Loading...
2016, 11-15 Study Session MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington November 15, 2016 Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Rod Higgins,Mayor Mark Calhoun, City Manager Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Caleb Collier, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Pam Haley, Councilmember Eric Guth,Public Works Director Mike Munch, Councilmember Steve Worley, Capital Improv. Program Mgr Ed Pace, Councilmember John Hohman,Comm&Eco. Dev. Director Sam Wood, Councilmember Gloria Mantz,Development Engineer Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. Proclamation: World Pancreatic Cancer Day Mayor Higgins read the World Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Day proclamation. 1. Marketing Study Update---Gloria Mantz, and Representatives from Atlas Advertising Development Engineer Mantz introduced Mr.Ben White,Atlas Advertising Agency CEO, and she gave a brief history of the company selection process. Mr. White explained that his company's purpose is to work with staff as a partner; said this plan will tell you who you will influence on the way to growth; that the plan tries to optimize that investment and is a tool to serve the future of the community, alongside other tools such as the Comprehensive Plan. He went over the Executive Summary and the desired outcomes shown on page 1 of the Marketing Strategy;he went through the highlights of the document and encouraged Council to interject at any time with comments or concerns. Concerning page 2 and "The Challenge," Councilmember Pace said that although our city government is fairly new, the community isn't and there was identify in the small townships. Mr. White noted the Concurrent Regional Initiatives on page 6 and how those tie into the comp plan and the Chamber's Big 5; said the idea is to think about our role and how to express things associated with marketing; said that naturally there will be some overlap. Mr. White also discussed the"Connecting Strategic Elements"shown on page 15, and said that outcomes led to the brand positioning shown on page 16, and that those items won't say the same thing to people who live here and to visitors; he mentioned the tremendous amount of objectives and targets as shown on page 17, and went through those objectives. Mr. White noted Resource Allocation as shown on page 19, and said they got a lot of input about what should be the focus on the short and near-term goals, adding that a lot changes in five years; said the goal is to help create community vitality, engage the community, attract tourism, and gain an economic development audience;he also mentioned our stimulating industrial area.Mr.White then went over the 6 items of community engagement shown on page 22. After going through the Study, Mr. White moved to the logos. Councilmember Collier asked if he was suggesting a new logo for our City and Mr. White explained that he is not; and that these logos are just for marketing, and he asked for Council input on the logos. Mr. White went over the logos noting not only the different colors and layout, but the fonts as well; that option 1 has some allusions to the river in the orange part,and a modern type face,and is a little more contemporary;and that option 2 has the stronger logo mark and a different set of colors and that it could live by itself, but takes its cues from recreation. Councilmember Pace and Munch said they like the second option better,and Councilmember Munch asked Council Study Session: 11-15-2016 Page 1 of5 Approved by Council: 12-13-2016 where these logos would be used. Mr. White explained that they would be speaking to external audiences and perspective businesses, and could be included on the City's economic development website as well. Councilmember Collier said there is a movement within Spokane Valley to change the name of our city and thus distance ourselves from Spokane. Mr. White said some names have a tremendous amount of meaning, like the word "apple" or "Jefferson County;" and that there are numerous Jefferson Counties throughout the nation; but if someone says "San Francisco"—that could lay claim to the entire place even if just the section referenced is just a small part of that large area, but it all has the central name and the name constantly being marketed by others is Spokane, and that is to our benefit; said if the City's name were changed, Council would have to spend more to get the same benefit and outcome as now; said if this city changed its name it would be exciting,but externally it would have to be built; and said we can discuss this in more detail if Council desires.Deputy Mayor Woodard said he also likes logo option 2;and regarding a name change,said that topic is not his personal focus at the time. It appears that Option 2 was the preferred logo. Moving to the proposed taglines, Mr. White said he feels these are the story lines about this place, and "where tradition meets ambition" is part of that story; and that the second option tells the way the place feels, and said that might play a little more locally than outside; so option 1 is the story of the area and the way the place feels, while option 2 describes the place. Councilmember Pace said option 2 sounds like a sales piece that a marketing person came up with,while the first option feels more organic.Councilmember Wood stated that option I was his preference;and Deputy Mayor Woodard said he likes them both and said he has no problem using multiple taglines. Councilmember Collier stated he also likes the first option. Mayor Higgins suggested perhaps having "Spokane" in a different font. Mr. White thanked Council for their input and said this was the kind of discussion he hoped for; and that he will work with staff to incorporate these ideas; adding that the most important part is getting this out to the world. 