You are currently browsing the monthly archive for May 2010.
Talking Trash
How we deal with and pay for trash and recycling in TC is a subject up for important decisions this month.
Currently in Traverse City and surrounding areas, each individual resident contracts with a solid waste hauler, who picks up their household trash and recyclables. The city picks up leaves in the fall and spring, and does a round of spring clean-up in May where we collect large items. Other communities have found that if they negotiate on a collective basis with the haulers, they can get more services for less money. Moving to one hauler also would reduce the number of trucks on residential streets. As North Traverse Heights resident Max Wolf wrote in the early weeks of this site:
One thing that is frustrating in my part of the city is having 4 different large trash trucks running down the same streets once a week. I think the city as a whole needs to negotiate trash pick up for all residents. I know some neighborhoods have managed to do this for themselves, but the rest of us are left paying double that amount, or more, and still have to deal with too many trucks making runs up and down our streets. This is not efficient or sustainable. My family that lives downstate gets their trash and recycling picked up once a week and it’s paid for on their property tax for a fraction of the price it is costing me under the system we have here. The city down there has trash companies submit bids once a year for the service. Maybe TC could do something like that and not only save us some money but also stop the excessive amount of trucks rumbling up and down our streets every week.
Based largely on the efforts of former city commissioner Deni Scrudato, the city has been working with surrounding townships to study whether and how these services can be improved. Thanks to county commissioners Sonny Wheelock and Christine Maxbauer, the county paid for the study. The county’s solid waste department has also been conducting a survey of local communities to see what services people want and how they want them delivered. The communities participating with the city, are Garfield, Acme, East Bay, Peninsula, and Blair Townships. Commissioner Jim Carruthers and Mayor Pro Tem Ralph Soffredine have been leading the effort for the city.
The study indicated that better prices and services would be available through collective bargaining. The survey indicated that most of the communities wanted to handle the agreements themselves, rather than through a county-wide solid waste authority. The city expects to issue an RFP for a single hauler to provide service in the city. The CC will be discussing the parameters of the RFP – what services will be offered – later this month. The city also is looking at doing the billing – adding it to TCLP and water/sewer bills, as the study indicates this will reduce prices further. The plan is to have the new system in place January 1 of next year.
The draft RFP right now contemplates a system where the hauler would provide:
- Residential Solid Waste Collection – with 96-gallon and 30-gallong options, and with back-door pickup for disabled residents
- Curbside Residential Recycling
- Yard Waste Collection and Delivery to Compost Site
- Bulk Item Pickup and Disposal – one item per month, but year round instead of just in the spring
Spring and fall leaf cleanup is right now expected to be provided by the city, though it is not clear this could not be privatized also. Residents who wish to contract for special services (enhanced recycling for example) would be free to continue doing so. It is conceivable that a program such as this could eventually be expanded to include enhanced recycling, but what is outlined here is just a start. It would be helpful to hear your views on this proposal as the CC discusses it throughout this month.
TC’s Blue Wall
Last week local media carried a number of stories about the conclusion of legal proceedings arising from an incident involving an off-duty TC police officer. To say the least, the community is not impressed with the city’s handling of the situation.
I have asked the city manager to investigate whether and to what extent the city has in place policies to prevent the preferential treatment of police officers, both in the response to off-duty incidents and in the disciplinary investigations that follow. I have asked him then to make recommendations for any necessary changes in policy for the CC to consider.
I will continue to provide info on our progress in this endeavor as it occurs. We must have a system that is fair and thorough, and a police department that communicates with the public in a way that inspires the public’s confidence. We will keep working until we have those things, if I have anything to say about it.
The Michigan Legislature is considering Complete Streets laws that, among other things, would require MDOT road projects within city limits to follow city master plans. This Thursday, and next Thursday, the House Transportation Committee will hear testimony on these bills – HB 6151 and 6152. (Our own State Rep. Wayne Schmidt is a co-sponsor of these bills.) They are also accepting emails.
The key section of the bills for Traverse City are Section 33(b)(i) of HB 6152, which says a local government can include a Complete Streets policy in its Master Plan, and Section 3 of HB 6151, which says that if the local government does have a Complete Streets policy, the Department of Transportation will follow it on state roads within the boundaries of the local government.
