HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works July 12 20051
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Public Works and Safety Committee
July 12, 2005
Committee Chair Barbara Brenner called the meeting to order at 1:33 p.m. in
the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present: Absent:
L. Ward Nelson None
Sam Crawford
Also Present:
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION ONLY
2. VIEWING OF TWO SHORT INFORMATIONAL VIDEOS PRODUCED BY
THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE (AB2005 -017)
Steve Gatterman, Sergeant /Traffic, stated he has two videos from the traffic
unit. One is shown to schools and one is shown to deputies.
Crawford stated the committee talked about a grant for enforcement three
weeks ago. He asked about Squalicum High School, and teen drivers showing off,
as teens do. He asked if any of those grants could apply. Gatterman stated there
are other grants that apply to teen driving. He showed the video presentation.
Gatterman stated Deputy Rodger Funk put together the video in response to
the death of Deputy Matt Herzog. The presentation uses local crash stories and
photos to get the point across to teens that it happens here on roads they drive.
Many of the crashes photos show the passenger compartment is basically intact,
although the rest of the car is smashed up. The presentation has a strong message
about seat belts. With today's vehicles, people get in a pretty severe crash and can
be safe if the seat belt is on. The Power Point presentation that normally follows
the video talks about each of the areas in traffic enforcement, such as driving under
the influence (DUI), speeding, buckling up, and other things.
Brenner asked about people who go into the water and can't get out because
of the buckle. Gatterman stated those types of crashes are a very small number of
accidents. He's never seen one in his experience. The odds of getting into a crash
and benefiting from the seat belt are much higher.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she's not surprised many accidents happen on
Hannegan Road, which she drives daily. Many people drive recklessly on that road,
not just teens. The roads are very unforgiving. Gatterman stated that 85 percent
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
of crashes are caused by people in a hurry to get somewhere and people who aren't
paying attention.
Brenner stated she is surprised not more accidents are on Birch Bay Lynden
Road. Gatterman stated one was in the presentation. They recently received data
about crashes on that road. They've asked the State Patrol to help work that
section. Their new chief has directed the State Patrol to help local Sheriff offices.
Brenner stated another road with a lot of accidents is Slater Road near
Ferndale Road. Gatterman stated the Lummi Nation is working with State Patrol to
work something out on Haxton Way. There's not much gore in the video. Kids are
given the option to not watch the presentation.
Brenner stated the kids need to see the gore. Gatterman stated that
unfortunately, it creates a lot of complaints, and would require parent
authorization.
The next video has not been shared outside the department. Deputy Dave
Scott created a presentation for the deputies that was modeled a bit after the
previous videos. The video is shown during driver training for the officers. Most of
the accidents shown were not the fault of the deputies. He showed the video
presentation.
Gatterman stated deputies do get involved in collisions. Recently, stress that
it's necessary to more closely evaluate the need to get to the call with lights and
siren in reality, based on call history. They have to decide whether or not to go
code three all the way to the call, based on the history of the residents. Deputy
Herzog's crash had a lasting impression on people in the department when it comes
to speed. Even though the deputies are authorized to speed, it's not always
necessary.
The presentation talks about the number of officer - involved injuries and
fatalities. Nationwide, almost half are related to traffic crashes. A patrol car can be
driven up to 25,000 miles per year. The deputies spend a lot of time in the car.
Also, over half of tort claims regarding law enforcement are due to collisions. The
County has a lot of exposure in that area.
Caskey- Schreiber stated there is more traffic to deal with, which makes the
roads more dangerous. Gatterman stated that is true. There are new training
philosophies about not using emergency equipment to get through busy
intersections.
Crawford asked if the Sheriff's Office can do some enforcement for teens in
the location of Squalicum High School, Meridian High School, and Nooksack Valley
High School. As a parent, it would be nice to give those teens a message.
Gatterman stated school zones are one of the areas where the deputies know they
need to work. Most citations and patrols come as a result of citizen complaints,
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
trends on certain roads, and visual sitings by the deputies while on patrol. Citizen
complaints and crash data generates enforcement action. They don't want to write
tickets just to write tickets. They're trying to accomplish the goal of having fewer
crashes.
1. PRESENTATION OF THE 2005 LUMMI ISLAND FERRY OPERATIONS
REPORT AND FERRY RATE ANALYSIS (AB2005 -163)
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated distributed information (on file).
This is meant to also be the annual review of the ferry rate structure. As they
change operations and move to a new boat, they will need a rate change, also.
Today, he will talk about what they will do next with rates.
