2011, 05-17 Study Session Minutes MINUTES
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
STUDY SESSION FORMAT
Spokaue Valley City Hall Council Chsmbers
Spokane Valley, Washington
May 17, 2011 6:00 p.m.
Atlendance:
Councilmembere Sinff
Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jacksoq City Manflger
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Cery Driskell, Acting CiTy Attorney
Dean Grafos, Councilmember Neil Kers[en, Public Works Director
Brenda Cttassel, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Dev Director
Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Ame Woodard, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director
Steve Worley, Senior Engineer
Rick VenLeuveq Police Chief
Keren Kendall, Associate Planner
Cazolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Chris Bainbridge, CiTy Clerk
Meyor Towey called Ne meeting m order at 6:00 p.m.
ACT[ON ITEMS:
1 A000intrnent of Candidate to Interim Council Position #5 — Mayor Towev
As Mayor Towey had previousty recused himself from this issue, he tumed the meeting over to Deputy
Mayor Schimmels and left the council chambers. Deputy Mayor Schimmels initiated a council roll call,
with all cowcilmembers present except Mayor Towey, who hadjust recused himself and left the meeting.
Deputy Mayor Schimmels explained the procedure for filling this council positioq and he opened the
floor for nomina[ions. Chuck Hafner was nominated by Councilmember Woodard and sewnded by
Councilmember Grafos. Ben Wick was nominateA by Councilmember Gotivnann and seconded by
Councilmember Grassel. Deputy Mayor Schimmels then closed the nominations and called for a vote for
candidate Chuck Hafner, with all comcilmembers voting for Chuck Hafner excep[ Councilmember
Gothmann. As four votes for Mr. Hafner constimted a majoriry, Mr. Hafner was declared the interim
councilmembec City Clerk Bainbddge administered the oa[h of office to Mr. Hafner, who then [ook his
seet at the dias. Mayor Towey returned to the meeting.
2 Develooment Aeeement Extension CPA 02-11 Comnrehensive Plan Amendment — Karen Kendall
Councilmember Woodard, as he had done previously conceming this issue, rewsed himself and left the
wuncil chambers. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to grant CatHolic Charities
and applican[ Ann Mmtrn an addi[ional exfensron of up to 60 days from today's date, to present to
Counci( the proposed development agreement associated with the Comprehensive P/an amendment CPA
02-Il, and that such extension inc(udes time a[located far a pu6lic hearing bejore council. Assistant
Planner Kendall expleined that this is a request for an extension of up to sixty days to allow time for all
parties to agree on the contents of the development agreement; that the agreement continues to be drafted
and once that draft is completed, i[ will be submitted to staff for review who will then cootdinate with the
applican[ and with Catholic Charities concerning the agreemen[, and that the matter will be noticed for a
public hearing. Mayor Towey invited public comments.
Council Smdy Session Minutes May 17, 2011 Pege 1 of 8
Approved by Councih lwe 14, 20ll
Tim Bieber N 312 Farr: said Catholic Chariries and the citizens don't want the sixry days extension as
tk�ey went this resolved; said he represents the Farr area conceming the neighborhood; said many ere
opposed to building this sWCture; that tt�ere appears m be land grubbing as ii seems they have cut down
more than six trees on one acre if you include the fruit trees and said he is concemed whether that is
lawful; said it seems staff needs Ne time and not Catholic Ct�arities, probably to align codes and
regulations with the building proposed to be built; said it appears to be a pungent odor coming from this;
Ihat it seemed that thirty days was gracious, and this would be a total of nineTy days; that if everything
was done according to the regulations and codes that are established now on the land, the neighborhood
would be more than willing to be passive and allow the wuncil and staff to work with the builder, and
that the neighborhood would be passive about it and let it go, but said it appears there are a lot of issues
involved with putting this complex on that small piece of land and whether there is enough land, and said
the parking is at [he macimum by law now for the church, and reiterated tha[ he dcesn't underetand the
need for the additional sixry days as the church and the citiuns are not asking for i[, but raNer i[ is the
staff seeking [he extension. There were no fiutLer public comments.
