2013, 11-19 Study Session AGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION FORMAT
Tuesday,November 19, 2013 6:00 p.m.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11707 East Sprague Avenue,First Floor
(Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting)
DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL
ROLL CALL
Community Recognition, Presentation of Key and Certificate—Mayor Towey
1. Eric Guth Construction Improvement Plan Discussion/Information
Annual Update
2.Mike Jackson Draft Legislative Agenda Discussion/Information
3.Mike Stone Parks and Recreation Master Plan Discussion/Information
4.Mayor Towey Advance Agenda Discussion/Information
5.Mayor Towey Council Check in Discussion/Information
6.Mike Jackson City Manager Comments Discussion/Information
ADJOURN
Note: Unless otherwise noted above,there will be no public comments at Council Study Sessions. However,Council always reserves the
right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. During meetings held by the City of Spokane Valley Council,the
Council reserves the right to take"action" on any item listed or subsequently added to the agenda. The term"action"means to deliberate,
discuss,review,consider,evaluate,or make a collective positive or negative decision. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting
who require special assistance to accommodate physical,hearing,or other impairments,please contact the City Clerk at(509)921-1000 as soon
as possible so that arrangements may be made.
Study Session Agenda,November 19, 2013 Page 1 of 1
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 11-19-2013 Department Director Approval: ❑
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Construction Improvement Plan Annual Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND: Public Works Director Guth will give an overview of 2013 completed projects
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation
SR S VVIO4
r31. J1 f IPlailmhi1Al�I�,IIII
mi udlillIL
12013 Pro bets a
■ lid w kY1e Rojicomoot Pr*ct Uplato
Council Commitment
D
D
The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) staff
completed 17 projects in 2013
Total money spent on these projects
• Street Preservation = $1,744,000
• Sidewalk Improvements =
• Pathway Projects =
• Traffic Improvement/Safety =
• Bridge Improvements =
$ 883,000
$ 203,000
$1,648,000
$ 909,000
$5,387,000
I
etre
N fr1 31ll-- s
Argonne Rd-
Empre.2nm
Sine Peaeste n Safety
Sego-almoner
Complete&comer
ti6Wn-o(NHttWQOt'"�� g h
Wele
Wellesley Ave.Sides/Ms
and APems U- s�rner
eeen-
j{WIBL'@r.
SUN.)Rend-
Euclid to Trent ASR 2211
Pour-Summer
COO wets Fell
retaxpActe ca._ay
I P'r fir.
� I
�rY_l
I�i
I 1
1
x1 i 1
III
l Road-
endure,En
Pre &unmer
Complete-Fall
ReerFon
I
de _ _2 monad
Sullivan Reed Br dgef4507
Crer UPRR Overlay Project
Sapp-Bummer
Complete-Summa
Argonne Raneullen PP-
Comda Safety Prelacy
Beg,Summon
Como.,Sommer
Sprat::eab Pam rlmpmvement-
Begin 500rou
Compete-Speng
Stevan Road West
5105524002 0m!n RBIroAI
Begin- Spring
Gannet.Summer
Fl,aa,m_
Pries Ra.R&
Semgui to,ail(SR 250)
P'Stang
c
Park Rd-
Y911 p,to Pro.,
Fuel,Somme
Complete-Fell
onplts Bimma _ n
∎oMI'
OVA/alk(Sill Phase
Benin Sur mar
Complete-Summa
EVre ntol-FC B5
Bogle Fall 2012
Complete-Spring Z 59
Roadway
��kwQe Eee!
City of Liberty Lake
I
j Alt
s-.p,
iil,
City of Spokane
.,.Mane.
Cugatd Carrell
00010050 Improvements
Rego-Sum ter
Complete-Summer
FInaS Rd FAIT Ave.
CSelmette-S So05,101enz
Begin mmer
Complete-Summer
Ilifill11111111ffn
Ste to CT,/Lento
1505.5 Sunnier
5
Compete-Fall
I
��xul
BI 0215
_ 4
—ten-- �I
OsSptroppp wey Rd. •'; ����IWi6�7��.4t1 44�C:7ldfr�� �`��J�a0l!�_ s�y_�' �,I 2-0.M1 Avenue Stle
aelk Prarect
Drum,Improncemordo
Peen-Summer
1101 lo 14tle Come.-Onnorl
u : _ iTN404.LLINAT mete I g p nImnpg raaner 4109
Complete 0 unmet -‘42\44
5215 Nov.-
LI.ersity to Semi.
Begird Summer
Complete-Fat
51
site A}J 1'
eor
•
1
eft
Spokan�`
Walley.
W
City of Spokane Valley
2013 Road Construction Projects
•
Street Projects
Street Preservation
Projects
Street Preservation
Contingency Projects
ITS Projects
Storm Improvements
Public Works Department
D
D
2013
• Phase 1 - Sullivan Rd-Flora Pit Rd to Trent
• Phase 3 - Carnahan-Kahuna to 8t ' and Indiana
Ave-east of Pines to Mirabeau
2012
• Pines - 16th to 23rd
• Sprague Ave - Thierman to Park
2013 Completed Projects
Street Preservation Projects
D
D
D
D
2013 Completed Projects
Sidewalk Project
24th Avenue Sidewalk - Adams to
Sullivan
Sidewalk Infill - Phase 1
Wellesley Ave & Adams Rd Sidewalks
Sprague Ave ADA Curb Ramps -
Havana to Fancher
Adams sidewalk
Sidewalk Infill - Phase 1
;Weir
IMP!tt•
•
Sprague Ave ADA
Improvements
te
1:
D
D
2013 Completed Projects
Pathway Projects
Appleway rai Design
University Rd Overpass Draft Study
fp
Looking west toward I,
Appeway Boulevard
as the trail wll enter
Unversiy Plaza
11
University Overpass Preliminary Options
Spokane River
r
•
Option 3:
Overpass serving:
-Pedestrians and bicycles
FuturerSpoka valley,Millwood,7rail OR
-Pedestrians,bicycles and
emergency vehicles
OR
-Pedestrians,bicycles and
all vehicles
Iti-ON
E��en`�✓
Option 2B:
-Pedestrian bridge and
bicycle bridge
r
Option 4A
Pedestrian and
bicycle bridges
over UPRR tracks
and over 1-90
Option 1:
Separate
pedestrian/bicycle
bridge
rOption 2A
Overpass serving:
-Pedestrians and bicycles
OR
-Pedestrians,bicycles and
emergency vehicles
Option 4B:
Overpass serving:
Pedestrians and bicycles
OR
-Pedestrians,bicycles and
emergency vehicles
Possible
Spaldings
rail spur
E Mansfield Ave
Argonne Interchange
-New southbound lane
-Diverging diamond
v
C c
to
2
z z
E Mission Ave
CC
3
0
0
N
Valley
Mission
rigt Park
N
Option 4C
-Pedestrian and
bicycle bridge
Pines Interchange
-Signal modification
-Modify ramps
Option 5:
Separate
pedestrian/bicycle
bridge
2013 Completed Projects
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Traffic Improvement/ Safety Projects
ul ivan Sprague
Pines ITS
Argonne! Mullan Safety Project
Argonne Rd Corridor Safety Project
Citywide Safety Improvements
Citywide Traffic Signs Upgrade
Pines/ Mansfield UPRR Crossing
Sullivan Corridor Study
Sprague/Sullivan ITS
I LY LA
Pines Rd ITS projects
Argonne Rd Corridor Safety
Pines/Mansfield UPRR Cros!§ing
Citywide Traffic
Sign Upgrade
D
D
D
2013 Completed Projects
Bridge Improvement Projects
Sands Road Bridge Resurfacing
Sullivan Rd Bridge over UPRR Resurfacing
Sullivan Rd W Bridge Phase 1 - Sullivan
Park
Sands Rd
Bridge
Sullivan Rd Southbound over UPRR Tracks Resurfacino-
Sullivan Rd W Bridge
Replacement - Phase 1
Sullivan Park
201 3 STORMWATEP
IMPROVEMENTS
i
Esrey 3 dew
C•aer V:r-rant
1111 h.