The first change is on page 32, which projects where the costs are likely to
go. The chart on page 32 of the report shows that operating costs start to climb
with a new boat. About one - quarter of that rise is related to inflation. About one -
quarter of that rise relates to the new boat, which also generates additional
revenue. The remaining half of the cost is for the backup vessel. Dry dock would
occur every other year. During the years where dry dock is not scheduled, there
will be a short maintenance period with the vessel remaining in the water, which
costs less.
Brenner asked if the County has a backup vessel now during dry dock.
Monsen stated the backup vessel is a passenger vessel. The plan recognizes that
the County will keep the Whatcom Chief as the backup vessel.
Brenner asked what would happen if they sold the Whatcom Chief and keep
the foot passenger ferry. It may reduce costs significantly. Monsen stated it would
reduce costs. However, it was made clear that retaining the Whatcom Chief for
backup purposes was important. Page 33 of the report represents the increasing
costs, if the fare structure doesn't change. The intention is not to promote boat use
growth and revenue. The analysis represents the historical growth rate.
He recommends moving ahead with a fare increase, beginning January 1,
2006. One element of that increase is to define the cost alternatives with a backup
vessel. One option is to not have a car ferry as a backup vessel. It is in mothball
for the majority of the year. It's difficult to put it back into service regularly, simply
because the other boat goes down for a while. Another option, at the other end of
the spectrum, is to have the backup vessel ready to go at a moment's notice. That
is a big cost difference. He will explain what those options are and their cost
implications before the Council makes decisions about rates. He recommends
putting together scenarios that influence cost, so rates are based upon an
operational plan.
Brenner asked if one scenario includes selling the Whatcom Chief. Monsen
stated it does.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if rising fuel costs make it difficult to accurately
forecast costs. Monsen stated the fuel cost isn't a dramatic part of the operating
cost. If they try to go to continuous operation, they need one more full -time staff
person. Boat service drives the operational cost more than fuel.
He hoped the Council would help determine those scenarios and fare
structure alternatives. At the same time, they are waiting to find out about a loan
application approval. In August, he will know if the Public Works Board will
recommend the loan to the legislature. That will help him understand the timing of
purchasing a boat. Because of the Washington Transportation Plan from the
Department of Transportation, which has elements of the ferry system, he will talk
with other counties about the special subsidy in the fuel tax and other State issues
that might influence State financial support for the boat one way or another. It will
also influence cost recovery goals from the State. Pierce County has adopted the
goal of collecting 80 percent of the operating cost. Skagit and Whatcom counties
have not. Those discussions will occur over the next few months.
Crawford asked if the 80 percent State target would affect all roads or just
ferry funding. Monsen stated 80 percent of operating costs for the State ferries are
collected at the fare box. The State actually collects 70 percent. Skagit County
collects 30 percent. Whatcom County collects 55 percent of the ferry operating
cost. In the State ferry system, operating cost is exclusive to boat operation, not
boat investment or capitalization of the boat. Operating costs for counties include
dock maintenance, but not capitalization. For Whatcom County, operating costs
include capitalization, but not docks. They're not always talking about the same
thing.
Crawford stated he wouldn't want the State holding the County culpable for
subsidizing a portion of ferry operating cost and justify that as a reason for
withholding funding for other parts of the road system. Monsen stated he supports
the policy and operational direction this County has decided on and implemented.
Being appropriate and reasonable isn't always how the State process ends up.
Brenner asked if Whatcom County has heard anything from the State about
being too generous by subsidizing the ferry. Monsen stated he has not specifically,
but they are currently discussing with other counties how to divvy up the amount to
be shared by each county. There is no shortage of people who will raise that issue.
He doesn't know if it will result in a policy decision.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the new ferry would require as much time in dry
dock. Monsen stated he couldn't say. Staff will take it out of the water every other
year instead of every year. The Whatcom Chief will still need annual repair,
whether or not they use it. One advantage of having the second vessel is that they
know the 35 -car boat is as big as they can use, and if they want to change capacity
in the future, they will need a second boat. That may be one reason to consider
holding on to the Whatcom Chief.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Next month, he will begin discussing the above -water design with the
community and Council. He was very concerned about choosing a propulsion
system that is not a standard propeller system. It costs a bit more, but it will
eliminate the need to put $500,000 into dredging, because the boat draft is less.
The system will also provide better performance.
Brenner asked if this propulsion system is used elsewhere or is cutting edge.
Monsen stated the system is not cutting edge, but is not used much on the West
Coast, except for in tugboats. It is a German -made system and is common in
Europe. In most applications for today, the benefit of the system is power and
maneuverability. He compared different systems for maneuverability.