These bills have the potential to be very positive for TC, which struggles to balance the needs of regional drivers with the priorities of residents and neighborhoods when it comes to our transportation grid. For more info on how to comment on the policies, see http://michigancompletestreets.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/take-action-support-hb-6151-6152/.
The city commission will discuss goals and priorities for the year on Monday night. The setting of priorities is the most influential thing the CC does to steer the operation of city government. We do this now because the goals are then implemented over the city’s fiscal year, which runs from July 1 to June 30.
The draft of the goals is below. It’s still a work in progress. My view of the draft at this point:
1. We need to do better on roads, streets and sidewalks, both in spending levels and in following the master plan. http://planfortc.com/2009/12/19/streets-sidewalks-2-news-on-waterfront-sheriff-last-update-of-2009/ Following the master plan is required by state law. The focus of our streets program should be on following the master plan, not making the master plan follow other policies.
2. We need to deliver police and fire services more efficiently and cost effectively. Otherwise these rising costs will consume more and more of our budget. That will limit the city’s ability to deliver other services, or force tax increases. http://planfortc.com/2010/05/03/city-finances-part-2-police-and-fire-may-3/
3. We need to capitalize on the momentum of the bayfront process to bring in a package of foundation and state grant dollars and get something done for next summer. http://planfortc.com/2010/05/12/waterfront-designs-are-ready-may-13/
4. We need comprehensive regulatory reform to make the city more business friendly. This means changes in both the rules to make them less complicated and more user friendly (also a goal of the master plan), and it means changes in staff culture.
5. We need more emphasis on the neighborhood issues, which right now are down with “Other” at the bottom of this list. http://planfortc.com/2010/01/22/neighborhood-presidents-top-priorities-ian-glatting-hired-for-divison-st-ipr-update-jan-23-24/ We are a city of neighborhoods.
What do you think the city’s top priorities should be?
City Commission Goals and Priorities
May 2010 Draft
Infrastructure Issues
Goal Statement
The City of Traverse City will maintain its infrastructure to enhance the quality of life in the City. It will manage its assets in a way that is long-term cost effective. Infrastructure includes the streets, sidewalks and other non-motorized paths, the storm water system and the water and sewer systems.
Specific steps include the following: 1) Make infrastructure a budget priority with an annual goal of at least $1 million General Fund transfer to the Capital Improvement Projects Fund. 2) Revise the Infrastructure Policy and/or Master Plan as necessary to address conflicts between the policies. Consider increasing City participation on SID projects to better utilize the Special Assessment Fund. 3) Continue efforts to fully implement the Asset Management Program. 4) Enhance the CIP process to ensure Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) are included in all reconstruction designs. 5) Examine ways to develop sustainable funding for the Storm Water System. 6) Work with MDOT on Division Street and Grandview Parkway improvements that value both motorized and V non-motorized transportation users for future projects.
Employee Benefit and Cost Issues
Goal Statement
The City of Traverse City will attract and retain the best human resources possible. However, that must be managed within the context of long-term financial sustainability.
Specific steps include the following: 1) Continue efforts to reverse the trend lines for the cost of employee pensions. 2) Continue efforts to reduce Health Insurance costs. 3) Review every vacancy that develops to determine whether it is necessary to fill or whether the workforce can be reduced by attrition. 4) Research and analyze other options such as flex time, furlough days, early out program, etc., with the goal of reducing employee costs. 5) Consider contracting out services if cost effective.
Police Department Issues
Goal Statement
The City of Traverse City will provide quality police public safety services. However, that must be managed within the context of reduced costs and recognition of the regional resources available.
Specific steps include the following: 1) Continue to reduce the size of the department by attrition. 2) Consider retaining the services of a consultant who specializes in police work load analysis for specific recommendations regarding the right configuration for the department. 3) Review consultant recommendations and provide recommendation to City Commission. 4) Implement.
Long-Term Tax Issues
Goal Statement
Due to its role as a Regional Center, the City of Traverse City provides many services that benefit the regional population. This results in Traverse City taxpayers bearing a disproportionate tax burden. This situation should be addressed.