Comcilmember Hafner asked if there is a further explana[ion of the purpose of the extensioq end Planner
Kendall said that steff is requesting up to sixty days, but feels likely will not need the full sixry days; sMe
said there is a draft agreement from the epplicant and Cetholic Ci�ities which will be revieweA by staff;
that it falls on the applicant along with Catholic Chazities to prepare the development agreement; that they
have been working on a draft for the past thirty days, that staff is now asking for the edditionai time for
statT [o perfocm a review, including further communications with the applicant and Ca[holic Charities
should eny concerns arise, and to allow emple time to publish notice of the public hearing, which would
be held before the ciry council, and said tk�at staff needs about a minimum of twenty days to place the
notice in the newspapeq and to mail notices to surromding property owners within a 400 foot redius; and
again said staff is hopeful to have the public heering prior to the expiration of the sixty days.
CounciLnember Grassel asked fot clarificaGon, that tonigh['s issue is the sixty-day extension and not
ageeing m the developer's agreement or Ne mning change, and Ms. Kendall con£vmed that is the case;
and the pulpose of the public hearing will be for council to detecmine if the development ageement is the
right course of action and to move forward with finelizing the comprehensive plen amendment, all of
which will be at CwnciPs discretioa Councilmember Cttafos asked when the development ageement
comes back, if it will review all the surrounding properties as far as parking based on the presem use and
requirements. Ms. Kendall said the development agreement is used as a tool to require extra special
requirements that are not presenUy requ'ved in our Code; and said she has no[ reviewed [he agreement in
detail so cannot address wha[ is being proposed by the applicant and Catholic Charities as additional
measures to mitigate and appease any concems and to work with the neighborhood; but that staff will
look at thou issues, and based on some of [he issues s[aff has heard, perhaps staff could provide some
constructive feedback with the comments before it comes to council, and said it is possible that wuld
include parking; and said with the development, they would have to accommodate pazking for the entire
site and the proposed use. Mayor Towey asked if once council sees the final development agreement,
does council have the option to make further changes in that agreement, and Ms. Kendall confirtned
Council wili have tha[ option. �ote by Acclamation: !n Fwor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion
carried Councilmember Woodard remmed to the meeting.
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
3 Le¢islativeUpda[e—BriahnaTavlor GovemmentalAffairsConsultant
Govemment Affairs Consultant Briahna Taylor explained [ha[ she hes been actively working on counciPs
behalf in Olympia and that this has been a difficult session end is sGll ongoing. Ms. Taybr gave a recap
and highlighfs of the many issues council has seen in e-mails and reports from her during the legisla[ive
session; and gave an overview of the legislative hvo-year process. Ms. Taylor explained the uniqueness
of this session with the number of new legislators and of how during the beginning of the session in
January, [here were various work sessions focused on getting those new members up to speed. She said
Council Smdy Session Minutes May 17, 2011 Pege 2 of 8
Approved by Comcil: Jwe 14, 2011
in a very historic move, the senate voted in a bipertisan manner to approve the'v version of the proposed
budget; and she explained about the ttvee budgets, state programs, and declined sfiareA revenues resulting
in a$5.4 billion deficit. Ms. Taylor also gave an update on this counciPs hvo principle items of interest,
the Fire Sprinkler System at the Spokane Valley Food Bank, and the Park Land Acquisition on Perk
Road; that we wodt know until the capital budget is finaliud if the food bank will get the funding end
that the funding for the perk land looks doubtful, and said she will wa[ch tlus issue and look for future
funding opportunities in 2012. She also spoke of the success with the legislation conceming cattle trucks
going through the port of entry, and mentioned the success is due also to the group effort of the
stakeholders, including the trucking association and cattlemen; said the bill was amended many times
before finally being signed by the Govemor. Ms. Taylor discussed other items included in her "End of
Session Legisladve Report" dated May 17, 2011, including law enforcement district legisla[ion,
interoperability, SEPA reform es well as other city-related issues such as preserving bcaVstate shered
revenues. Ms. Taylor said this session proved very successful for this ciTy, the Spokene Valley Partners,
end others and she expressed her tl�anks for Council traveling to Olympia. Discussion included cutoff
deadlines for bills, a stalemated capital budget resulting in the possibility of another special session, and
of House Hill 1478 that provides fiscal relief to local govemments, and that it made it tluough the
legislative process with amendments, and is ready to be signed by the Govemor, and said the final version
extends timeframes for local govemmen[ enti[ies to act in compliance with many requirements of [he
Growth Management Act, and the Shoreline Management Act, and said she will get Council more
information on the specifics of ihe bill. Council thanked Ms. Taylor for her time and review of the issues.