Brenner asked why more places on the West Coast don't use it. Monsen
stated it's a technology that is coming into the area. For straight -line propulsion,
he wouldn't invest in it. However, they are paying for control and maneuverability.
For Whatcom County, control is the issue, not powering ahead.
Crawford referenced fares on page 33 and asked if the fares shown are
today's or historical. Monsen stated the blue graph line is based on the current fare
structure and ongoing, historical use. The red graph is the need for 55 percent
recovery rate.
Brenner asked why they see a significant jump in 2007. Monsen stated that
is when the new boat goes into service, and when the County will have two boats.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Brenner asked what the graph line will look like if they get rid of the
Whatcom Chief. Monsen stated close to half the difference in the increase is
keeping the Whatcom Chief as a backup boat. The County continues to cover
approximately 55 percent of the operating cost. Because the current Whatcom
Chief is at a functional capacity, there is no growth in use. Therefore, the operating
cost percentage collected will drop.
Crawford asked if the ferry users generally support increasing fares when
there is an increase in service. The concerns of the community were more about
convenience. Monsen stated that seems to be true. As they get into discussions
about the fare, the discussion will be who has access to the fare discounts.
Crawford stated the majority of the community told him that cost isn't as
important as other factors. Monsen stated that is consistent with his experience.
Brenner stated that once they start talk about the fares, that issue will come
up. They haven't been talking that much about fares. Monsen stated there will be
discussion about who pays what amount.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Colleen Berg, citizen, stated the propeller sounds like a good idea, given the
dredging that would be done. She asked how stable the propeller is, or if the
propeller has anything to do with stability. Monsen stated it won't affect anything
above the waterline.
Berg stated more and more people would like to get out of the cars and not
travel on the ferry with their cars. There is apprehension over the cost of a bigger
ferry. Consider making it possible to get people out of their cars, such as
coordinating with bus service, which isn't available right now.
Crawford stated it looks like there will be a 50 percent increase in fares over
a certain number of years.
Polly Hanson, 2791 West Shore Drive, Lummi Island, stated one concern is
the effect on the makeup of the community. If the fares go up, there will be quite
a few people in the community who won't be able to afford the fares and will have
to move off the island. If that happens, only wealthy people will be able to live on
the island. This has happened in many communities in the country. It's not their
goal. It's not an admirable goal. Try to arrange things consciously, prepare for
that, and maintain a balanced community. Do not be casual about the fare
discounts provided. It's not a side issue. It's very important.
She asked what the propulsion system would be like on a very windy day
with rough water. She asked the type of control under those extreme conditions.
Monsen stated that at this point, they are doing that analysis. The extreme
condition is why they would go with the propulsion system. It provides superior
control in those conditions.
Hanson stated they must be more successful in coordinating with the bus
system. The ferry arrives less than two minutes after the bus leaves.
Brenner stated it wouldn't hurt for the Council to take a position on that
problem. The Council has little influence over the Whatcom Transportation
Authority (WTA). Hanson stated the Council needs to be specific about what they
need, in order to look at the bigger picture. There must be a way to coordinate the
two services.
Crawford stated some school bus drivers are also not very accommodating to
certain schedules. If there is a bus stop at the ferry landing, the point is to take
the people from the ferry onto the bus. WTA is in the business of moving people
around, not driving buses around.
Brenner stated there are some changes the Council can do with the fares.
However, whenever people on Lummi Island don't pay, other residents must
subsidize the cost. There are low- and moderate - income people all over the
county. Lummi Island will become a haven for the wealthy anyway, for many
reasons. There are areas all over Whatcom County that will end up that way. She
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
appreciates the concern, but they can't make people take a litmus test before
moving to Lummi Island. The County can make sure the costs are generally borne
by the people who benefit the most rather than people throughout the county.
Hanson stated there are certain other places in Whatcom County where the roads
cost a lot of money, such as Chuckanut Drive and near Mt. Baker. This is one more
mile in the Whatcom County road system. It is a mile available to anyone in the
county. It shouldn't be treated any differently. It may cost more. However, the
per mile cost of other areas also cost more.
Brenner asked to see those costs. She agreed there should be equity in road
costs. Hanson stated the reason the ferry is so expensive is because the costs are
identifiable. Costs for other roads are not as obvious.
Brenner stated the major cost of the ferry is because it has to be staffed, not
because the beginning and end are identifiable.
Brenner stated staff would come up with per mile cost estimates.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE 2005/2006 INTEGRATED ROADSIDE
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (AB2005 -278)
Paul Kelley, Vegetation Road Crew Leader, stated the plan is available for
review. It's the same plan as in the past. There are a couple of new items,
including the hydro- seeding program to prevent erosion and sedimentation in
waterways, which helps with bio- filtration before getting into the stream. Also, the
wildflower plots on various roads in the county is a new program. There has been a
lot of positive input from the public.