==:11111■
1111:1111111
Illr1r
i1' '! J .i .
i• i Decant Fad it
'33 -'i .', c=Broadway
nose 1
�- in■■E�r7`
=MAN■111 1 Herald,M12C?
MELANIN •r ■■ SPraBue. •
MN/ ti{s1a to Parr ■
INIE
Frederick&Wilbur
Frer#erick 8 Perr;Bp
.3utiva-
3 k_-rent
• I��rood
Indiana, V r:•a=au
to^na
ferns=elif .oundaboeut
Byer&Alk (�, di
■rig
--S
Park LA.ppleway
Bishrnan Mica&
t ,,ley^r
2 ace,
"_of tiffs=_icn
aUrrir 111111113.111
3u}u i': 9r d
Dra- Ratrcf
Mission,
1•_ 2arker
ra A
Progress.S 5D7 1.11
� Dishman Mica&Bth 4111_P_13613 � � ..�
i1J11f_���—r �■u■■ — i✓
a∎c
'A
ti
!JIM' , 1=LIEL r
�w�■r��1R
Si = h 10tj
14ih
Custer 1c Camahan
5torrnwater Improvements
Stormwater CIP Project (5 Locations}
Maintenance Division Project(27 Locatiorrs)
Starrnwater Improvements
art
PW CIP Project(7 LocationsE
18th-1 r-..
Yi
�� �1� l�IIi
&S,ki kw.—.h r� E �1
zI
-n-`.■fir ni �EI�I�
7,
r ■
jv
idle II
IME F'
InIZIFt4r
Ch =--er Creek
klaintena-_e
RotOrfaa& 1s�:
24th Sidewa k
Date: 11!812013
„Ai Valley
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
3 Completed Stormwater Projects
Sprague Ave. Swale Upgrade
Sullivan Rd Bridge Drain Retrofit
Bettman-Dickey Stormwater Upgrade
14th Avenue Custer to Carnahan
Spokane Valley Regional Decant - Phase 1
Improvements on (7) CIP Street Projects
Pines/ Alki Small Works
Dishman-Mica/ Appleway Small Works
MICE Upgrades at (27) Locations
Sprague Ave - Before
Sprague Ave - After
4
4
Run-off was flowing
directly into the river
Sullivan Rd Bridge Drain Retrofit
Piping system
1 Sullivan Road W Bridge Replacement
D
D
D
D
S u 11 i van Rd W H Ihiage Replacement
Final Design Stage
Final Environmental Permitting - HPA, Corps of
Engineers, etc.
Funding:
✓ $8.0 million Federal BR Funds
✓ $2.0 million FMSIB
✓ $2.3 million Spokane Valley
✓ $3.5 million TIB
Schedule - Bid Ready January 2014
- Construction 2014-2015
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: November 19, 2013 Department Director Approval: ❑
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Review of 2013-2014 Revised Legislative Agenda
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
The Council adopted the 2013-2014 Legislative Agenda at their December 18, 2012 meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Ms. Briahna Taylor of Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs spoke to Council at the
October 29, 2013 Council meeting. She noted that if Council wanted to advocate for certain
projects before the Legislature, these items should be discussed as soon as possible. City
Manager Jackson stated staff and Council would work to develop an updated Legislative
Agenda.
The Finance Committee met on November 7, 2013, and recommended adding the Appleway
Trail Project to the Legislative Agenda.
OPTIONS: Council discussion to consider issues to amend the 2013-2014 Legislative Agenda
and proceed as written or revised; or direct staff further.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place this item on an upcoming
council agenda for adoption consideration as drafted, or with specific revisions.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson and Mayor Towey
ATTACHMENTS: Revised 2013-2014 Legislative Agenda
s 'okane
p
Va11eyK
2013-14 Legislative Agenda
The following is the City of Spokane Valley's 2013-2014 legislative agenda, adopted by Council December 18,
2012.
Applewav Trail Project
Seek$2,000,000 in funding in the 2015-2017 Capital Budget for the development of the former Milwaukie Railroad right-
of-way as a unique,two-mile green space and trail in the heart of Spokane Valley's commercial district. The project will
provide a much needed route for non-motorized travel along Spokane Valley's principle east-west commercial arterial,
connecting the Spokane Transit Authority Transit Center, business districts, schools, and medium-high density housing.
Community members have been actively involved in development of a Conceptual Design for the project,which includes:
a paved trail, plazas, play spaces and gathering places, public art, perennial gardens, space for community gardens,
mountain bike trail, lighting and safety crossings. The current cost estimate for the two-mile portion of the Appleway
Trail Project (University to Evergreen) is $2,692,320. Spokane Valley has received grant funding in the amount of
$642,852 from Spokane Regional Transportation Council in their last Call for Projects. The design drawings are 90%
complete.
Protect the Local-State Shared Revenues
The City of Spokane Valley encourages the state to preserve local state-shared revenues, and restore funding to those
accounts cut during the last legislative session. These funds include the Liquor Excise Tax Account, Liquor Revolving
Account, Streamlined Sales Tax Mitigation, Municipal Criminal Justice Assistance Account, and City-County Assistance
Account. In 2012, the Legislature eliminated local Liquor Excise Tax funding, and reduced the future City liquor profit
revenues. The City supports restoring this funding and maintaining funding to the other state-share revenue accounts.
Additional Lien Authority to Recoup Code Enforcement Costs
The City of Spokane Valley seeks legislation to provide cities with additional tools to recoup costs for enforcing code
compliance when a court order is issued and a city performs the abatement itself or through a contractor. The legislation
provides cities with the same tool that counties currently have to impose a lien on the property to recover the cost of
nuisance abatement.
The City supports the Association of Washington Cities'legislative agenda items that serve the best interests of
Spokane Valley.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: November 19, 2013 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Parks & Recreation Master Plan Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The City Council adopted the original Parks &
Recreation Plan by resolution on April 25, 2006.
BACKGROUND: The draft update of the 2006 Parks and Recreation Master Plan is complete.
This update is intended to supplement and update the 2006 plan. While it functions as a "stand-
alone" document, it cross-references and draws from that 2006 plan. Where conditions have
materially changed, however, the plan provides detailed explanations of the changes and offers
updated recommendations and implementation measures accordingly.
Public involvement is always a crucial step in comprehensive parks and recreation planning,
ensuring that the community has an effective voice in shaping the plan and that the needs
expressed in the plan and included in the implementation program accurately reflect community
desires. This updated plan includes an extensive public engagement effort, basing its
recommendations on exhaustive stakeholder interviews, a statistically valid telephone survey,
and two public meetings.
Staff will be providing an overview of the draft plan update, seeking input and comments from
the City Council. Staff is anticipating bringing the draft plan update back on December 10 for a
resolution to adopt.
OPTIONS: 1) Suggest changes to the plan update, or 2) Provide additional direction to staff.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Seeking City Council consensus to bring forward a
resolution to adopt the Parks & Recreation Master Plan Update on December 10, 2013.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: Michael D. Stone, CPRP. Director of Parks and Recreation
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation; Draft Park & Recreation Master Plan Update; 2006
Master Plan
Parks and
Recreation
Master Plan
Update
November 19, 2013
Master Plan Update
Consultant was Studio Cascade, Inc.