4 Draft 2012-2017 Six-Year Trans�ortation Improvement Plan (1'IPl — Steve Worley
Senior Engineer Worley said this is another opportuniTy for discussion on the draft, six-yeer TIP; that a
few weeks ago staff presented an initial draR, and based on some comments, staff made some minor
changes m the description list m make those items easier to understand; and he asked if Council had time
to review the project list, and whether there ere comments, questions, or fiuiher discussion desired on any
of the projects; and said the packet tonight includes a list of "projects with no curtentty identified local
match within existing resources" which are pmjects tha[ staff believes are needed, but fall outside of the
normal funding opporiunities. Mr. Worley asked if Council hes any ideas concerning projects related to
Appleway Extension or Sprague/Appleway and whether council feels those should be included in the TIP;
and that there are some street preservation needs as well, and he recognizes thet staff needs to come to
cowcil with updated infortnation on the pavement management program, and he asked for council
comments and whether that should be included in Ne TIP. Councilmember Woodard said the materials
indicate that only projects that expected to be funded with REET (real estate excise tax) are required to be
included in the T'[P, and said since we dodt know about preserva[ion match funds, that anything we want
having to do with preservation doesdt have to be included on the TIP; and Mr. Worley clarified that the
inten[ is [hat any projec[s tha[ are going [o be funded wi[h REET money must be in this plen; and other
projects, whether funded with REET money or not, if they aze transporta[ion-related projects, should be in
[he plen; and said that this is the planning dowment or guideline for those projec[s. Public Works
Director Kersten added that once adopteA, this becomes part of the Comprehensive Plan.
Councilmember Grassel asked if a general statement could be included in the TIP as to preservation
funding with a line item of $1 million, or if it must state specifically what tt�e project would include. Mr.
Worley said we have had in past TIPs, generalized statemen[s such as tha[ for pavemen[ management
improvements for arterial streets and for local eccess streets, which didd[ lis[ specific projects but
included up [o $2 million in each of those programs, bu[ they were classified as "unfunded" or "planned
projects° because there were no identified funding sources. Councilmember Grassel suggested moving
those "unfunded projec[s" to a fu[ure year, 2013 or 2014, and replace tha[ with $1 million preservation
and maintenance; and Mr. Wodey said that option is at CounciPs discretioa Mr. Kersten mentioned [hat
s[aff expec[s to ge[ 80% gan[s for most of those projects, adding tha[ within the nex[ few mon[hs sYaff
will give Council an upda[e on the IUB Pavement Management Plan. Councilmember Grassel asked if
there are any projects in the TIP that could be matched with some preservatioa Mr. Kersten said staff
CouncilSNdy Session Minums May 17, 2011 Page 3 of 8
Approved by Cowcil: June 14, 2011
applies for preservation gants regardless of projects being included in the TIP; that if deadlines allow,
staff comes to Council to seek approval pdor to submitting gants; and said council could add a
preservation line-item to each year if desired; and said we had been doing that but took it off due ro lack
of funding; but council could increase ft�e total to add preservation, or delete some of the existing
proposed gant projects to balance it out. Concerning the unfunded projects, Councilmember Cttafos
pointed out the s[atement that "staff will coordinate with the finance deparhnent to ensure TIl' projects are
budgeted within the street capital projects fund° and he said if the city match is typically 15%, when does
s[aff determine if funds ere available, and Mc Kersten said that is done when the project gets funded and
emphasized that [his is just a plan; and we are very tight financielly at this point, and are jus[ able to fund,
wit}� tlte REET funds, the currently funded ptojects, and tha[ issue will be discussed in an upcoming
