Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works April 28 20151 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 48 49 50 51 52 53 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee April 28, 2015 CALL TO ORDER Committee Chair Barbara Brenner called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. ROLL CALL Present: Barbara Brenner, Pete Kremen, and Ken Mann Absent: None Also Present: Barry Buchanan, Rud Browne, Satpal Sidhu, and Carl Weimer COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 1. INDEPENDENT LUMMI ISLAND CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO PRESENT INFORMATION ON THE LUMMI ISLAND FERRY SYSTEM (AB2015 -156) Tom Philpot introduced his committee and described the possibility of purchasing the Hiyu vessel as an interim solution to long -term needs. Phil Lacefield, Jr. submitted and read from a presentation (on file) regarding the vessel Hiyu. Mann asked why the Hiyu would be an interim solution. Lacefield stated the Hiyu's remaining life is estimated at another 15 years, as is the Whatcom Chief. The Passenger Vessel Association has determined that a ferry's life should be about 35 years. The Whatcom Chief is 58 years old. The Hiyu is younger and has been used one - quarter the amount of time. Mann asked if this vessel is capable of going to Fairhaven with three crew members. Lacefield stated it is capable. They would have to reclassify the Hiyu to permanently re -rate the ship as a T class vessel, which can run with three crew. If on the open sea and more than 150 passengers were on board, there would have to be a fourth crew member. Kremen asked the width of the driving lines on the Hiyu. Jim Dickinson stated the Hiyu lanes are 8 -feet wide, which is about a foot wider than the Whatcom Chief. The Hiyu was rebuilt in 2006, which allows it to go to about 60 years. It is 47 years old now. Kremen asked if the Hiyu is Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant instead of ADA compatible. Lacefield stated the Coast Guard does not require that any ship at sea be ADA compliant. Their rules supersede ADA rules. However, newer vessels are being built to ADA compliance. The Coast Guard supports retrofitting older vessels if possible. On the Whatcom Chief, there is no room to put ramps for wheelchair access to the passenger cabins. The Hiyu can be modified to allow wheelchair access. Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee, 4/28/2015, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1.6 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 48 49 50 51 52 53 Kremen asked the fuel efficiency of the Hiyu compared to the Whatcom Chief. Lacefield stated they estimate that the Whatcom Chief uses 142 gallons of diesel per day. The Hiyu would use about 110 gallons per day. The engines are larger and slower turning, so it would take less fuel to get the job done. Dickinson stated the State ferry records indicate that the Hiyu is burning 18.18 gallons per hour. The Hiyu is very efficient. Kremen asked if they would increase staff by 50 percent. Dickinson stated it would operate with the current number of the crew. Brenner asked the Hiyu's cost. Lacefield stated the cost would be less than $100,000. Brenner asked if the County would have to create more draft for the Hiyu. Lacefield stated Gooseberry Point is deep enough. The island landing is shallower. There would be eight or ten low tide times per year where it would have less than a foot of clearance. Few or no modifications would be necessary. Browne asked if the dolphins would have to be replaced if they are going to use both vessels. Lacefield stated the Hiyu will fit at Lummi Island with almost no modifications. They can put bumpers on the front of both ships to accommodate any design changes. The dolphin modifications need to happen at Lummi Island anyway, so they can be done to accommodate any ferry. Browne asked for a summary of the economic impacts and the total difference in operating costs. Lacefield stated they have records. It would take more detailed inspection, but every indication is that all economic indicators are lower with the Hiyu in place. Browne asked why they propose to keep both vessels. Lacefield stated other jurisdictions would like to have a backup ferry when necessary, so there can be a joint agreement among the counties to fund and use the Whatcom Chief. The income from renting out the ferry could be positive. The Hiyu is the only ferry that exists on the west coast that can fit. Buchanan stated he needs more detailed financial analyses. He agrees with the approach. Rob Nye, Public Works Department, stated that if the Council wants, staff can provide some kind of technical and economic analysis. Mann asked why the Lummi Island Ferry Advisory Committee doesn't make this recommendation. Nye stated he believes they approved the technical analysis, but