 13 pCITY OF pokane Valle 11707 E Sprague Ave. • Suite 106 • Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 921-1000 • Fax (509) 921-1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org January 7, 2015 Scott Ferguson Prevention Division Manager Washington State Dept. of Ecology PO Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504 Dear Mr. Ferguson: On behalf of the City of Spokane Valley and its citizens, I would like to provide comment on the Department of Ecology's draft report of the Marine and Rail Oil Transportation Study, published on December 1, 2014. The City would like to thank you for taking the time to analyze the potential risk areas and suggest policy recommendations that will improve safety for Washington State residents. There appear to be important errors and omissions in the report and Spokane Valley would like to bring these to your attention.We have identified three primary areas of concern: • Incomplete or missing data o The City of Spokane Valley is bisected by the BNSF and UP rail lines in eastern Spokane County. With a population of 91,113 residents we are concerned that the City is omitted from mention in the study and more specifically Spokane Valley is not included in Table 10,which appears to be a comprehensive list of Washington communities adjacent to freight oil passages throughout the state. The City of Spokane Valley was well represented at the September 9, 2014 all-day meeting(two staff members and one City Council member) conducted by the Department of Ecology in the City of Spokane Valley at the Mira beau Park Hotel.The omission of our City in the report gives us some concern that our input at the public meeting has also been overlooked. (At the public meeting,the City of Spokane Valley emphasized grade separation projects to help eliminate the potential of train/vehicle accidents). With the omission of the City of Spokane Valley,we believe that it would be appropriate to conduct a thorough review of this key data set for factual correctness and include Spokane Valley and any other cities which may have been omitted. 1 ,�s • Emphasis on population density as a measure of risk o Pages 53-60 of the report address the potential risks associated with derailment and oil spills in Washington State. While we understand that there is a high concentration of people and infrastructure in the heavily populated areas,the report seems to over- emphasize population density as criteria for at risk communities. For example, page 60 of the report classifies 22 cities (although in the preceding text it states 38 cities) at greater risk due to population density of over 3,000 persons per square mile and describes at least a dozen other cities with population densities of 2,500 to 3,000 (per square mile)are described as "potential risk."This suggests that all other cities do not have any risk at all.That of course is not the case. Given that the paragraph immediately preceding this information notes a tragic incident in the city of Lac-Megantic where an oil car derailment caused 47 fatalities and given that the population density in Lac-Megantic is 706 people per square mile—it would seem that cities of much lower density are at risk for catastrophic accidents. In short,the report appears to prioritize the risk based on the premise of population density. Figure 28: Densely-Populated Washington Cities near Crude by Rail Routes lists only those cities with population densities exceeding 3,000 people per square mile.This is over four times the population density of Lac-Megantic which experienced a tragic loss of life and property in 2013. In fact, many of the incidents detailed in Table 9 (recent accidents) occurred in rural areas and small towns with catastrophic results.We would like to see additional finding that risk areas are highest wherever residents or property are immediately adjacent to railways and immediate response may not be timely or sufficient. Although mentioned later in the report,such natural attributes such as the sole source Spokane-Rathdrum aquifer should also be considered. We are concerned that Figure 28 creates a misconception that density alone is the most important criteria in prioritizing community risk when in fact almost every community with crude oil rail traffic is exposed to potential disaster, regardless of population density.Additionally,there may also be urbanized county locations throughout the State which may not have been considered in the report since it is primarily based on cities. • Incorrect definition of First Class Cities precludes analysis of at risk cities o Within the section "Potential Public Safety Risks: Crossing Accidents"the analysis and associated recommendation with Table 11, Page 64 is limited to First Class Cities. It is understandable that this data would be collected for the purposes of recommendation #7 on page 123 of the report. However,this analysis portrays the danger of at-grade crossings as limited to First-Class cities. We believe there is a misinterpretation of"First Class Cities". Please note the revised code of Washington: RCW 35.22.010 "Cities of the first class shall be organized and governed 2 according to the law providing for the government of cities having a population of ten thousand or more inhabitants that have adopted a charter in accordance with Article XI, section 10 of the state Constitution." The definition of a First Class City relates to population and the fact that a city has adopted a charter. Table 11 suggests that all cities in Washington with a population of 10,000 or more are included; we request that the report include clarification that Table 11 is intended for the purpose of Recommendation #7 — Regulation and Oversight Issues: Oversight of At-Grade Crossings, and is not a list of all at- risk crossings in Washington State. Table 29, (which is very similar but has a different total) First-Class Cities in Washington with Railroad Crossings appears on page 265 in the correct context of describing those cities which do not have UTC regulatory oversight for safety standards. Please note that there are about 78 cities in Washington State with a population of 10,000 or more (including the City of Spokane Valley which has a population of 91,113). However, in reference to our earlier point regarding population density, it may not be relevant to link risk only to cities with populations of 10,000 or more. Thank you for considering our comments. Once again, the City of Spokane Valley would like to thank you for the work that has been done to generate the draft study. Our hope is that our recommendations may help strengthen the final product and of course include the City of Spokane Valley. Please do not hesitate to contact me for further discussion or clarification on the issues raised. Sincerely, Mike Jackson City Manager City of Spokane Valley 3