agenda i[em tonigh[; and said that those fundeA projects are budge[ed and consume all the REET funds
[his year and next year for those projects we will be doing in Ihe neM hvo years. Councilmember
Gothmann said tha[ [he only funds he is aware of for preserva[ion projects, were from the Presiden['s
Stimulus funds, which Mr. Kersten said were used for the Sprague project. Mr. Worley said there were
o[her gran[s for preserva[ion projects; that we received some federal funds received through SRTC
(Spokane Regional Transportation Council); that SRTCs practice has been to allocate a certain
percentage of the federal funds for the Spokane Region, to preservation-type projects, with the majority of
funding going toward improvement-type projects; and said we have funded several projects which
included preservation, such as Broadway Averme from Bates to Sullivan where Broadway was re-
surfaced and changed to three lanes; the reconstruction to concrete of the intersection at Sprague and
Sullivan was also with federal preservation funds; he said the federal agencies do not categoriu it as
preservation, bu[ SRTC, took the feAerel funds and decided a cer[ain peroentage should go to preserve
some of the stree[s, and then all the jurisdictions compete as fer as who ge[s a portion of that preservation
money that was set aside.
Councilmember Hafner said that street preservation has been a topic of discussion over the lest few
months; and said if we continue to do more and more streets without the funding we need to preserve the
streets we have, how are we going to take care of that; and he asked why we would continue to build new
streets when we can't take care of the old slreets; and he askeA why the issue of preservation hasdt been
taken care of in flte last eight years; and said if this CiTy has not been putting aside funds for proservation,
he feels we should start doing so. Mr. Wodey said that is a problem all jurisdictions throughou[ the
cwnlry are facing; and we just heard tonight from Ms. Taylor's presentation that Washington State just
pessed a law to allow REET funds to be used for preservation and street maintenance; that most of the
gant agencies that provide funds for hansportation projects typically fund neweq improvemen[ type
projects; but said we are starting to see a shift in the £unding. City Manager 7ackson said the unmet need
of $4.2 million dcesdt represent all of the preservation; that there is preservation being done, and said
perhaps staff could show Iha[ better, and said the number of new miles is very ]imited, and most have
been reconstructing exis[ing roads, and when a road is rehabili[ated, that is a fortn of preserva[ion; and
said [here are ways we could likely measure this to show a clearer picture; and that a lo[ of this is a matter
of showing the re[um on [he inveshnent; tha[ the CiTy has historically useA REET funds to match gants,
which is an outstanding re[um on the investrnent dollars, and that we are always searching for ways to
meet the preservation needs; wlvch will be discussed further tonight under an upcoming agenda item.
Couucilmember GoUvnann said [hat the STEP (septic tank eliminaiion program) ftom a street poin[ of
view is a preservetion progrem; so we have been doing considerable preserva[ion; and he mentioned that
all of Ponderosa was recently totally "preserved" and practically every area of [he city has had some kind
of preservation in [he Iwal stree[s, but acknowledged [ha[ the bigges[ problem is preserving [he arterials.
Councilmember Gothmann added that in the past, we have not provided a funding stream for
preservation. Councilmember Grassel said other cities have included that in their budget as a line-item in
the general £und, and we do not; and Councilmember Gottunann poirted out that other cities such as
Liberly Lake provide utility taYes on all their u[ilities while we only have a utility tac on the telephone;
[hat we have a slim budget and the utility taY is just enough to fund maintenance but no[ preserva[ion; that
Council SNdy Session Minutes May 17, 2011 Page 4 of 8
Approved by Cowcil: luce 14, 2011
all cities are addressing the same problem, and realize they cannot take those monies from their general
Cund unless the general fund is increased.