Intended to supplement and update the
2006 plan
Functions as a "stand alone" document
but it cross-references and draws from
2006 plan
Reflects shifts in community priorities
Master Plan Update
o Plan Adoption
Meets requirements for Recreation and
Conservation Office grant eligibility
o Provides direction and guidance
o Allows for flexibility in priorities and scheduling to
maximize funding opportunities
Recommends specific park acquisitions and
improvements
Provides range of options
Master Plan Update
Public Involvement
Crucial step to ensure the public has an
effective voice in shaping the plan
Needs expressed in the plan should accurately
reflect community desires
Utilized stakeholder interviews, a statistically
valid telephone survey and two public meetings
Master plan Update
o Goals, Policies and Objectives
Remain relatively unchanged from the 2006
plan
Reflect the City's changing comprehensive
planning environment since 2006
Modifications worth noting include:
o Priority for land acquisition
o Priority in developing park facilities to
accommodate needs of user groups
Master Plan Update
n Significant Changes since 2006
Development of Discovery Playground
Added 8 acres and developed Greenacres
Park
Vacant available property continues to shrink
o Added 8 acres on Sprague for Balfour
expansion
Renovated three outdoor swimming pools
Master Plan Update
Sample Recommendations
Be aggressive in pursuing the acquisition of park
land as the availability of undeveloped property
continues to shrink
Continue to seek grants, private land donations,
or property swaps
Initiate development of the Balfour/Library
Master Plan
Work towards a comprehensive recreation trails
system utilizing the Centennial Trail as the
backbone
Master Plan Update
o Sample Recommendations
o Provide new neighborhood parks in the north,
southeast, west and east areas of the City
Provide a new community park in the south
portion of the City
Provide specialty park types in existing
facilities
Consider using natural open space for a disc
golf course
Additional linear park - Appleway Trail
Master Plan Update
Capital Project Priorities
Acquire park land
Upgrade existing park facilities
Install splash pads at existing or new parks
Create an off-lease dog park
Create a disc golf course
Install eight sand volleyball courts at Browns Park
10
Master Plan Update
e% Summary
Supplement document to 2006 plan
Public involvement component
Eligible for grant applications
Provides priorities and direction for
Department' s future
Provides a capital component
J.
,, ..„.....,,, •„,,,„ ,
.,„.:. .. . A- ,,,`,„„;',
tarp S16k1jc'
� fJ•
■Valley
!. `i -`l �yyq 431 �,i„... 01"
]. t .. "@- ,:'' F �d,.:
� a a
Parks and .- „*, `• gf �a.
ryi, a 'g ' .
Recreation
• .,
�
d •Master Plan �" n _ f
2013 Update _ = �
[
' '
+A / �1►1� t ' < �fe i ' - ' 'eta gig+ '
E. n 5TH ::YYff• ii, .. yf ~;lif�ff
D'
# ` �r Y I i _ /+I0 L 1JJ ' l .4-•,‘..-c, ..;.'. ?
t�� -
L /
r.,q . nr ,�. p.. : v43i" j•
4,
0 y
- ',,,,,_.--!-4. , , .,-;,'"'All- r. .,:,...:11m.,:-.1.. :-- -.,-.-.:-.t...-: - —— . ..,_ -)0;1
a -
r•sph ii "«Ρ -r x a -
atto,
2013 Update to the City of Spokane Valley
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
Acknowledgements
City Council
Tom Towey, Mayor
Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor
Dean Grafos
Chuck Hafner
Rod Higgins
Ben Wick
Arne Woodard
Executive
Mike Jackson, City Manager
Parks and Recreation Department
Mike Stone, Director
Patty Bischoff,Administrative Assistant
Parks and Recreation Staff
Special thanks to all the community members who participated in the telephone survey and the
public outreach events.
Consultants:
Studio Cascade, Inc.
MT - LA
429 E. Sprague
Spokane,WA 99202
(509) 835-3770
www.studiocascade.com
Table of Contents
Chapter 1.0: Introduction 6
1.1 Public Involvement 6
1.2 Report Organization 6
1.3 Goals, Policies and Objectives 7
Chapter 2.0: Planning Context 12
2.1 Regional Context 12
2.2 Planning Area 13
2.3 Demographic Characteristics 13
2.4 Land Use 16
2.5 Housing 16
2.6 Population Growth 17
Chapter 3.0: Existing Parks and Facilities 18
3.1 Park Land Definitions 18
3.2 Park Land Inventory 19
Chapter 4.0: Existing Operations 24
4.1 Organizational Structure 24
4.2 Staffing Levels 26
4.3 Revenues and Expenditures 27
4.4 Maintenance Operations 29
4.5 Recreation Participation 29
Chapter 5.0: Needs Assessment 30
5.1 Stakeholder Interviews 30
5.2 Household Recreation Survey 31
5.3 Public Workshop 33
5.4 Summary of Park Land Needs 36
5.5 Summary of Recreation Facility Needs 42
iii
Chapter 6.0: Recommendations43 43
6.1 Park Plan Concept 43
6.2 Park Layout Plan 44
6.3 Park and Facility Recommendations 47
6.4 Trails, Pathways and Bikeways 55
6.5 Recreation Programs and Services 57
6.6 Administration and Management 59
6.7 Maintenance 61
6.8 River Access 62
Chapter 7.0: Aquatic Facilities 63
7.1 Aquatic Facility Background 63
Chapter 8.0: Implementation 65
8.1 Funding Sources 65
8.2 Capital Projects 68
8.3 Preliminary Project Priorities 70
8.4 Basis for Estimating Costs 70
8.5 Capital Costs 71
8.6 Current Funding Availability 71
8.7 Financing Strategy 71
Appendix 73
ik Telephone Survey Report
Table of Tables
Table 2-1: Age Group by Percentage of Population 14
Table 2-2: Income Characteristics for Selected Geographies 15
Table 2-3: Top 5 Industry Sectors for Workers and Residents 15
Table 2-4: Ethnic Group by Percentage of Population 15
Table 2-5: Housing Affordability 17
Table 2-6: Population Since Spokane Valley's Incorporation 17
Table 3-1: Count and Acres of Park Facilities by Park Type 20
Table 3-2: Summary of Park Facility Inventory 22
Table 4-1: Existing and Historic Park and Recreation Staffing Levels 26
Table 4-2: Budget Allocation 2003-2013 27
Table 4-3: Park and Recreation Division Budget Breakdown 28
Table 4-4: Cost per Capita and Percent of Revenue Generated 29
Table 5-1: Park Visits by Study Area 32
Table 5-2: Future Park Land Demand at Adopted Level of Service 39
Table 5-3: Proposed Acres Needed by Park Type 39
Table 5-4: Summary of Recreation Facility Needs 42
iv
Table 7-1: Existing Aquatic Facilities in Spokane Valley 63
Table 8-1: Parks and Recreation Capital Project List 68
Table 8-2: Summary of Probable Costs for Recommended Improvements 71
Table 8-3: Funding Allocations for Parks, Years 2013-2018 71
Table 8-4: Summary of Funding and Expenditures 6-year Capital Improvement Plan 72
Table of Figures
Figure 2-A: Regional Context 12
Figure 2-B: City of Spokane Valley Planning Area 13
Figure 3-A: Park Inventory Map 21
Figure 4-A: Simplified Organization Chart for the City of Spokane Valley 25
Figure 4-B: Organization Chart for the Parks and Recreation Department 26
Figure 5-A: Survey Study Area 31
Figure 5-B: Results From Public Workshop 1 35
Figure 5-C: Park Service Areas for Spokane Valley Parks 38
Figure 5-D: Park Priority Areas as Indicated From Workshop 2 41
Figure 6-A: 2013 Proposed Park Layout Plan 46
v
Chapter 1.0: Introduction
This plan update is intended to supplement the 2006 City of Spokane Valley Parks and
Recreation Plan, reflecting changes in the community since that plan's adoption. The
update is structured in a manner similar to the original plan, facilitating reference between
the old and new. Chapter topics and section numbering all match, with only those sections
requiring amendment included in this update.
Since adopting the 2006 plan,the City of Spokane Valley has continued to focus on its core
beliefs and values. This focus has resulted in the implementation of several projects
identified in the 2006 plan as well as other community improvements. The planning
context for this update is a bit different than when the 2006 plan was prepared, reflecting
shifts in community priorities.
1.1 Public Involvement
Public involvement is a crucial step in comprehensive parks and recreation planning,
ensuring that the community has an effective voice in shaping the plan and that the needs
expressed in the plan and included in the implementation program accurately reflect
community desires. The 2006 plan included an extensive public engagement effort, and
this update does as well, basing its recommendations on exhaustive stakeholder
interviews, a statistically valid telephone survey, and two public meetings.
In addition, this plan's methodology was configured to link public facility improvements to
public demand at the neighborhood level. By developing a geographic information systems
(GIS) model, this process is able to localize demand and facility improvements to serve
individual neighborhoods based on survey responses. This adds another dimension to the
public involvement component, tying public responses directly to neighborhood-level
improvements.
1.2 Report Organization
This parks and recreation plan update is intended to supplement and update the 2006 plan.