Brenner asked where they get the native wildflower seeds. Kelley stated he
would have to find out and let her know.
Brenner asked the location of the detention pond on West Smith Road.
Kelley stated it is at the new development, driving toward Ferndale, just before the
city limits. It's on the north side of the road. The development is Bell -Fern Estates.
Brenner referenced the herbicide best management practices (BMP's)
limitations, bullet two. She asked why it is 150 feet on all, when the Council has
made changes to the critical areas ordinance (CAO) that would make some buffer
areas 300 feet.
Mary Green, Equipment Rental and Revolve (ER &R) Manager, stated a 50-
foot no spray zone is required. However, Whatcom County does a 150 -foot no
spray zone just to show how they are committed about not getting any herbicide in
any sensitive area.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Brenner stated the new CAO talks about four levels of critical areas. The
least restrictive buffer is 50 feet. There are some buffers that are 300 feet. Kelley
stated the buffers are 150 feet on either side of the critical area.
Brenner stated category I buffers are 300 feet on each side.
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated the setback in this plan is not a
no -touch buffer. The CAO buffers are an application and permitting issue. The 150
feet is the County standard, which is more than licensing requirements. If there is
an inclination to create a no -spray zone around critical areas, they can discuss it.
However, don't equate setbacks with no -spray zones.
Brenner referenced Council packet page 206 regarding selective knotweed
treatment. She asked if there should be an item under 'limitations' that says it
should not be used in a critical areas. Kelley stated that is a given. They don't use
it in critical areas. It would be covered under the list of restricted areas.
Green stated they can add it to the list.
Brenner moved to add a bullet point to the 'limitations' section for selective
knotweed, "In critical areas."
Motion carried unanimously.
Brenner referenced the indemnification and hold harmless agreement. She
asked why the County would be held harmful on someone else's property. A right -
of -way is not the same as ownership. She asked why the County would have
liability. Green stated the County attorney wrote this language. When people say
they are going to maintain the right -of -way, they have to take responsibility for
what can happen if they don't maintain it. There is always the possibility that
people will attempt to hold the County liable. The owners must sign this agreement
annually.
Brenner referenced Council packet page 227, item two. She asked if peoples'
properties go all the way to the road pavement. Kelley stated the County has to
maintain its right -of -way. That item is about the area from the fog line to the
property line, or the end of the County right -of -way.
Brenner stated it should maybe specify the area from the pavement to the
end of the right -of -way. Most property lines goes to the pavement.
Crawford stated he doesn't agree.
use all the time. Generally speaking, a
right -of -way, or to the centerline of the
County right -of -way.
This is something that gets argued in land
plat is drawn up to the edge of County
road with a note on deed excluding the
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Brenner stated a right -of -way is like an easement, but the owner still owns
the property. Monsen stated the terminology is correct. Most people know that the
right -of -way line and property line are equivalent. Most people know that the
property line goes to the middle of the road, and there is an easement. This
language only says that the County has the right to maintain the right -of -way, but
will change its practices if the owner wants.
Brenner stated it's not to the property line. It's to the end of the right -of-
way. Monsen stated they can change the language to say that they will work within
the right -of -way.
Brenner moved to amend item 2 on the Owner Will Maintain Spray Options
with Explanations, "...( within the unimproved right-
of-way)...."
Crawford stated most people understand property lines better. Staff will
have to explain the right -of -way concept.
Brenner stated she understands the concepts of property lines and rights -of-
way, but this didn't make sense to her. Most people don't know where their
property lines are. Most people assume there is a certain amount of space that is
the County right -of -way.
Motion failed 1 -1 with Brenner in favor.
Crawford stated there is no reason to change it. It's the same document the
County has had for 30 years.
Brenner stated that some people won't understand. They'll think their
property line is in the middle of the road. It doesn't make sense. Green stated
that is one reason why the County has the owners come in annually to sign the
agreement and pick up their signs. If there are any questions like this, staff can
explain it.
Brenner stated people may decide they're not interested because it doesn't
make sense. Things should say exactly what they mean. This doesn't. She won't
support the program without the change. It will have to be scheduled again, when
Councilmember Nelson is present.
Green stated she would work on the language with the attorney for next
year's plan.
Brenner stated she would agree to the plan, since staff will work on the
language for next year.
Brenner moved to recommend approval to the full Council, as amended.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Motion carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair
Public Works and Safety Committee, 7/12/2005, Page 10