City Manager Jackson said that we Lave star[ed a policy of setting aside eny emount from the previous
year tlta[ exceeds $26 million in the generel fund, [hat we allocate that to the s[reet capifal fund; and with
that and the $500,000 transferred from the civic facilities fund in the 2011 budget, we have over $1
million cuRently; so a process has been initiated. Councilmember Grassel proposed that perhaps staff
revise the TTP, and those items Nat are not funded and things that are studies, such as the University overv
pass, tk�a[ we [ake those funds and move tha[ toward a general line item for preserva[ion maintenance; so
if a�an[ comes slong we have it in the TIP; and that she would like to see some re-prioritizing of the
TIP. Public Works Direcror Kersten explained that conceming those totels, we are looking at about $2
million annually in ma[ch; [ha[ we could cut half the projects and we still couldn't fund them; that this is a
list beyond our ability to fund wi[h REET funds by about $12 million; and said we could cut the entire
lis[ off and delete [he entire TIP and we would only have $500,000 a year for preserva[ion; tha[ i[ has
almos[ very little impact because the ma[ching funds are very minimal compared to [he grant funds.
Councilmember Grassel asked Nen if the only option would be to move [hose projeds [0 2013; and said
according to [he NB plan, not all roads are in dire need and we dodt have to apply $42 million a year;
but Mr. Kersten said he feels we do, and agein explained that that topic will come back for further
discussion; but said that the road deterioretes and hits a certain point if you don't do preservation and wait
a few yeers too long, then you have to come back and re-conswct the road, and the cost of reconswction
is many times higher than that preservation cost, so we are on some very fine lines on a bt of our roads;
and said that Sprague between Evergreen and Sullivan should have been done a few years ago, that that is
a couple million dollar preservation project, and if you have to reconstruct it, it would likely be $8 or $9
million; and Sprague in front of Cos[co and Lowes needs [o be ground and ovedaid very soon as it has
deteriorated faster than anticipated, and that is probably another $3 million preservation project but if we
let it go a few years, we will hxve to reconsWCt it at flbou[ $10 or $12 million; he said some of those
projects must be done within that deterioretion curve or we start to lose the road, and said at that point we
couldjust `9et i[ go" which is essentially what Spokane has done; and said you dod[ save eny money at
that point by reconsvucting the road.
Councilmember Grassel asked if we could include on the TIP, that Sprague, University to Evergreen at a
cost of $3.6 million; and Mr. Kersten explained that was funded; but the next one is Sprague, Evergreen
to Sullivan which needs to be done. Councilmember Grassel asked if we could move funds into the TIP
for our portioq and then hope for a grant. Councilmember Gothmann said if we deleted project N16, a
$lA million project, it would yield $188,000 for preservation, which is an extremely low yield; and said
what we are doing by approving capi[al consttucrion is we get a multiplier on the dollar for every dollar
spent on capi[al cons[ruc[ioq we ge[ about four more dollers back; and for every dollar spent on
preservation, you geS one dollar's worth of work on; and that is the dilemma all cities face; and said we .
need to fonnulate a me[hod to have road preservation funding; adding that mos[ ci[ies do not take
preservation out of tlte'v general fund because they Imow they can't fimd it as it is not sustainable, and
unless you provide addi[ional tac revenue, the problem wntinues. Mr. Jackson said staff will [ry [o lay
out all the poten[ial funds council could use for fiirther diswssion during the budget retreat. Regazding
the Broadway to the eas[ of Sullivan project, Mr. Kersten said it was a hvo-lane road in bad condition;
[hat we widened that mad to three lanes; so two of the lanes were preservatioq with the third lane
increasing the road; and said if you jus[ use the me[ch money and try to use that for preserva[ion, i[
wou1M'[ have gone as far as getting [he grant; end [hat we got the "better bang for our buck" by getting
the grant, improving those hvo lanes and widening the [hird; and said that is generally the nortn on our
projec[s; and said that projec[ #16 and 32 ere [he hvo Sprague projec[s, which are in the TIP and said they
are included in [here as [hey will likely score high if we get a preservation grant In response to commen[
from Depury Mayor Schimmels concerning the sewer paveback, Mc Kers[en said that was a phenomenal
project for the city as we have essentially improved almost all our residential streets.
