Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

1. City manager Steve Hall might be getting a raise. All city employees got a cost of living increase this year, so Hall's COLA should be $4,126.72. His performance bonus, if the council goes with the staff report, will be $3,250. Here's the staff report (pdf file) on that.

2. The city also might release some parts of the Chambers Basin moratorium area to allow development. Apparently, though the exchanges of some technical reports between the proponents of the development, city consultants and city staff, it came to light that this development won't have an impact on the storm water issues surrounding the rest of the basin.

This is important because: remember earlier this week, when we were all looking at pictures of the west side under water? And earlier today, looking at pictures of the Chehalis over I-5? That's storm water.

Chambers Basin is a flood prone area of Olympia, and some would question whether building there is a good idea.

From the staff report (pdf file):

City staff has received revised information, including a memorandum from GeoEngineers (Attachment 4). Staff now expects that development risks related to storm and groundwater can be reasonably minimized through site grading and stormwater design.

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

Instead of going up as much as we thought before, Park impact fees will be going up half as much as previously thought, if the city council takes the advice of their staff next week.

For example, when you build your average single family home in Olympia, the park impact fee is $1,843. Under the original proposal that fee would have gone up to $5,793. But, under the new plan, its only going up to $2,896.

But, I assume the council is going to increase it again sometime. So says the staff report:

Subsequent to the November 13, 2007 Study Session in which the attached impact fee rate study was presented, Councilmember Hyer proposed adopting an interim fee with an approximately 50% reduction in the rates proposed in the Rate Study. According to Councilmember Hyer, this fee would remain in effect until the next update to the Park Plan is complete and the fee schedule is further adjusted to coincide with updated target outcome ratios or other factors.

Adopting an interim fee that is approximately 50% of the total fee proposed in the rate study will mean that during the interim period the City will not collect revenue sufficient to ensure that the current ratio of park acres to population will be met. However, due to the fact that the phased-in approach proposed by Councilmember Hyer will be of a relatively short duration, it is not likely that the ratio of park acres to population will decline significantly.

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

1. From what I can tell, the council is sticking with the 1 percent increase allowed in the Ad valorem tax under Initiative 747. While that initiative was struck down by the courts, it looks like the state legislature will put that limit back in place later next week. Here's a pdf of the draft ordinance.

2. The council will also look to remove the sunset portion out of the controversial pedestrian interference ordinance. Now, they don't have to reconsider it every year, it will just be on the books. From the staff report:

Among other provisions, the Pedestrian Interference Ordinance (PIO) created:

1. A 6-foot pedestrian Walking Lane measured from the face of a building or property line;
2. Sidewalk obstruction permits for street furniture when a
6-foot walking lane can still be maintained; and
3. Busking licensing requirements.

In summary, city staff and many downtown merchants believe that the PIO and its phased implementation appear to have been a success. The Police Department’s initial focus on an educational approach was successful and no person has been cited. CP&D has issued 35-sidewalk obstruction permits and no busking license has been issued. The Land Use & Environment Committee and staff recommend that the ordinance be extended.

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

This week, we'll see how the city wants to make the city safer for walkers. The city is considering a list of projects on their consent calendar that will hopefully solve walkers getting hit by cars problems at several intersections.

From the report:

This emphasis project would make low-cost interim improvements to these crossings until funds are available to make more substantial improvements. For reference, crossing improvements that are made as part of the Pedestrian Crossing Improvement Program are typically curb bulb-outs, which costs about $45,000 per corner, and crossing islands, which cost about $65,000 without landscaping. (These costs include engineering, mobilization and contingency, standard increases for a construction project estimate.)

Here is a map of the intersections. Click on the place marks for descriptions of the projects:

View Larger Map

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

Usually, its the staff reports that hold the really fun stuff, but this week its the minutes that are really exciting. This week, we read about (from General Government committee meeting back in August) about a survey to see if folks want a new library, possibly one on the west side:

Present from the Timberland Regional Library were:

Dick Nichols and Judy Weaver, Board members; Jody Reng, Executive Director; Michael Crose, Administrative Services Manager; Sally Nash, Public Services Manager; and Michael Wessells, Community Relations Manager.

Ms. Reng noted that Timberland hired an independent consultant to conduct the survey.

Alison Peters of Alison Peters Consulting reviewed results from the community survey conducted by the Library Board in July. She distributed a handout with methodology and survey results. She noted that the survey was a telephone poll conducted in mid-July for about a 5 day period. The sample size was 600 completed polls from all residents with a telephone. Cell phone numbers were included.