Specific steps include the following: 1) Reexamine a City Income Tax with an offsetting reduction in the City property tax levy to spread the tax base to the surrounding region (several suggested removing the reference to an income tax). 2) Contact neighboring townships for population proportionate participation at specific cost centers like Hickory Hills and the Senior Center (if the Senior Center millage request is not successful). 3) Consider integrating parks and recreational services and other governmental activities with the County and adjacenttownships. 4) In the mid — long term, consider reductions in the City property tax levy.
Budgeting for Outcomes
Goal Statement
Budgeting for Outcomes was a COFAC recommendation that initially received support. Upon further discussion, there were questions as to whether a jurisdiction our size would realize significant benefit from this process. The Public Strategies proposal basically provided coaching and templates to assist the City in implementation. In July 2009, the City Commission chose not to amend the Goals and Objectives to include the Budgeting for Outcomes as a high priority. If a majority of the Commission would like to proceed with a Budgeting for Outcomes process at a cost of roughly $50,000, the City should determine what outcomes it would expect to achieve that are not achieved with the current budget process? At the same time, Grand Traverse County is undertaking a Budgeting for Outcomes process for its forthcoming budget. The City of Traverse City should monitor that process to determine whether it would be advantageous for the City to consider in a future budget year.
Specific steps include the following: 1) Determine the outcomes expected from BFO process and if those outcomes justify a $50,000 cost. and/or 2) Monitor County process and report back to City Commission.
Bayfront Plan
Goal Statement
The Bayfront Planning effort with preliminary engineering will be completed in June 2010. Implementation efforts should commence immediately.
Specific steps include the following: 1) Working with local funding agencies, develop a funding plan that can lead to construction of various plan elements in 2011. 2) After Phase I construction, consider a Brown Bridge Trust Fund ballot question for Phase II construction with consideration for improvements in other City parks. 3) Continue working with the neighborhood for improvements on the West End Beach. 4) Continue the high level of maintenance on the Bayfront.
City Opera House
Goal Statement
The historic City Opera House is a significant public asset. It has added vitality to the downtown and is a showcase and destination. However, the City’s role in managing the retail spaces is inefficient. Alternate arrangements should be considered.
Specific steps include review of the following: 1) COHHA? LLC? Wharton? Local Major User Committee?
Economic Development Issues
Goal Statement
The City of Traverse City will maintain and enhance its role as the economic core of the five-county region. However, that role must be managed with recognition that the neighborhoods and corridors outside of the downtown are central to Traverse City remaining a community with a high quality of life for its residents. Community Development must become a larger part of Economic Development.
Specific steps include the following: 1) Focus the Community Development Office on a) putting the Depot property on the tax roll with a specific development plan, b) creating an inventory of major commercial and industrial vacant space in industrial parks and along the major corridors, c) assisting in the creation of higher density and affordable housing, d) implementing the neighborhood signage project, e) making progress on West Front Street redevelopment and f) being responsive to development opportunities that arise throughout the City. 2) Meet with the development community to determine whether regulatory reforms might improve the business climate within the City. 3) Consider tax strategies as necessary to promote job creation and economic growth within the City while considering the long-term impact on the tax base.
Fire Department Issues
Goal Statement
The City of Traverse City will provide quality fire prevention and suppression services. However, that must be managed within the context of reduced costs and recognition of the regional resources available. Specific steps include the following: I) Review all available options regarding the provision of these services including: a) a regional approach with Metro or b) a consolidation to one station (combine with Police Department work load analysis) or c) a continual incremental staff reduction. 2) After the City Commission selects which option(s) to pursue, implement that option(s).
Other
The following items received one “vote.” These items will be kept in mind as the higher priority goals are accomplished:
Address declining revenue
Address traffic through the neighborhoods
Improve the City’s parks
Improve bicycle and pedestrian access
Discuss Roundabouts
Other items that are on the City Manager’s list and in process include:
Design Hickory Hills capital improvements to increase revenues
Revise the Heritage Center lease to reduce City cost
Enhance WIFI and broadband capacity
Contract for solid waste services
Implement Boardman Lake Avenue
Review structure of TCL&P
possible swim areas for 2010
Monday night the CC discusses a bunch of things coming up this summer.
Coast Guard city. Commander John Spanner of the Coast Guard air station in TC will be at the meeting to present a proclamation from Admiral Thad Allen declaring us a Coast Guard City. TC is the sixth city in the nation to be honored with this designation. The official ceremony will be during the Cherry Festival – details to follow.