2.Parks Maintenance Contract—Mike Stone Parks and Recreation Director Stone explained the issue of the parks maintenance contract for 2017, as noted on his November 15, 2016 Request for Council Action form; noting the benefits of having a multi- year contract. City Attorney Driskell added that we have had a one year contract with up to six additional, one-year renewals so the contract is reviewed annually to make sure we are still getting value. Mr. Stone said that each year is a separate contract, but having multiple years allows the contractor to be more stable in making large purchases,maintain a consistent work force, and not need a learning curve every year.Mr. Stone said we have a high standard for our park maintenance and wouldn't want to go backwards;we need someone who has worked on a contract of this size and nature; it is complex and we need and expect levels of service consistent with set standards; said staff hears from citizens about how pleased they are with the quality of maintenance and the appearance of our parks; said for this bid we only received one bid, that from Senske,and said they have an excellent service record, and he recommends awarding the contract to them. The topic of mowing came up with comments about how often to mow, and how high to mow the grass; and Mr. Stone mentioned that we currently do not collect the grass clippings; he said if there is a desire to reduce cost,lie asked for direction of what level to make those reductions. Mr. Calhoun said we also must carefully compare cost and customer service, and Mayor Higgins mentioned that Council is getting close to micromanaging in areas where Council ought not be involved. There was also discussion about only having one bidder with Councilmember Munch suggesting there are perhaps six capable contractors in the area;and Councilmember Pace stating his preference to have multiple bidders on every bid,adding that he realizes you can't force a bid and suggested trying to recruit and develop relationships with several qualified vendors.Mr.Stone said that we could market this,but with the standards we set in the bid proposal,there are not five or six companies in this area that could meet the criteria,so we would have to reduce qualifications as well as the Ievel of expectations. There was also brief discussion about the use of fertilizer,and weed control and use of chemicals; with Mr. Stone explaining that we do not use Roundup because of the concern with having citizens exposed to that. Mr. Stone noted that we have staffing requirements for the contractors, that we need two certified arborists, a certified trapper, someone with backhoe certification, etc., and putting all that together narrows the field. Mr. Stone mentioned that Council Study Session: 11-15-2016 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: 12-13-2016 although we only received one bid, more than one company picked up the bid package. Mr. Stone stated that from a management point of view, managing multiple contractors would be a nightmare and would take his job to another level;said now we can call Senske at 2 a.m.to repair a fence or work on the irrigation system and that Senske employees understand how to respond;said Senske works very well with the public, so it's not just grass and irrigation. Mr.Calhoun noted that when this comes back,staff will provide figures to give Council a sense of the cost increases over time with Senske, and said they are usually very modest increases each year and that they provide a spectacular service. Councilmember Munch said for the future, perhaps the animal trapper or other aspects of the package, could be separated out. Council concurred to bring this back for a motion at the next Council meeting. Mayor Higgins called for a recess at 7:32 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:41 p.m. 3. CenterPlace Catering Contract—Mike Stone After Mr. Stone went over the information in his November 15, 2016 Request for Council Action form concerning the Food Services Contract for CenterPIace,there was Council consensus to place this contract on the November 22 Council Agenda to consider a motion to award the contract to Le Catering for 2017. 