Council Smdy Session Minutes Mey 17, 20ll Pege 5 of 8
Approved hy Cowcil: Iune 14, 2011
Mr. Jackson suggested it might be good to keep all these projects in front of us; that we can still discuss
wi[h council which grants we apply for, but if we take [hem off this list, that would require keeping
another ]ist; and seid we could add some discussion conceming preservation inro the TIP, but that is just a
consideration, and said at some point these are all viable projects and it is good to see what the obstacles
are and to keep that before us; and Mayor Towey and council agreed; and he esked if comcil would be
comfortable to add some preservation language and bring this back for the hearing as scheduled and there
were no objecHons from counciL Councilmember Grassel suggested highlighting in the TIP which are
the preservation projects; and Mr. Kersten con£rmed stsff could do that and will highlight and note which
are all preservation funds and which ere partial preservation funds.
Mayor Towey called for a recess a[ 734 p.m. and recomened the meeting a[ 7:48 p.m.
5 Broadwav Drainage — Neil Kersten
Public Works Director Kersten explained that there are rivo options concerning this project; that Option 1
is a regional bio-infiltration facility [o capture [he storm flows in the Broadway, Vis[a [o Ella section and
pipe to the area low spot; provide heatmen[ through catch basins and a bio-infiltration faciliTy (swale)
locateA on available proper[y at the southwest corner of Broadway and Dick; and tha[ [his would provide
capacity in [he faciliTy [o store the 100-year rainfall event without backtlows on[o Broadway; tha[ it
would be requ'ved for any new street project according to the CiTy's Stormwater ordinance; Ne
prel'uninary cons[ruction cost is $477,617; properly acquisition cost would be $65,000 for the land plus
closing wsts, and an on-going landscepe maintenance for the fecility of about $400 a year. Mr. Kersten
said the benefits of option 1 are there would be a 100-year storm event storage at the natural low spot in
the area; it would have a 100+ year life expectancy, future repa'v would not require demolition of the
street infrastructure, it would meet current stormwater regulations, and would enable us to decommission
fourteen existing unpm[ected drywells. Mc Kersten said op[ion 2 is to rehabilita[e the drywells, add
catch basins and replace existing drain field rock at the existing drywells; the cost for the preliminary
consWCtion would be $110,260; it would provide no volume storage capaciTy over the teo-year event;
would necessitate cleaning [he fourteen catch basins every [wo years for a totel cost of $525 per year; it
may need to be replaced again in twenty years depending upon the clogging rate; future repair would
require additional cost of street demolition and replacement, but it would improve flow capacity and have
a 20+ year life expec[ancy. Mr. Kersten men[ioned that some engineers have logisticel problems with
option 1; and said staff would like to do the bid and have option 2 as the bue bid, and if we can get
option 1 to work, to make that an altemate bid; then come back to council after the bids ro re-analyze and
recommend an option based on the outcome of the bids; unless council prefers staff not pursue that
altemate bid; and in that case, steff couldjust do option 2.