Expanded concessions. With serious bayfront improvements a year away, the city is considering expansion of the concessions on the old zoo property in the meantime. The recommended vendor would offer bike and kayak rentals, beach items, and possibly craft programs in addition to food. The city will get 15% of the proceeds in return for use of the space – a suggestion is to put these funds into a dedicated account for the waterfront.
Swim areas. The CC will also review a recommendation for this summer’s swim areas. In short, 1,000 feet from the west edge of the volleyball courts to the grassy area across from Maple St is proposed to be set aside for pedestrian and swim uses, and the roughly 1,000 feet that includes the volleyball courts to the Open Space would be reserved for boaters. The hope is this will split west beach into a neighborhood beach around the end of Oak St, and a beach for boaters around the volleyball courts. On the Clinch Park beach, about 500 feet of swim area is proposed, with additional clearance for boats coming in and out of the ramp. The CC is expected to discuss this and then vote on a proposal in a week or two.
Expansion in Old Town. The Old Town parking deck is scheduled to be finished in August. The deck is being built with bonds that were issued against the tax revenue from new buildings that Hagerty Insurance’s development company committed to build on Lake Street. Hagerty now plans to increase the size of the space from about 21,000 square feet to about 43,000 square feet – which will also increase the tax revenues from the project and speed payback of the bonds. The new building plan will delay its construction until next summer, but Hagerty has committed to starting the increase tax payments at the end of this year.
Wine festival. The Wineries of Old Mission Peninsula http://www.wineriesofoldmission.com/ are proposing an event in the old zoo area called “Paella in the Park.” To be held on Friday, August 6, the event will feature Spanish food from local chefs, wines from Old Mission, and music. The CC will be discussing the event Monday, since the proposal includes an admission fee.
Details for all these items can be found at: http://www.ci.traverse-city.mi.us/City_Commission/Agendas/.
childrens play area & central park on old zoo property
The preliminary waterfront designs are done and ready to be presented. You can view them at http://www.ci.traverse-city.mi.us (scroll down to Bayfront Planning and click on “bayfront preliminary engineering.”
They were presented last night to Central Neighborhood and will be presented many times over the next couple weeks. Based on the comments here and the input at the meetings, finals along with cost estimates will then be released June 21st. Here is the meetings schedule:
May 16, 4 PM: Kids Creek Commons Neighborhood Association, Building 50, Grand Traverse Commons
May 18, 7 PM: Traverse City/ Garfield Recreational Authority, County Commission Room, Governmental Center
May 19, 7 PM: Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Joint Meeting, Commission Chambers, Governmental Center
May 20, 7 PM: Old Towne Neighborhood, St. Francis Church, 1025 S. Union
May 21, 8 AM: Downtown Development Authority, Commission Chambers, Governmental Center
May 24, 12 Noon: Traverse City Kiwanis Club at the Traverse City Elks Club, 625 Bay Street
May 24, 7 PM: City Commission meeting, Commission Chambers, Governmental Center
Special thanks to the Parks Commission, as well as Mike Jackson, Jennifer Jaffe, and Jim Carruthers – who together have made this project happen. Let us know what you think!
Two developments at TCLP’s meeting tonight:
Biomass. Director Ed Rice reported that his staff has been analyzing sites for local combined heat and power biomass gasification. TCLP for a while now has been discussing a site in the Airport industrial park off Parsons Road. At Mr. Rice’s recommendation, that site has been removed from consideration. He indicated that TCLP will continue to evaluate other possible sites for local generation. More info will be provided here as it becomes available.
Energy Efficiency. TCLP also discussed the fact that its energy optimization program has exceeded its goals. While this is a good thing, it also means that demand from TCLP’s customers has exceeded program funding, and the utility is up against the maximum efficiency spending it can carry over into future years of the plan. The board discussed creating a plan to to exceed the state’s energy optimization requirements, noting the strong community demand for these programs. Hopefully, this would include a study both of the efficiency potential of TCLP’s service area, as well as an estimate of the investments necessary and the possible rate impacts. The board seemed determined to make this happen, and so more discussion is likely. A more detailed post on this topic will follow in a couple weeks.