While it functions as a "stand-alone" document, it cross-references and draws from that
2006 plan. In an effort to avoid redundancy,this update includes by reference those
portions of the 2006 plan that still apply. Where conditions have materially changed,
however, this plan provides detailed explanations of the changes and offers updated
recommendations and implementation measures accordingly.
The update's structure mirrors the 2006 plan,with chapters and sections as in the original
document. It is configured this way to aid in cross-referencing and to ensure continued
compliance with the Recreation and Conservation Office's (RCO) planning guidelines.
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Chapter 2 - Planning Context
Chapter 3 - Existing Parks Facilities
16
Chapter 4 - Existing Operations
Chapter 5 - Needs Assessment
Chapter 6 - Recommendations
Chapter 7 -Aquatic Facilities
Chapter 8 - Implementation
1.3 Goals, Policies and Objectives
Spokane Valley's parks and recreation goals, policies and objectives remain relatively
unchanged from the 2006 plan. However, there are some modifications worth noting,
particularly regarding the priority attached to land acquisition and developing parks
facilities to accommodate needs of user groups such as skateboarders, off-leash pet park
users, disc golf course, sand court volleyball to name a few. Other modifications to the
goals, policies and objectives reflect the City's changing comprehensive planning
environment since the 2006 plan's adoption.
The goals are statements about Spokane Valley's desired future. These goals are supported
by policies that guide plan implementation and objectives that provide realistic, achievable,
and measurable steps toward reaching the goals. Together,the goals, policies, and
objectives can be used to help measure the plan's success.
Goal 1: To develop a balanced, diverse, and accessible park and recreation system
that meets the specific needs of the residents of Spokane Valley.
Policy 1-A: The City of Spokane Valley will endeavor to provide park land and recreation
facilities equitably throughout the city at conveniently located and easily
accessible sites.
Objective 1-A (1): Prioritize the acquisition and development of parks and recreation
facilities that contribute to community identity and community
pride in Spokane Valley.
Objective 1-A (2): Consider all options, including partnerships and collaborations, to
acquire and develop neighborhood parks and community parks in
unserved or underserved areas, as identified in the Recreation
Needs Assessment.
Objective 1-A (3): Establish and regularly update a comprehensive inventory of
existing parks and recreation resources.
Objective 1-A (4): Develop a park and open space acquisition program to take
advantage of present opportunities to meet future needs.
Policy 1-B: The City of Spokane Valley will attempt to provide equitable and diverse
recreation opportunities and activities for the benefit of Spokane Valley
residents and visitors to our community.
Objective 1-B (1): In the near term, offer a limited recreation program that builds
public interest and support.
Page 17
Objective 1-B (2): In the long term, offer comprehensive program services to all ages,
abilities, and economic and cultural backgrounds.
Objective 1-B (3): Adapt programming to meet community needs and desires as
identified through community questionnaires, focus group
meetings, and public meeting processes.
Objective 1-B (4): Periodically and systematically monitor, evaluate, and revise
existing programs and services to ensure quality programming.
Objective 1-B (5): Identify anticipated service areas (neighborhood, community, city-
wide, regional) for future parks and recreation programs to
equitably serve all users.
Objective 1-B (6): Maximize the use of existing facilities and programs to support local
needs, while encouraging tourism and regional use.
Policy 1-C: The City of Spokane Valley will work to provide facility types to address
changing parks and recreation demands.
Policy 1-D: The City will periodically evaluate future need and locations for park land,
acquiring land as opportunity arises and necessity indicates.
Objective 1-D (1): Match increase in park land inventory with expected population
increases.
Objective 1-D (2): Locate park land within convenient access of neighborhoods.
Goal 2: To maintain and manage the appropriate social, cultural, physical, and
natural resources required to maintain and improve the quality of life in
Spokane Valley.
Policy 2-A: The City of Spokane Valley will strive to design and maintain parks and
recreation amenities and facilities in a safe, attractive manner, to contribute to
the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
Objective 2-A (1): Adopt and utilize Design Guidelines for site selection and
development in the acquisition and/or development of parks
within each park classification.
Objective 2-A (2): Prioritize the renovation and upgrade of existing facilities to
improve site safety and encourage facility use.
Objective 2-A (3): Periodically assess the condition of park amenities and facilities.
Objective 2-A (4): Establish a program and budget for addressing deferred
maintenance.
Objective 2-A (5): Embrace environmentally sound practices as natural resource
stewards.
Policy 2-B: The City of Spokane Valley will work to define and standardize maintenance
procedures for park land.
Pap (' 18
Objective 2-B (1): Establish minimum maintenance standards for the park system and
establish a goal for minimum maintenance cost per acre.
Objective 2-B (2): Explore creative and cost-effective ways of providing high-quality
facility management and maintenance.
Policy 2-C: The City of Spokane Valley will seek to acquire park land with unique natural
features or significant natural resources in order to protect or preserve them
for present and future generations.
Objective 2-C (1): Seek to acquire riparian corridors where feasible to protect these
natural resources and to offer potential sites for trail development.
Objective 2-C (2): Develop effective natural resource management plans for
significant natural areas within parks and other City-owned or
controlled lands to identify management priorities and to guide
development and restoration decisions.
Objective 2-C (3): Directly and/or cooperatively acquire and protect land within the
flood zone of the Spokane River and other drainage corridors. Plan
parks and recreation facilities and public access to these areas
where appropriate.
Objective 2-C (4): Prioritize critical natural resource areas within Spokane Valley,
including wetland areas, fish and wildlife habitat areas,
floodways/floodplains, and geologic hazard areas.
Goal 3: To coordinate parks and recreation planning, services, and development to
provide the highest level of service in a cost-efficient and fiscally responsible
way.
Policy 3-A: Generally, the City will not duplicate service nor compete with private
organizations in the delivery of parks and recreation services, unless other
service providers are not meeting the unique and specific needs of Spokane
Valley residents.
Policy 3-B: The City of Spokane Valley will continue to foster cooperative development of
parks and recreation resources and the provision of services through private
and public collaborations.
Objective 3-B (1): Work closely with the City Manager, City Council, and other City
departments to achieve mutually beneficial objectives.
Objective 3-B (2): Work in cooperation with governmental agencies, educational
institutions, private and regional recreation organizations, and
citizen interest groups to maximize the provision of parks and
services.
Objective 3-B (3): Pursue partnerships as a key means for leveraging resources to
meet community needs for park land, sports facilities, and services,
while minimizing duplications of effort.
Page 19
Goal 4: Spokane Valley will continue efforts to provide an efficient level of parks and
recreation services based on current financial resources and the ability of
residents to pay for those services
Policy 4-A: The City of Spokane Valley will strive to provide facilities, programs, and
qualified personnel in a fiscally responsible and cost effective manner.
Objective 4-A (1): Pursue cost sharing and cost recovery mechanisms where
appropriate.
Objective 4-A (2): Weigh the costs and benefits of Departmental services and facilities
to assist in decision-making regarding programming and facility
development.
Objective 4-A (3): Establish equitable fee structures for facilities and programs to help
ensure the long-term maintenance and operation of facilities while
ensuring affordability.
Objective 4-A (4): Establish more revenue-generating programs to increase program
funding and to help fund or subsidize other programs and services.
Objective 4-A (5): Offer programs at a range of costs (free, low-cost, full price) and
implement other strategies to ensure program affordability, while
meeting city financial goals.
Objective 4-A (6): Explore new program offerings without expecting them to be self-
supporting.
Policy 4-B: The City of Spokane Valley will strive to provide the highest level of service
possible within identified budget parameters.
Policy 4-C: The City of Spokane Valley will periodically update and revise the Master Plan to
meet changing fiscal conditions.
Objective 4-C (1): Identify funding options for all proposed projects.
Objective 4-C (2): Make fiscally reasonable recommendations for the development of
facilities and services that reflect community desires and needs.
Policy 4-D:Encourage the acquisition, maintenance, and preservation of public art that
inspires and enriches citizens of Spokane Valley.
Objective 4-D (1): Identify public art opportunities that highlight the cultural and
historical connections of Spokane Valley through local history,
environmental systems and visual symbols.