haven't made a recommendation. Mann asked if the Elliott Bay report includes an analysis of the draft, energy for docking, and other items. Nye stated it does. He emailed it to the Council yesterday. Rayma Blake, Protect Lummi Island Community (PLIC) Chair, described the results of an island resident survey, which includes many factors. The survey had 127 responses. Sixty percent of the respondents indicated that the report about the Hiyu should go to Public Works for more financial analysis. Seventy -three percent indicated they would pay no more Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee, 4/28/2015, Page 2 1 for a larger or second ferry. One -third agreed a larger ferry is needed and that a second 2 vehicular ferry would be a good thing. Three - fourths indicated that two runs per hour would 3 meet their service needs, which is why some of the fuel use is lower. Forty -three percent 4 indicated that more deck space is preferred for ease of exiting their car while on the ferry. 5 6 Nancy Gale, Protect Lummi Island Community member, stated all the data they've 7 collected is available to share with the Public Works staff. 8 9 Lacefield stated more financial data is necessary, and they would like to see it. 10 However, time is of the essence to purchase the Hiyu. 11 12 Browne stated he would like the independent committee to put their financial 13 information together on one handout. Also, he would like to see this move forward to the 14 Council. 15 16 2. PRESENTATION ON RESTORATIVE JUSTICE (AB2015 -157) 17 18 Joy Gilfilen, Restorative Community Coalition President, submitted and read from a 19 presentation (on file) and stated they are facing a crisis in Whatcom County that restorative 20 justice can solve. There is a difference between alternatives before jail and alternatives 21 after jail. She introduced Irene Morgan. 22 23 Irene Morgan, Restorative Community Coalition Founder, described the members of 24 the coalition and her background. They need a different jail that is safe and humane. More 25 information is needed for good decision - making. She submitted and described a handout on 26 the cost analysis of jail and prison sentences (on file). 27 28 Gilfilen stated the point of the handout is that the Restorative Justice Coalition 29 intervened with the inmates on the list to pull them out of bad patterns that already cost 30 the taxpayers $500,000. If they had been able to use restorative justice earlier, they would 31 have saved those inmates sooner and saved the taxpayers $500,000. 32 33 Morgan continued to read through the handouts regarding the Reentry University. 34 35 Gilfilen described her professional background and how she became involved in 36 incarceration issues. They are talking about taking people out of the jail industry. Each 37 person who is put away costs $30,000 to $100,000 per year, depending on the severity of 38 the case. By interrupting the cycle at the beginning of the process with pre- education and 39 pre - learning, the return on investment for each person is $40,000. The solution to needing 40 a new jail is a public works solution. There is a secondary problem of public safety. They 41 are dealing with poverty, economic deprivation, small businesses that are struggling, and a 42 middle class that is shut out of the economy. There is an opportunity right now to make a 43 big difference. Whatcom County has a crisis. She proposes that $122.5 million for buying a 44 new jail to make them feel better won't solve the public safety problem. 45 46 Her proposal is to solve the crisis problem. First, if there is a liability with the 47 existing jail, the County must get every person who is still legally innocent out of there. 48 Reviewing past practices and why people are in jail is a high priority. Second, get the 49 mental health people out of the jail. Put them into mental health services. Population 50 trends for Whatcom County aren't growing at projected rates. Crime rates and arrest rates 51 are going down. It was not considered in the jail capacity needs document. That needs 52 document was designed to talk about how to build a jail. Instead, first talk about public 53 safety. Move the Sheriff's Office out of the jail basement and into another facility. Beef up Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee, 4/28/2015, 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 48 49 50 51 52 53 the high security inmates or remodel the Division Street property so it can be a higher security facility. Create a diversion program that is pre -jail at the Baker Street property, which can remove 48 people from the jail. Restorative economics changes the focus away from jail and on what they want to do. When they work on a different focus, they will get a different solution. The public needs tax relief. They don't need to spend $122.5 million to build a big