Division St
Monday night the city commission is discussing what to put on the ballot, and when, for Division St. The two options are a divided boulevard from 14th St to 8th St, which could go on the ballot in August, or a plan to remove the traffic lights from 14th St to Grandview Parkway and replace them with roundabouts. The roundabouts plan needs more modeling, and therefore is not ready for the ballot yet, but could go on a month from now for November.
Boulevard
A divided boulevard could go from 14th St to just south of 8th St. The boulevard would have a landscaped median except at the intersections, where it would have center turn lanes, similar to Woodmere (but no bike lanes). Each travel lane would be a foot wider than it is now (from 11 feet to 12 feet). Reconstruction of Division including the boulevard would cost $10 to 13 million. The boulevard would need a 30-foot strip of parkland on the west side. The boulevard would provide a more scenic corridor and would provide pedestrian refuge space in the medians. On the downside, wider lanes would mean faster speeds, and the boulevard would not address the stretch north of 8th St.
Roundabouts
The lights at 14th St, 7th St, Front St, and Grandview Parkway would be removed and roundabouts would be installed at 14th St, 11th St, a new 8½ St (or perhaps 7th St), Front St, and Grandview Parkway. The roundabouts plan would cost about $1.5 million per intersection, and could be phased in one at a time as funds allowed. (Either option would likely require federal funding, perhaps an earmark designated to implement this as part of the Grand Vision). It would require parkland at 11th St, 8½ St, and Grandview Parkway.
Advantages of roundabouts are that they allow traffic to move in a slow but consistent speed, are safer for pedestrians and bicyclists, reduce dangerous left turns, reduce noise and vibrations, and reduce traffic accidents. A roundabout could also create a more scenic corridor by eliminating overhead signals and wires. The roundabouts plan came from the steering group representing neighborhoods and businesses along the corridor and has been endorsed by Munson, the GT Commons, and the TBA ISD, among others. http://planfortc.com/2010/04/29/munson-and-the-commons-weigh-in-on-division-st-april-30/
Next steps
More modeling is needed for the roundabouts. The individual roundabouts have more than enough capacity for the traffic on Division St, but the relationship of the roundabouts to other intersections needs to be modeled (14th St and the light at Veterans Drive, for example). Therefore, the city could put the boulevard on the ballot for August, but needs the modeling before making a decision on the roundabouts – which could allow a November vote. Another option is to target one intersection for a roundabout.
Observations
It seems to me that the roundabouts plan – because it is such a dramatic change – needs to be done carefully and with all the issues worked through prior to a vote. Some points that need discussion.
1. Treat the corridor as a system. Benefits to the neighborhoods are based on this being a system, not a roundabout here or there. In addition, the US-31 corridor needs to be looked at as a whole. The South Campus entrance to the GT Commons and Munson could help take some pressure off Division. Finally settling on an E-W alternative around town would take some pressure off the US-31 corridor. (More on this in a later post).
2. The plan needs to be well thought out, meaning the various issues need to be addressed. As Central Neighborhood rep Mike Devries pointed out, current designs show a discrepancy from Lockwood’s concept. Lockwood designed traffic slowing geometry, but the current designs have some speedy on-ramp shapes.
Front & Division - Lockwood sketch
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Front & Division - current design
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Correcting the designs could reduce the condemnation needed at Front St. Also needed is a solution to through traffic on the residential side of 11th St. Also needed is an acceptable plan for 8½ St, or an acceptable alternative to it.
3. Bring back the steering committee. The steering committee included Munson, the GT Commons, Central, Kids Creek and Slabtown neighborhoods, and other representatives along the corridor. These people represented the stakeholdes on the corridor well. They know the needs of the neighborhoods and businesses in that area. They are best positioned to work through solutions to these issues.
4. Implement interim changes now. This includes street trees, sidewalks, and pedestrian crossing signs and paint. An example from Lockwood’s sketches is here:
Street calming along Division
If the boulevard is taken off the table (hence no widening), we could start getting these kinds of measures going now. They could help calm the feel of the street and perhaps reduce speeds while the roundabouts are worked through and implemented one step at a time.
What do you think? Let us know here, by email to the CC, or at Monday’s meeting – 7 pm in the Governmental Center.
Recent Comments