Objective 4-D (2): Reflect community identify using public art to create unique
community places, define or re-define public spaces, or suggest
experiences that evoke a strong sense of orientation.
Objective 4-D (3): Use public art to create visible landmarks and artistic points of
reference. These projects should serve as a source of community
pride and reinforce and further define community identify.
Page 110
Objective 4-D (4): Encourage public art in private development by providing
incentives to include works of art in private development.
Objective 4-D (5): Utilize public art in Spokane Valley to attract visitors to the City.
Page 111
Chapter 2.0: Planning Context
This chapter provides a profile of Spokane Valley,Washington, in the planning context of
parks, recreation facilities, and programs. This profile includes a description of the region,
planning area and subareas, natural resources, climate, demographics, land use, housing,
and population projections.
Key Findings
The following key findings emerged from an evaluation of the planning context:
• Several natural resource areas in Spokane Valley are important for recreation.
These lands may be environmentally sensitive and have limited development
potential,but they are often conducive to park, open space, and recreation uses. The
most notable natural resource in the city is the Spokane River and its adjoining
riparian corridor and flood zone.
• Spokane Valley has a four-season climate that supports diverse recreation
opportunities year-round. Indoor and outdoor facilities should be considered to
take advantage of this climate.
• Spokane Valley is the eighth largest city in Washington and the second largest in
Spokane County,with an estimated 2012 population of 90,550.
• Demographic characteristics often provide insights regarding recreation demand,
interests, and participation. Since Spokane Valley was incorporated in 2003,there is
no specific historical data to illustrate demographic variations. However, population
characteristics for the area can be derived
from regional population statistics.
CANADA
• Based on the assumptions developed in UNITED TATES
Spokane Valley's Comprehensive Plan,the
build-out population (year 2033) is expected
to reach over 105,668 people within the
current city limits. -
2.1 Regional Context WAS rnrG ro w
4
The City of Spokane Valley is located near the eastern
border of the State of Washington in an inland valley -=
that stretches from the west plains in Eastern
Washington, eastward through Spokane and Spokane
City of Valley to Post Falls and Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.
Spokane Valley is located in the heart of Spokane Gt p al*k °'COW Mee
County. In general,the City is bordered on the west
•
by the City of Spokane and on the east by
IDAHO
unincorporated Spokane County,with the newly -
formed City of Liberty Lake nearby. The City is Figure 2-A:Regional Context
located approximately 15 miles west of the Idaho
Page X12
border and 110 miles south of the Canadian border. Figure 2-A illustrates this regional
context.
2.2 Planning Area
The planning area for the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Plan includes land within
the city limits plus land within the City's urban growth area (UGA) (Figure 2-B). The City of
Spokane Valley encompasses roughly 38.5 square miles (24,640 acres) and generally
follows the boundaries described below:
• North: the City is bounded by the Town of Millwood,the Spokane River, and
Swanson Avenue/Foster Road.
• East: Spokane Valley is bordered by Hodges Road,with the City of Liberty Lake
nearby.
• South: the City has an irregular boundary on the south but generally following a
north-easterly direction from south of 32nd Avenue in the vicinity of Ponderosa and
Painted Hills area to 8th Avenue near the Liberty Lake City boundary.
• West: Havana Street is the primary divider on the western side of the City.
['Man Grgwrtn
ul 1
W 10111.Y
- 0.6111111
• _ CO of bber{y7
�U____ i fir IIIIP
griii AMIE ENE -.111.91
$Pohang Valley Planning Area
,;
LGn 6wtb •_bnnrib Area '~
Figure 2-B:City of Spokane Valley Planning Area
2.3 Demographic Characteristics
Demographic characteristics often provide insight assessing recreation needs. Spokane
Valley residents are the people who will use Spokane Valley parks and recreation facilities
most often; as such, the residents of Spokane Valley serve as the foundation for parks and
t , _ 113
facility demands. Factors such as age and income significantly affect the level of
participation and overall interest in recreational activities. Employment, education, and
ethnicity also play a role.
Age is an important factor in outdoor recreation. Generally as people age,their
participation in outdoor activities declines,with the highest participation rates occurring in
children. In general, the older the person, the less they participate in active and/or
competitive recreation activities. Children and young adults tend to favor active and/or
competitive recreation activities; these activities include basketball,baseball, soccer, and
swimming. Emerging trends have been toward non-competitive extreme sports, including
skateboarding, in-line skating, mountain biking and rock climbing. Older adults tend to
have a more passive interest in recreation programs and participate in parent/child
activities or spend time as a spectator at youth events.
As of 2010, Spokane Valley had an estimated population of 89,755. More than one-quarter
(26.6 percent) of Spokane Valley's population is under the age of 20 and 26 percent are 55
or older.While the under 20 population is generally in line with similarly sized cities, the
over 55 population is higher than comparable cities,which may indicate participation rates
are lower than comparable cities in Washington. Table 2-1 compares similarly sized cities
with Spokane Valley across four broad age groups: less than 20 years of age, between ages
20-34, between ages 35-54, and over age 55.
Table 2-1:A:a Grout*' __ e of Po s ulation
Total Percent 20 and Percent 20-34 Percent 35-54 Percent 55
Population younger and older
Yakima 91,067 31.4 21.7 23.8 23.2
Kennewick 73,917 31 22.2 25.1 21.7
Federal Way 89,306 28.4 21.7 28.4 21.5
Spokane 89,755 26.6 20.7 26.7 26.2
Valley
Renton 90,927 25.4 24.2 29.9 20.5
Everett 103,019 25.4 25.4 28.3 20.8
Bellingham 80,885 21.9 32.5 21.4 24.0
Source:U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census (totals may not equal 100 due to rounding)
Income levels also reveal important recreational participation characteristics. In general,
the higher income groups tend to participate in outdoor recreation. Higher incomes also
tend to participate in more expensive types of recreation. Lower income groups may rely
on subsidized programs or free facilities, such as play areas,trails, and non-scheduled
sports fields.Table 2-2 compares median (the middle) and mean (the average) incomes for
both households and families. Households include all people occupying a housing unit;
whereas, families consist of a householder and one or more people who are related by
birth, marriage, or adoption; thus there are more households than families.
Page 114
Table 2-2:Income Characteristics for Selected Geo::raihies
Median HH Mean HH Median Family Mean Family
Income Income Income Income
Renton 62,800 77,317 69,077 85,906
Bellingham 42,892 59,224 67,595 79,982
Federal Way 51,687 67,104 64,911 75,931
Kennewick 51,730 60,174 57,691 67,559
Spokane Valley 46,209 53,310 55,076 62,236
Everett 46,257 61,985 50,798 69,439
Yakima 36,873 49,570 45,073 56,948
Source: U.S. Census Bureau,2011 American Community Survey
There are 39,426 employed residents and 49,060 jobs in the City of Spokane Valley, close to
12,000 of the 49,060 jobs are held by people living within the City of Spokane Valley. This
means that close to 27,000 Spokane Valley residents work outside the City and there are
more jobs in the City than there are employees.
An analysis of employment in the City of Spokane Valley reveals the largest class of
employment is "Retail Trade" followed by"Manufacturing". However, the largest class of
employment for residents is "Health Care and Social Services" followed by"Retail Trade".
Table 2-3 compares the top five industry sectors for workers (jobs in the City) to the top 5
industry sectors for residents (jobs held by residents).
Table 2-3:Tor 5 Industr Sectors for Workers and Residents
Top 5 Industry Sectors for Workers Top 5 Industry Sectors for Residents
Retail Trade 22.3% Health Care and Social Services 16.7%
Manufacturing 14.8% Retail Trade 14.5%
Health Care and Social Services 14.5% Manufacturing 9.3%
Accommodation and Food Service 7.6% Education Services 8.4%
Administration and Support,Waste 7.4% Accommodation and Food Service 8.4%
Management
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEND Origin-Destination Employment Statistics
(Beginning of Quarter Employment,2nd Quarter of 2002-2010).