4.Lodging Tax Advisory Committee(LTAC)Recommendations—Chelsie Taylor Finance Director Taylor went over the information on her November 15,2016 Request for Council Action form outlining the background of the hotel/motel tax and the Advisory Committee, and the recommendations for funding allocations as a result of the October 20, 2016 Lodging Tax meeting. Ms. Taylor pointed out that the options for Council for funding recommendations are that Council may choose to make awards to all, some, or none of the recommended candidates in the amounts recommended by the Lodging Committee, or could send the entire group of recommendations back to the Committee for re- review. Ms. Taylor noted that this is set for a motion consideration at the December 13, 2016 Council meeting. Councilmember Pace spoke concerning the funds for Visit Spokane and stated that he isn't sure what we get for those funds. City Manager Calhoun said for Visit Spokane and the Sports Commission, they are generally organizations for the Spokane Region; he encouraged Council to examine these requests, adding that apparently they made a good enough case for the LTAC to provide them with those funds. Councilmember Munch said that he met with Cheryl Kilday a few weeks ago and he brought up his concern with the funding issue; said they have to keep two sets of books and account for where the money is spent; and that they are mainly a marketing tool. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he doesn't understand the recommendation to the Museum, as the only thing they do is bring people to see who we are and said he hopes this amount doesn't cripple them financially this year; said that the Sports Commission said they put 20,000 rooms together at$2.00 a night but said they don't really bring a lot of room nights as the Hoteliers support them as there is no other"game"; said compression doesn't happen in the valley anymore;that the HUB does most of their own promoting and they don't replenish the lodging tax revenues, the "heads in beds" do; and said he feels some of these recommended amounts are out of proportion. Councilmember Wood said the hoteliers supported them, that they are positive and encouraging; and said the committee meeting was positive and upbeat. Councilmember Collier said he would like to see more funds awarded to the Museum and asked if Council could send this back. Ms. Taylor said that is Council's choice, but it would require another forty-five day waiting process. Council agreed to bring this forward as planned. 5.Barker Overpass Design—Eric Guth, Steve Worley Mr. Guth and Mr. Worley went through their PowerPoint presentation concerning the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project, including a description of the project and that it is part of the larger Bridging the Valley project which all began prior to our City's incorporation; said. SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) is the lead agency, but this project included many stakeholder agencies in Washington and Idaho, and that we joined in 2003; they explained the use of the federal funds, how complete the designs are for the grade crossings, and that the"30%" design plans have been on hold since 2004 waiting for federal funding; they mentioned our City's unsuccessful numerous attempts at obtaining Council Study Session: 11-15-2016 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: 12-13-2016 TIGER and FASTLANE grants,but that we have been encouraged to resubmit; said for the proposed final design, $720,000 in federal funds have been earmarked and we risk losing the funds if we don't use them; that we need to provide an additional$300,000 for a total complete design cost of$1,020,000; said we have advertised for a consultant and received two responses, with the team of David Evans and Associates selected as most qualified. Mr. Worley noted that there has been a gap of twelve years since we had the "30% Design"completed and that substantial changes have occurred since then, as noted on his slide#12, which he said boils down to that now that "30%" design is really only about 10% design. Mr. Worley explained the proposed final design and the major tasks needed, including updated cost estimates, as well as future calls for projects for which we could apply to assist in these costs. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked about the road going up to Monte Vista,and whether we have an agreement with the property owner and Mr.Worley said we don't have an agreement with any property owner. Deputy Mayor Woodard also asked that it appears we will have to connect with that Monte Vista Drive but if we don't and let the property owner who can develop all that put in his road,how much savings would that be. Mr. Worley said he did not know and said he doesn't know if we could get away without putting in that north leg and that is one of those things they will look at in the design;and said the reason there is a question about whether we could get away without doing that, is the part of the DOT(Department of Transportation) design requirements; said that the ramp that comes from the bridge over Trent,the on-ramp to the west of Trent, that ramp has a certain distance requirement from Barker to Trent, and if that distance of that ramp extends to where the current entry to where that subdivision is,there might be several ways to accomplish that;he said he has been in contact with Spokane County because our city limit is right on that line west of Trent;that we'd like to coordinate with the County and maybe even have them participate financially in the connection of that north leg of that interchange. Mr. Worley noted that a new traffic analysis will have to be conducted since