Results included:

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

The evening of October 5 will feature fireworks for the neighborhood around Olympia High School if all goes well at next Tuesday's city council meeting. The council will be weighing whether to allow the school to celebrate their 100th Anniversary with timed explosions between 8 and 9 p.m., which sounds like during halftime of the Oly Bears' game against North Kitsap.

From the staff report (which you can find below with the attachments):

The fireworks display will be set off between the hours of 8 PM and 9 PM at the Olympia High School. As the display only involves a “Static no noise fireworks display”. Insurance is require and has been provided.

There is no liability to the City Of Olympia.

Option 1. Approve static fireworks display for Olympia High School Alumni and Homecoming Association’s 100 year anniversary

Pros
1. Allows applicant to celebrate 100th year anniversary and School’s homecoming.

Cons
1. There may be complaints for the neighbors.

Option 2. Do not approve a no noise static fireworks display at Olympia High School.

Pros
1. There will be no complaints from neighbors

Cons
1. The applicants will not have a display that will enhance the anniversary.

So, it basically comes down to if we would like the possibility of the neighbors complaining.

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

The only thing that looked interesting to me are edits the city is making to its homeless encampment ordinance. Honestly, they look pretty plain-jane to me, but this ordinance has been pretty topical, so maybe someone else can see something I'm missing.

The first edit has to do with how the encampment will contact police if they have to ask someone to leave. Instead of leaving it up to the person staffing the camp to contact authorities, the ordinance requires them to contact police and let them know what happened (this is on page 5 below).

The second edit changes the term "executive committee" to "designated representative." Probably easier to get one person instead of a group.

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

This week the city council will hear about a proposed deal between the city and the Colpitts Development company to build 120 "market rate" apartments, two stories of parking and some retail space in downtown Olympia.

I wish I could find some info on the Colpitts company itself, but other than saying they're located in Seattle, there isn't anything to say.

Here is a map of the site, it is the current parking lot behind the Olympia Federal Bank building.

Here is the rundown from the staff report:

Subject to detailed environmental and site design feasibility analysis, Colpitts proposes to construct a development consisting of approximately 120-market rate apartments (a range of studio, 1 bedroom and possibly 2 bedroom units) on the City owned Columbia Street surface parking lot between 4th and 5th Avenues. The project would also include two floors of parking and some ground floor retail.

...

Colpitts pays the City $270,000 for land: The property is conveyed with a deed restriction requiring construction of a mixed-use project. (Page 1, Sections 2.a & 3a-c). The sale is to occur within 120-days of approval of a clean-up plan by Department of Ecology and not later than December 31, 2008.

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

I haven't been slacking for the past month and a half, there really just hasn't been anything that tickled my fancy enough to write about. There were two weeks in there with no council meetings, so it was actually just a month of boring stuff.

Even this week is kind of boring, so I'm going to force myself to write about a $50,000 donation towards the Woodland Trail. The Eastside street entrance is opening this next Tuesday by the way.

The Woodland Trail Greenway Association is going to help the city greatly by donating a large chunk of money to spruce up a section of the trail:

Olympia Woodland Trail Phase II is from Dayton Street to the Chehalis Western Trail. The majority of the Phase II trail corridor is impacted by past railroad usage and adjacent commercial and industrial properties. In order to make this section more in keeping with the Woodland Trail name and desired values for the trail, WTGA applied for and received a grant for landscape enhancements along this segment. Funds received from this grant are being donated to the City so that the City may contract with the Washington Department of Transportation Landscape Restoration Crew to help restore this trail segment. In addition to the cash donation, WTGA will be contracting for the delivery of compost and mulch to the corridor. WTGA volunteers will help plant and maintain the plantings.

Almost every week this is the "What's on the city council's plate this week" review. I don't cover everything, so if you want the full rundown, read the packet and agenda yourself.

The biggest thing the council will be talking about this week (at least in my eyes) will be how they're going to pay for the new city hall downtown.

Will they build it and pay for it themselves? Will they turn the project over to a private contractor? Something in the middle?

Essentially, the way the staff would like the city to go benefits the city because it can keep its hands clean during the construction process and only take over the building when the construction is complete. It also involves something called "63.20 financing" which I'm not really clear on (read all about 63-20 here ) But, you can read more below.

I've also posted the original pdfs from the packet for your further reading.

From the staff report:

THE DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES

There are two development options available to construct a City Hall office building:

1. A lease purchase arrangement where the developer administers the City Hall project using a design-build process; or
2. The City manages the project using the traditional public works process.

...

THE FINANCING METHODS
Assuming the City will pay for the project with a combination of debt (or lease payments) and cash, there are several ways to finance the construction of the City Hall Project:

1. Under the lease purchase arrangement, a nonprofit corporation may issue lease revenue obligations on behalf of the City to finance the project. These bonds will be 63-20 bonds.