facility. Do crisis intervention now and a real needs assessment of what is needed after intervention. The new jail footprint could fit across the street, and could be for 250 to 300 people with an expansion for additional facilities. It wouldn't require additional costs for sewer, water, and other additional infrastructure. Certain alternatives have a 45 -to -1 return on investment for single actions and intervention. Look at those alternatives. Analyze how to better deal with mental health and homelessness, which will save them money. The taxpayers can't afford the jail. They must be conservative and deal with the existing crisis. Morgan submitted and read through a handout on pre -jail alternatives using existing resources and facilities (on file). Sidhu asked for real -life examples of the RestoreALife Center and other alternatives, including how effective they are and any other information. Gilfilen stated they submitted to the Council a nine -point restorative economic strategy plan at the end of December. They don't have the funding to do economic development work, but they have the data. Sidhu asked if all this information was shared with the Jail Task Force two years ago. Gilfilen stated they shared all the information having to do with restorative and alternative programs. The task force discussed it, but it was not included in the final conversation. Most of their concerns have been written off as being outside the scope of the project, but it's not outside the scope. Weimer stated they will talk about some of these things, including creating a task force to begin discussing the issues, at a special meeting this afternoon. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. RESOLUTION TO DEDICATE THE NEW POTTER ROAD SOUTH FORK NOOKSACK RIVER BRIDGE NO. 148; CRP NO. 998027 (AB2015 -148) This item was withdrawn from the agenda. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 1. PROJECT UPDATE ON THE BIRCH BAY DRIVE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITY PROJECT (AB2015 -066A) Roland Middleton, Public Works Department, submitted a handout (on file) and described work that the County has done. They have done shoulder improvements from the south Cottonwood Beach parking to the north. They will continue to do some work on vegetation. They are also working at Laurel Lane and Terrell Creek. They are working with the community who owns the tide gate on a bank repair. Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee, 4/28/2015, Page 4 2 The big project is the Birch Bay Drive and pedestrian facility. He described the 3 project area. Public Works staff are working with a new consultant, Environmental Science 4 Associates, and the project is now on schedule. They are ready to have another public 5 meeting at 10 a.m. on June 6 at the church. Construction is scheduled for Fall 2016. They 6 have to go through right -of -way and permitting. He's still meeting with members of the 7 public on evenings and weekends. Now they are getting down to the details of the project. 8 9 Brenner asked how that's going. Middleton stated it's going very well. There was a 10 lot of misinformation put out by different groups, and people just didn't understand. Now 11 they are showing the design to the residents. They are working with the Parks Department 12 on the recently- acquired park property, which will partly be used for construction 13 mobilization. They will also do pre - loading for the future building at that park location. 14 After the construction is done in 2016 -2017, they will come through to do an entire overlay. 15 16 They must modify the six -year transportation improvement program to indicate the 17 actual location of the project. If they don't do two parking areas now, they will complete 18 them in a few years. The design for the two parking areas is significantly different from the 19 regular beach area. It will be a separate project. 20 21 The residents are mostly concerned about underground utilities. The cost of putting 22 utilities underground is staggering. Puget Sound Energy will not share that cost. They were 23 also not able to get Public Works Trust funds. 24 25 This is a community project that the County is implementing and building for the 26 community. The next step is to figure out how to continue with the goal of underground 27 utilities. The community has formed a committee that is sanctioned by the Birch Bay 28 Chamber of Commerce. The committee will talk about starting the process to create a local 29 improvement district to put the utilities underground when the Water and Sewer District is 30 ready to redo the sewer lines in a few years. 31 32 Brenner asked if that is approved by ballot measure. Middleton stated it would be 33 similar to how the Birch Bay Watershed and Aquatic Resource Management (BBWARM) area 34 was created. It was done through the Board of Supervisors and legislative body. There are 35 different ways to implement a local improvement district. The community is leading that 36 effort. 