Ethnicity also influences participation rates in outdoor recreation. Participation in outdoor
activities is significantly higher among Caucasians than any other ethnicity. Of those that
identify with one race in Spokane Valley, over 90 percent identified themselves as White; 1
percent as Black or African American; 1 percent as American Indian and Alaska Native; and
almost 2 percent as Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. Five percent
identified themselves as Hispanic; people of Hispanic origin may be of any race. Table 2-4
compares different ethnicities as a percentage of population.
Table 2-4:Ethnic Grou b Percenta:+e of Po+ulation
White Black or American Asian Hispanic
African Indian and
American Alaska Native
Bellingham 84.9 1.3 1.3 5.1 7
Everett 74.6 4.1 1.4 7.8 14.2
P ., I 15
Federal Way 57.5 9.7 0.9 14.2 16.2
Kennewick 78.5 1.7 0.8 2.4 24.2
Renton 54.6 10.6 0.7 21.2 13.1
Spokane 90.9 1.1 1.2 1.7 4.6
Valley
Yakima 67.1 1.7 2 1.5 41.3
Source: U.S. Census Bureau,2010 Census(totals may not equal 100 due to rounding)
2.4 Land Use
Land use plays an important role in the location, distribution, and availability of park and
recreational facilities; for example, residential areas need nearby parks to serve the people
who live in each neighborhood. Generally, the denser the neighborhood the more park land
is needed. Industrial areas may need open space or natural area buffers and parks for
employee use during the day but less formal park space. Commercial areas are more likely
to require plazas and small areas for passive recreation.
Based on geographic information supplied by the City,the total land area, excluding right-
of-way, of the City of Spokane Valley is 20,086 acres.The majority of Spokane Valley is
zoned for residential use (62.34 percent) followed by industrial use (20.25 percent) and
finally mixed-use/commercial (15.27 percent). Since most of the developed land in the City
is classified residential,the proximity and location of parks and support facilities within
neighborhoods are important criteria to consider for park planning.
The challenge in developing a comprehensive park system in Spokane Valley is the lack of
totally vacant land. There are many partially developed sites (e.g., a house on a 1-5 acre
lot), but few vacant parcels of eight acres or more in size. This land use pattern makes it
difficult to acquire larger sized parcels for park use.
2.5 Housing
In 2010, Spokane Valley had a total of 38,915 housing units, 4.8 percent of which were
vacant. Of the total housing units, 67 percent were single-unit structures, 25 percent were
in multi-unit structures, and 8 percent were mobile homes. Twenty-nine percent of the
housing units were built since 1990. Park service areas have a direct correlation to density;
the more dense the development, the smaller the service area because the number of
people potentially being served by a park increases.The City of Spokane Valley's parks will
generally have a larger service area because the majority of residential development is
lower density.
Of the 37,045 occupied housing units, nearly 63 percent are owner occupied.The average
household size for owner-occupied unit is 2.38 and the average size of a renter occupied
unit is 2.5. Just over 82 percent of occupied housing units were moved into since 1990 and
the median price of a home is $180,400.
An important consideration for recreation participation is the percentage of household
income used to pay monthly costs: mortgage, real estate taxes, insurances, utilities, and
homeowner association fees. Knowing the percentage of monthly costs to income provides
Page 116
an indicator of housing affordability. In general, the more affordable a home,the more
income can be used for recreation. Government agencies generally define excessive costs as
those that exceed 30 percent of household income. Table 2-5 provides a summary of
ownership and renter costs as a percentage of household income:
Table 2-5:Housin! Affordabilit
Selected Monthly Owner Cost as Gross Rent as a Percentage of
Percentage of Household Income Household Income
Estimate Percent Estimate Percent
Less than 20.0 4,319 27.60 2,230 16.7
percent
20.0 to 24.9 percent 2,265 14.50 2,365 17.60
25.0 to 29.9 percent 3,634 23.20 1,129 8.40
30.0 to 34.9 percent 1,771 11.30 1,018 7.60
35.0 percent or more 3,642 23.30 6,639 49.80
Total 15,631 13,444
Source: U.S. Census Bureau,2011 American Community Survey
2.6 Population Growth
The Washington State Office of Financial Management(OFM) forecasts population growth for all
cities and counties in the state. OFM's April 1, 2013 estimate for the City of Spokane Valley
is 91,490.According to the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan,the projected 2033
population for Spokane Valley is 105,668. On June 9, 2009, the Board of County
Commissioners approved via Resolution 09-0531 a population allocation of 18,746 for
Spokane Valley planning purposes. The City's Land Capacity Analysis estimated a
population capacity of 16,493 leaving 2,253 people to be accommodated outside the City.
Table 2-6 below shows the population estimate, population change and percent change
since the City's incorporation.
Table 2-6:Po ulation since S okane Valle 's Incorxoration
Year Estimate Population Change Percent Change
2003 82,985 x x
2004 83,436 451 0.54%
2005 84,465 1,029 1.23%
2006 86,601 2,136 2.53%
2007 87,894 1,293 1.49%
2008 88,513 619 0.70%
2009 88,969 456 0.52%
2010 89,755 786 0.88%
2011 90,110 355 0.40%
2012 90,550 440 0.49%
2013 91,490 940 1.04%
Sources:Intercensal Estimates of April 1 Population and Housing, Washington State OFM
Page X17
Chapter 3.0: Existing Parks and Facilities
Understanding the parks and recreation facilities inventory at the planning period's outset
is critical. The City of Spokane Valley is one of the primary providers of park and
recreational facilities in the city. Other public and private providers also contribute parks
and open space in the area. Three school districts (West Valley, Central Valley, and East
Valley) provide a variety of athletic facilities that contribute to the diversity of facilities
available in the City.
This chapter summarizes the proposed park classification system, along with key findings
regarding existing parks, open space, and recreation facilities.A complete inventory of park
land and recreation facilities in the Spokane Valley Planning Area was completed for this
process and is available from the Park and Recreation Department.
3.1 Park Land Definitions
In order to address specific planning needs for park, open space, and recreational areas,
park classifications have been proposed. Each park class provides a distinct type of
recreational opportunity. The ideal community park system is made up of several different
types or classifications of parks. The classification system proposed for Spokane Valley is as
follows:
• Neighborhood Parks: Neighborhood parks are designed primarily for non-
supervised, non-organized recreation activities. They are generally small in size
(about 3-7 acres) and serve people living within approximately one-half mile of the
park. Since these parks are located within walking and bicycling distance of most
users,the activities they offer serve the entire neighborhood, including children.
Typical facilities found in a neighborhood park include: playgrounds, picnic areas,
trails, open grass areas for passive use, outdoor basketball courts, restrooms, picnic
shelters, and multi-use open grass areas for practice field sports.
• Community Parks: A community park is planned primarily to provide active and
structured recreation opportunities for young people and adults. Community park
facilities are designed for organized activities and sports, although individual and
family activities are also encouraged. Community parks can also provide indoor
facilities to meet a wider range of recreation interests. Community parks serve a
much larger area and offer more facilities.As a result, they require more support
facilities, such as parking, restrooms, and covered play areas. Community parks
usually have sport fields or similar facilities as the central focus of the park, and
range in size from about 10 to 30 acres. Their service area has roughly a 1-2 mile
radius.
• Large Urban Parks: Large urban parks are parks designed to serve the entire
community. Generally, they provide a wide variety of specialized facilities, such as
P I- � zy
sports fields, indoor recreation areas, and large picnic areas. Due to their size and
facilities offered, they require more in terms of support facilities, such as parking,
restrooms, and play areas. Large urban parks usually exceed 40 acres in size and
should be designed to accommodate large numbers of people.
• Regional Parks: Regional parks are large recreation areas designed to serve an
entire region beyond the city limits. Often they are acquired to provide a specific
and sometimes unique recreation opportunity.
• Special Use Areas: Special use areas are sites often occupied by a specialized
recreation facility and can be a component of a park. Some uses that fall into this
category include waterfront parks, boat ramps,botanical gardens, community
gardens, single purpose sites used for a particular field sport, or sites occupied by
recreation buildings.
• Linear Parks: Linear parks are developed landscaped areas and other lands that
follow linear corridors such as rivers, creeks, abandoned railroad rights-of-way,
canals, power lines, and other elongated features. This type of park usually contains
trails, landscaped areas, viewpoints, and seating areas.