Councilmember Woodard said he was in [he azea yes[erday when it was raining so hard Nat the street
from Visffi down to Dorn and Dick were bo[h flowing pretty hard, but none of the wa[er was coming
downhill because it was getting caugh[ all along the way; he said he tumed around on bo[h Dom end Dick
and all [hose drywells were accepting everything as well; he said [ha[ Mc Kersten said that all fourteen
drywells from Vista to Park need [o be replaced; and said tha[ most of those were pu[ in in 1998 when
they re-did [ha[ s[re[ch of road; he said maybe not Ute one at Dick or pom, but the ones on Broadway
were replaced in 1998; and said he doesdt see the flooding issue. Mr. Kersten seid it is his understanding
that they were done in 1978. Mr. Wooderd seid he has two businesses there that he spoke with, one
which has been there for 28 years, and said he wes there when it was done and all those drywells were re-
done in 98; and said his son lives on [he corner of Dick and Broadway, and in 28 years, they have never
seen i[ flood. Mr. Kersten said he has personally been there twice in t}te las[ [hree years when i[ was
flooding a[ the bottom, and said Nere was a lo[ of water down there. Councilmember Grafos said in
looking at the costs, there is about a difference between option 1 and 2 of $234,000; and that he feels we
should go wi[h op[ion 2 and not waste the time on option 1. Mr. Kers[en said the costs no[ calculated are
that emironmentally op[ion 1 is much be[ter, if there is an oil spill there would be no compazison in the
cost involved between the rivo; that for op[ion 1 the system never fails and would never need replacing;
Council SNdy Session Minuhs May U, 2011 Pege 6 of 8
Approved by Comcil: ]we 14, 2011
it has or it wwld have a 100+ year life; whereas option 2 includes very specific list to the drywells; so
the question is, do you want to do it long-telm, environmentalty the best way, or a cheaper, less expensive
cost that works for 20 years. Councilmember Gotivnann said he favors using option 2 es the base bid and
suggesting option 1 as an option; and that during the interim, Mr. Kersten could examine Councilmember
Wooderd's question. Mr. Kersten added that the condition of the pavement is very poor; so if the
pavement is only ten yeazs old, it has aged faster than any pavement he has even seeq that it looks thirty
years old but that determination will have to be made if it is ten or tl�irty years old; end said ihat drawings
show that it is thirty years old; but said staff will check that and if these are only ten years old and in
good shape, then they will not replace [hem. DepuTy Mayor Schimmels asked about [he dandelions in the
swales, end said [he swale by Barker Bridge on Indiana and Barker has dandelions, and Mr. Kers[en said
he thought that wasn't our swale. DepuTy Mayor Schimmels said it absolutely is ours, and that i[ is an
imgated swale which leads to the water bill on that swale, and said [hat probably gets abou[ four to six
inches of grass growth behveen a week or two a[ the least. Mr. Kersten said he will look in[o the issue.
Councilmember Grafos said he thinks [he drywells would last hventy years or longer and can't sce
spending another $235,000 on those drywells; Councilmember Woodard said if we can get hvenTy years
on those drywells, the roads would need repaving by then enyway. Mr, Kersten said to keep in mind that
[he money [hey would be using are s[ormwater funds and can only be used for [his lype of project. Mr.
Kersten rewmmended using the $I10,000 as a base bid, but also do an altemate for option 2, the
$277,OOQ and get the actual dollar amount when we come back and staff would recommend Nat if the
dollars come in, he would recommend option 1; but said that decision is up to council; but that tonigh[ is
not committing [o option 1, but getting [he chance to see if it can ge[ engineered, and to get the ac[ual
cost; and Mayor Towey said he would go with Mr. Kersteds recommendation; and have staff some back
[o council on the difference. Mr. Kersten reiterated that a[ the time of bid, staff can look et those rivo
costs specifically and decide, and said overall if council is really not in favor of option 1, then we
shoulddt waste time working on it; end seid if that is the feeling, steft' would be better off spending time
on something else. Mayor Towey said he would like to see how the bids come in. Councilmember Grafos
said his point is, why waste staff s time on a project that is $235,000 more; but if there is a consensus to
move forward, thaYs fine with him. CowciLnember Hafner asked what is staff s involvement in putting
the base bid as option ] end altemative as 2, and Mr. Kersten said that staff would have to do the
engineering design to bid [he project, as well as address the engineering issue associated with op[ion 1 to
make sure i[ flows correctly pas[ all the exis[ing utilities. It was council consensus to go with op[ion 2
and no[ consider option l.