traffic has increased over the years. Councilmember Collier asked about the property on the northwest black line running through it(as shown on the slide),and asked if we have been in contact with the property owner and how much does this encroach upon their property. Mr.Worley explained that it does not;that when SRTC did the original plans,they had a very extensive public involvement process and all the grade crossings were presented to the public so property and business owners came to the open house and were aware of what the proposed plans were,but he explained, we haven't made individual contact with anyone except with the property owners related to the Wellesley realignment. Councilmember Collier also asked if the property owner wants it done and is going off the old plans,it doesn't look like he loses much,but with the new plan,it looks like we are cutting into it considerably. Mr. Worley asked if the was referring to the northwest corner of the interchange, and Councilmember Collier replied that he was. Mr.Worley said that all of these things related to going through the final design and through the right-of-way process if we get the funding to do it; all of those issues will get taken care of and we will deal with each individual property owner and determine the impacts,and have appraisals done. Mr. Guth added that it is a steep hillside and where you see the road is a developable park; so most of this will be going up that hill to that road; said the connection does have some impact to that subdivision, but it gives them better access than what they have now. Mr. Worley went through the proposed final design information including the tasks not included, the fee estimate,the schedule and possible future grant opportunities.Mr.Worley also noted the major tasks needed as well as those tasks not included with this effort, and explained that this does not complete the design process; said that there will also be some WSDOT involvement;that this doesn't address any of the limited access requirements that WSDOT will put on this project; said now the fee estimate for the scope is about. $1.3 million, which is about $300,000 more than originally anticipated, and doesn't get us as far as we thought it would. Mr.Worley said that the plan is to get a contract with the consultant by December,they'd complete the scope by October of next year to get us to about 50% design,then we have to go through the environmental and BNSF approval process,as well as future grant opportunities like FASTLANE,and said he believes there will be another call for TIGER grants next year, but we don't know yet what the federal government will do; said SRTC will be coming out with a call for projects for STP funds as well. Council Study Session: 11-15-2016 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: 12-13-2016 • Mr. Worley explained the options for moving forward are to move forward with the proposed scope and fee, or reduce the scope to fit the current budget. Councilmember Wood suggested moving forward with the proposed scope and fee, and maybe get it done as fast as possible. Mr. Calhoun added that we have funds earmarked for this project. There was Council consensus to move ahead with option 1 to move forward with the proposed scope and fee. 6.2017 FASTLANE Grant Opportunity—Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth explained the FASTLANE II Call for Projects as noted in his November 15, 2016 Request for Council Action; and recommended staff submitting both projects, but submitting them separately in the small category. After brief discussion about the funding and the projects in general, Council concurred that staff bring these back next week for a recommendation to pursue the funding grants, as well as if the offer presents itself,to join in the coalition for the larger project category. At approximately 8:50 p.m. it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to extend the meeting to 9:15 p.m. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 7.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda. 8. Browns Park Lease Update This item was for information only and was not reported or discussed. 9. Council Check-in—Mayor Higgins Couneilmember Pace sand that he and Councilmeniber Wood have been meeting weekly on Wednesdays at the McDonald's at U-City, studying the Municipal Code and reviewing the development regulations for the comp plan process;said after this comp plan process is over,that they will start all over again;he invited the public and said he also sent out Facebook invitations; also noted that Councilmernbers Collier and Munch have been discussing lobbying resolutions for the TPP based on feedback from the public hearing, 1 to include both pros and cons; and are also working on the second amendment sanctuary city idea. 10. City Manager Comments—Mark Calhoun Mr. Calhoun noted that the second reading of the comp plan has been moved to December 13 in order to give ample time for SRTC to make its review. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. r _ I' '1/ ATT ST L.R. iggrns, . , iry r , OOO���� .) .. Irl tiristmeBainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session: 11-15-2016 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: 12-13-2016