37 38 Mann asked the cost of putting the utilities underground. Middleton stated it would 39 cost $25 million to $30 million. 40 41 Browne asked why it's so expensive. Middleton stated he cannot say. It was only a 42 preliminary estimate. Puget Sound Energy was going to participate in the project, but 43 decided not to when they saw the cost. The cost is to put existing utilities underground, 44 which includes more than the cost of the wire. They were told the cost is due to having to 45 transfer the distribution lines and a transmission line, which is part of the big cost. 46 47 Browne stated the County should put out a request for proposals (RFP) on how much 48 it would cost. That cost doesn't make sense. Middleton stated he recommends hiring 49 someone whose business is to put together limited improvement districts. That consultant 50 can help the community go through the process and provide the Council with the different 51 options and detailed cost estimates. 52 Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee, 4/28/2015, Page 5 I Kremen asked about a future project for the water and sewer district. Middleton 2 stated those lines are reaching the end of their life in the next ten to 20 years. 3 4 Kremen asked how much the price would be reduced if they wait to put the utilities 5 underground at that time. Middleton stated costs would be reduced greatly because they 6 wouldn't have to dig up the road. They are leaving a beach area open for utilities that is 7 free from cultural resources, which is the biggest issue. 8 9 Weimer asked if they would know the cost to put the utilities underground before or 10 after the improvement district was formed. Middleton stated there needs to be a strong 11 preliminary estimate before the district is formed. 12 13 Weimer stated he recalls an engineer saying it would be more expensive because the 14 utilities are going in salty soils or saltwater. Middleton stated that's not the case. It was a 15 concern at the time. 16 17 Randy Parton, Birch Bay Chamber of Commerce Treasurer and Director, stated 18 placing the utility lines underground will improve the view, which will benefit local 19 businesses. Also, the guy wires for the utility power poles are difficult to see and 20 dangerous. They appreciate the Council's support in going forward with this partnership. 21 22 Doralee Booth stated the telephone poles are on the water side of the road, and the 23 residences are on the other side of the road. In addition to the power lines that run along 24 the road, wires cross Birch Bay Drive to the homes. The wires are secure in a storm. There 25 is a 1984 preliminary engineering report for improvements on Birch Bay Drive. In the 25 report, the cost estimate for underground utilities from Alderson Road to Harborview Road 27 was $200,000. The cost from Harborview Road to Shintaffer Road was $180,000. They 28 should do this work sooner rather than later. 29 30 Brenner asked if there are extra utility maintenance costs that they wouldn't have if 31 underground. Middleton stated he doesn't know. A transmission line also runs along the 32 road. Everything is hanging from the poles. Nothing is underground. This effort may also 33 provide an opportunity to bring natural gas to Birch Bay. 34 35 Browne stated one option is to move the poles to the east side of the road that the 35 houses are on. Another option is to move the transmission lines one street east. Those 37 transmission lines are designed to serve Semiahmoo and developments north of this area. 38 It's worth asking people to consider more aesthetic alternatives. Middleton stated that's 39 what a contactor for the local improvement district would do. That's how it worked when 40 they developed BBWARM. BBWARM is very successful. The Public Works Department would 41 manage that contract on behalf of Birch Bay and would look at those options. 42 43 Browne stated he's reluctant to believe that a hired contractor would think of all the 44 alternatives he would think of. Get evidence about the two ideas he's mentioned. 45 Middleton stated they've had a great deal of success with the action plans they've put 46 forward because it's been a large collaborative community process. They will have 47 stakeholder meetings and open public meetings to ask for ideas and will consider every 48 alternative brought forward, including those kinds of ideas. 49 50 51 OTHER BUSINESS 52 53 There was no other business. Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee, 4/28/2015, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 3:05 p.m. ATTEST`�� 1 � is �� �� rrr�� ✓r } s Dina Brown Rgyg s oqu riciI C terk Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee, 4/28/2015, Page 7