• Natural Open Space: Natural open space is defined as undeveloped land primarily
left in its natural form with recreation uses as a secondary objective. It is usually
owned or managed by a governmental agency and may or may not have public
access. This type of land may include wetlands, steep hillsides, or other similar
spaces. In some cases, environmentally sensitive areas are considered open space
and can include wildlife habitats, stream and creek corridors, or unique and/or
endangered plant species.
• Undeveloped Land: This land is undeveloped and has not yet been designated for a
specific park use.
3.2 Park Land Inventory
The City of Spokane Valley is joined by the State of Washington and Spokane County in
providing park land in the planning area. This section summarizes the park, open space,
and recreation areas provided by these entities. The park plan recognizes that there are
several park and open space sites located just outside the Urban Growth Area, such as the
Dishman Hills Natural Areas, and Iller Creek and Saltese Uplands Conservation Areas,
which provide nearby recreational opportunities for area residents.
In the fall of 2012, an assessment of the City's park facilities was completed based on a tour
of the individual park and conversations with Park staff. Table 3-2, below, provides an at a
glance summary of Spokane Valley's park inventory. The table identifies the parks by type
and lists the facilities available at each park. This section provides an overview of the
existing inventory and summary of conditions in Spokane Valley Parks.
Pa g 119
3.2.1 Key Findings
• The parks system managed by Spokane Valley consists of active and passive
recreational areas. There are six neighborhood parks,two community parks, one
large urban park,three special use areas,two trails/linear parks, one natural area,
and two undeveloped sites in the parks system (see Table 3-1). In total,there are
approximately 180.3 acres of park land.
• The City owns and operates three seasonal outdoor pools: Terrace View Pool, Park
Road Pool, and Valley Mission Pool. The City contracts with the Valley YMCA to
operate and maintain the pools. The pools were renovated in 2008-2009.
• There are a number of County and State parks sites that either border the City or are
nearby. These nearby recreation resources are noted, and should be recognized as
contributing to the open space character of the community.
• In terms of overall design and site utilization, most of the parks provide a balance
between active use areas and general open space. However, several of the sites are
undeveloped and one (Castle Park) is only minimally developed.
• Accessibility and the lack of ADA access needs to be addressed where appropriate
for parks. The City should continue its efforts to provide sidewalks to park amenities
from parking areas, and providing accessible routes, ramps, or transfer stations
to/in playgrounds.
• Some play equipment and park furniture is reaching an age requiring specific
maintenance, replacement of wood components or the replacement of the structure.
Use of wood components on play structures, benches and safety surfacing
containment borders requires an annual commitment for review, maintenance and
replacement when necessary.
Table 3-1:Count and Acres of Park Facilities b Park T .e
Park Type Count Acres Current Ratio
(Acres per 1,000 People)
Community Park 2 40.1 0.44
Large Urban Park 1 42.0 0.44
Natural Area 1 31.1 0.34
Neighborhood Park 6 35.9 0.40
Special Use Area 3 15.6 0.19
Undeveloped Park 2 15.6 0.17
Grand Total 15 180.3* 1.99
*Total does not include Appleway Trail or Centennial Trail
Figure 3-A indicates the current parks and recreational facilities inventory. Table 3-2:
Summary of Park Facility Inventory lists these locations and the types of facilities and
services offered at each.
Page X20
Figure 3-A:Park Inventory Map
Spokane Valley Parks
City Limits _1 Other Parks
Li.■Other Cities DNR
OCity of Spokane Valley
. =Spokane Valley Parks
1
Other Government Property
School Property
Miles
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Source data as provided by the City of Spokane Valley,subject to revision
1in = 1miles
N
A
Page 121
Table 3-2:Summary of Park Facility
Inventory
Nei•hborhood Park
73
rte'",
m
t
C
=
'CS
:
^'
7.d
o
cn
C0
a) N
y
w
2
E:
P.
t a"
'E cu
E C:,
. cn
N
c0
FL:
O
cu
O
H
O '
cu
Fo
�-.
a�i
O
c U
q
N
7
U
iC
at
N
sue,
-O
7
O
m
p.
N
i,"
.5,
Pa
a�
a�
-
cu
s.
-
u
E
N
o
O
y
P4
bA
-
t
o.
sue,
9,
4
c
m.
co
s,
cC
s,
Z
0
N
\ c
-O
o
o,
N
•p
'5
W
o
-°o
=
O
z
t~
Q
'v
W
c
b
a)
W
s,
-
O
82.8 acres Park
....
Y
.
1
.
1
Y
1
14
......
Browns Park
8.2 acres
.
1
1 .
y .
4
1
1
Y
1
81
......
Castle Park
2.7 acres
....
Y
.....■.
Y
......
Edgecliff Park
4.7 accres
4.7
.
1
1 .
Y
2 .
1
1
1
Y
1
40
......
Greenacres Park
8.3 acres
2
S
Y
...
Y
2
Y
1
29
Y
..... One
Large and one small
shelter
Terrace View Park
9.2 acres
1
1
P
Y
1
1
1
Y
1
118
......
Pool,bathhouse,
horseshoe sit
Communi Parks
---_------_-_--
----
Sullivan Park
16.1 acres
....
Y
....
3
Y
1
151 .
Y
.
Y
Gazebo,radio control car
area
Valley Mission Park 8z Pool
24 acres
1
1
P
Y
2
1
1
1
Y
2
341
.....
y
Pool,restroom,
e.uestrian arena
Lar•e Urban Parks
Mirabeau Point Park
(42.0 acres)
• Discovery Playground
• Mirabeau Meadows
• Mirabeau S•rin•s
S
Y
Y
4
Y
1
93
Y
Y
Y
2
Waterfall with pond,
dock,and viewing
platform
Stage
Trailhead
S 1 ecial Use Facilities
Place
13.6 acres
13.6
..........■
Y
410
...
1
..
54,000 sq.ft.multi use
buildin•
Park Road Pool
2.0 acres
...
P
......■
Y
101
......
Pool,bathhouse
Western Sullivan Parke Hall
..........■
Y
.......
Page 122
Baseball Fields
Softball Fields
Soccer Field
0
o cn
o -o
taX 31.
os
E O,
Open Play Areas
Tennis Courts
Playground Areas
Shelter Buildings
Picnic Areas
Restrooms
Parking Areas
Indoor Facilities
Art Installation
Equestrian Facility
Trails and Linear Parks
Centennial Trail
Appleway Trail(4.25 linear
miles)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Natural Open Space Areas
Myrtle Point Park
(31.1 acres)
Undeveloped Lands
Valley Mission Park South
(7.2 acres)
Balfour Park Extension
(8.4 acres)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Centennial Trail Access,
Parking
Page 123
Chapter 4.0: Existing Operations
This chapter reviews the existing operations and management of the Spokane Valley Parks
and Recreation Department. The review includes an analysis of the Department's
organizational structure, staffing levels, and operations, including the operating budget,
revenue and expenditures, and maintenance costs. The chapter also discusses current
program participation.
Key Findings
The following key findings emerged from the analysis of parks and recreation operations
and management.
• The Parks and Recreation Department is composed of six divisions: Administration,
Park Maintenance, Recreation,Aquatics, Senior Center, and CenterPlace.
• As of 2013, the City budgeted for nine full-time positions: two in Administration,
one in Recreation, none in Aquatics (contracts with the private sector for aquatics),
none in Park Maintenance (contracts with private sector for maintenance), one in
Senior Center, and five in CenterPlace.
• In 2013, parks and recreation services accounted for 4% of the City's General Fund.
• The ratio of cost to revenue for parks and recreation services in Spokane Valley is
22%.
• Spokane Valley annually spends approximately$5,905 per acre of developed park
land for maintenance.
Little in the way of Spokane Valley's parks operations has changed since the 2006 plan.
The department's organizational structure remains the same, as does its approach to
operating recreation programs and system maintenance.
4.1 Organizational Structure
The organizational structure of the Parks and Recreation Department, along with its
position within the government of the City of Spokane Valley, affects the management and
provision of parks and recreation services.