6. Proposed Caoital Projects — Neil Kersten Ken Thom_pson
Mr. Kersten explained thet attached to tonight's council materials, is a list of capital projects which have
been discussed eazlier, and/or asked to be brought forward; and that sffiff is here seeking d'vection on
whe[her council would like to move forward on any of these projects and have staff start working on
committing the funds. Mr. Kersten went over [he projects lis[ed and the estima[ed cos[s and construction
schedule; and added tha[ he contacted Millwood to see if they would help pay for their share of the Quiet
Zone, and they indicated they have no available funds [o assist in [hat project. Finance Director
Thompson then explained some of the funding options for [hese capital projec[s, and showed [he capital
project needs, abng with the uncommitted resources and the committed resources, and said these projects
are no[ included in the T[P list so council needs to make sure they aze [op priori[ies, along with all other
projec[s and funding associated with projects, are considered, and said [ha[ he is ready to amend [he
budget, bu[ until council decides which projects they want [o do, he can'[ move forward; and asked if
Council would be in[erested to work on a priority list during the June 14 budget retreat. CiTy Manager
Jackson said this is a discussion to show council all the available resources, and as we work through this,
labels can change as council detemiines. Councilmember Woodard mentioned the possibility of the
ve[erens' memoriel ebng with the ciTy welcoming sign, west ga[eway projec[, end said that perhaps the
veterans' group might be willing to work with us to make an entry as well as a veteran's memorial; and
said we might wan[ [o hold off on some of those other projects un[il we can discuss the memoriai wi[h
Council SNdy Session Minuces May 19, 2011 Page 7 of 8
Approved by CowciC June 14, 2011
some of the veteran's �nup, to see if we can get the communiTy to buy-in to help with a memoriel.
Councilmember Grafos said of all these projects, that is the one to hold off on, and to contact the
veterans' group and seid he feels we could get some help, and in the meantime, perhaps desig� a sign that
would be enhance to our city; and seid this stortnwater project would enhance bringing injobs to our ciry;
and maybe add a grind end overlay to the area on Sprague Avenue, and add t}�at to the project as well.
Council concurted to work on the priority list during the June 14 budget retreat.
7 Reoort of Seattle Economic Develooment Meeting — DenuTy Mavor Schimmels
DepuTy Mayor Schimmels gave a teport on a leedership academy he attended mid-April wnceming
economic development, which was hosted by the Trade Development Allience of Greater Seattle, who in
hrn hos[ed a delegation of ninety Chinese leadere &om severa] rttajor ci[ies in China; he mentioned the
accompanying Seattle Times article on the meeting, and conceming the handout on the top intemational
firms and top [en exporters in Spokane Valley, suggested staff ineke contac[s wi[h those companies to see
whet we can do for [hem to start this economic development.
8. Advance A¢enda — Mayor Towey
Councilmember Grassel said that now that they heve killed SARP, she would ]ike Council to begin a
review of the City's Municipal Code Chapter 22 dealing wi[h signage and lendscaping and said she feels
the landscaping regulations are overwhelming. Mr. Jackson said staff will schedule a future council
meeting to begin discussing Chapter 22. Councilmember Grafos added that he also would like that
review as it eppears that on May 12 our code enforcement s[afF swept through the valley and issued
tickets to about fifty business owners on temporary signs and banners; and said those regulations need to
be revised es soon as possible beceuse we are restricting what people cen do in the ciTy, and if we start
chasing people out of here thet bring in the tex dollars, we will have real problems. Mr. Jackson said a
review will be scheduled as well as a history of [he process.
9. Information Onlv
The Grenter Spokune, lnc. Quarterly Report and PACE Pmticipation were for information only and were
not reported or descussed
10. Council Check-in — Mayor Towey
Councilmember Grafos esked if staff would bring back options on changing tr�c from University on the
east to Mullan to the wes[, to [wo-way tra�q and op[ions including cos[, funding, and the procedure for
placing this on [he ballo[ this fall. There were no objections from Council and Mr. Jackson said that he
will schedule that topic.
11. CiN Manager Check-in — Mike Jeckson
City Manager ]ackson said that council also had the discussion concerning one-way in 2010, and s[aff
will gather the informa[ion for fiuther discussion, adding [ha[ mid Augus[ is the deadline for placing en
item on the November ballot.
There being no fiuther business, i[ was moved by Deputy Mtryor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously
agreed to pdjourn. The meeting adjoumed a[ 8:51 p.m.
F,
Thomas E. Towey, Mayor
istine Bain ridge, City C k
Cwncil Sludy Sessian Minules May l7, 2011 Pege 8 of 8
Approved by Council: lune 14, 20❑