4.1.1 City Structure
In Spokane Valley,there are six separate departments that provide municipal services to
Spokane Valley residents: Executive and Legislative Support, Community Development,
Police, Public Works, Operations and Administration, and Parks and Recreation. Each of
these departments reports to the City Manager who in turn transmits information to the
Mayor and City Council and ultimately the citizens of the community. Currently, several
City services are contracted out to private businesses or agencies. These include street
maintenance, park maintenance, and aquatic operations. Figure 4-A shows the
organizational structure of the City of Spokane Valley.
1 24
Citizens of
Spokane Valley
City Council
City Manager
1 1 1 1 1 I
Executive and Community Public Works Operations and Parks and Police
Legislative Development Administration Recreation
Figure 4-A:Simplified Organization Chart for the City of Spokane Valley
4.1.2 Parks and Recreation Department
Within the Parks and Recreation Department there are six primary areas of responsibility:
Park Administration, Park Maintenance, Recreation,Aquatics, Senior Center, and
CenterPlace. Each of these areas is managed and/or supervised by the Parks and
Recreation Director. Figure 4-B shows the organization of the Parks and Recreation
Department.
• Park Administration: The Park Administration division is responsible for
implementing the City Council's goals and objectives for providing parks and
recreation services.
• Park Maintenance: This division is primarily responsible for monitoring the general
upkeep of parks and public areas throughout the City, consistent with the goals and
objectives set forth by the City Council. Currently, park maintenance services are
contracted with a private operator.
• Recreation: The Recreation Division is responsible for developing, coordinating and
facilitating the delivery of recreation services and programs within the City.
Currently, programs include a summer day camp, summer park program,youth
programming, preschool programming, adult dance classes, and limited special
events.
• Aquatics: This division is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the
City's three outdoor swimming pools. The City of Spokane Valley has contracted
with a private provider to operate and maintain the three pools since 2005.
. g I 25
• Senior Center: The Senior Center Division is responsible for coordinating services at
the Spokane Valley Senior Center. The Senior Center programs and services were
moved from its original building to CenterPlace.
• CenterPlace: This division is responsible for the operation and management of
CenterPlace Regional Event Center.
Parks&Recreation
Director
Administative
Assistant
I I I I
Park Maintenance 'ecreation Divisio Aquatics Division Senior Center CenterPlace
(Contract) Division Division
Recreation Senior Center i Customer Relations/ Administrative
Coordinator Specialist 1 acilities Coordinato Assistant
Office Assistant I - Facilities Worker
Facilities Worker
Figure 4-B:Organization Chart for the Parks and Recreation Department
4.2 Staffing Levels
In order to meet the demand for parks and recreation services,the City has budgeted for a
staff of nine full-time positions. Table 4-1 below shows the number of employees (full-time
equivalents) since the City's incorporation in 2003.
Table 4-1:Existing and Historic Park and Recreation Staffing Levels
Fiscal Year Total City(FTE) Parks and Recreation Percentage of Park and
Department(FTE) Recreation FTE to Total
2003 44.90 4.0 8.9%
2004 46.95 5.0 10.6%
2005 60.00 7.0 11.7%
2006 61.80 7.0 11.3%
2007 71.15 9.0 12.6%
2008 89.15 9.0 10.0%
2009 93.75 9.0 9.6%
2010 93.75 9.0 9.6%
2011 86.25 9.0 10.4%
2012 87.25 9.0 10.3%
2013 85.25 9.0 10.6%
,,, , 1 26
The table above illustrates a low ratio of employees for parks and recreation services. This
is primarily attributed to the lack of a developed recreation program and the fact that the
City contracts out park maintenance and aquatics operations.
Based on the 2013 adopted budget, the ratio of park and recreation FTEs to population is
one employee per 10,061 population. This is down slightly from 2007 where there was one
parks and recreation employee per 7,990 population.
In communities with an extensive park system and an established recreation program, it is
common to see a ratio of one parks and recreation employee to population in the 5,000-
7,000 range. However, the City of Spokane Valley continues its conservative approach to
adding staff while maintaining levels of service. Spokane Valley continues to have the
lowest employee count of any Washington city with a population of more than 50,000.
4.3 Revenues and Expenditures
Table 4-2 shows the City's General Fund budget and the budget for parks and recreation
services. Generally, the parks and recreation budget has kept pace with the City budget as a
percentage of General Fund expenditures. It is expected that the parks and recreation
budget will continue to keep pace with General Fund expenditures.
Table 4-2:Bud:et Allocation 2003-2013
Year City General Fund Parks and Recreation Percentage
Expenditures Budget of total (1)
2003 13,892,900 921,770 6.6
2004 25,804,125 1,601,780 6.2
2005 27,187,186 1,932,186 7.1
2006 29,885,641 1,862,966 6.2
2007 31,549,504 2,086,186 6.6
2008 32,705,058 2,644,420 8.1
2009 49,288,955 2,812,040 5.7
2010 54,540,850 2,926,033 5.4
2011 36,925,086 2,813,412 7.6
2012 35,196,500 2,915,206 8.3
2013 42,967,741 2,655,343 6.2
(1) Percentage Based on Department Budget
4.3.1 Departmental Expenditures
Table 4-3 illustrates Departmental expenditures for each Division. In 2012 and 2013,
CenterPlace received close to a third of the Parks and Recreation budget. The expenditures
for Park Maintenance in 2012 reflect the construction of Greenacres Park. The various
budget allocations for the divisions appear to receive appropriate amount relative to
overall allocation of resources.
.. 1 27
Table 4-3:Parks and Recreation Division Budset Breakdown
Division 2012 Percent 2013 Percent
Expenditures of Total Expenditures of Total
Park 258,923 9% 270,717 10%
Administration
Park Maintenance 757,313 26% 789,000 29%
Recreation 206,895 7% 224,999 8%
Aquatics 439,296 15% 485,600 18%
Senior Center 86,197 3% 88,143 3%
CenterPlace 1,110,937 38% 796,884 32%
Total 2,859,561 2,655,343
4.3.2 Department Revenues
Aside from local taxes (property tax, retails sales and use tax, excise tax), some parks and
recreation services can generate a considerable amount of revenue through fees and
charges associated with recreation programs and facility rentals.
In 2013,the City expects to generate $571,500 through recreation program fees,which
includes $215,000 through facility rentals, such as CenterPlace and $355,000 through
program fees, such as swimming pool fees.When compared to the total park's budget,
revenues from parks and recreation services in Spokane Valley account for approximately
22% of the total operating budget. Revenue sources for parks include:
• Park Administration can generate revenue through grants and donations. The
collection of park impact fees is also another source of revenue.
• Park Facilities can generate revenue through reservations and facility rentals.
However, at the present time,this potential is minimal due to the lack of facilities in
the existing parks.
• Recreation Programs can generate significant revenues from class fees and services.
Currently,this revenue source is limited due to the lack of classes offered. Currently
recreation programs recover 100% of their costs through registration fees.
• Aquatic operations generate minimal revenue through admission fees and swim
lessons. Revenues from this operation could be increased by adding facilities,
activities, and increased hours that generate more usage.
• Senior Center operations generate revenues from user fees associated with
programs and services.
• CenterPlace should continue to generate revenue through the rentals of space, lease
of space, and food services income.
One means of analyzing revenue production is to compare operating costs on a per capita
basis. The gross cost per capita is the total cost of the services divided by the number of
persons in the service area. However,this is not necessarily the true cost to the taxpayer
because it does not reflect the net cost after revenue is deducted. Table 4-4 shows the cost
per capita for the parks and recreation system.
Page X28
Table 4-4:Cost 'er Ca'ita and Percent of Revenue General-
Year Population Operating Gross Cost/ Net Cost/ Revenue Rate
Budget Capita Capita
2006 86,601 1,862,966 21.51 17.52 18.5%
2007 87,894 2,086,186 23.74 19.10 19.5%
2008 88,513 2,644,420 29.88 24.15 19.2%
2009 88,969 2,812,040 31.61 25.85 18.2%
2010 89,755 2,926,033 32.60 25.36 22.2%
2011 90,110 2,813,412 31.22 25.06 19.7%
2012 90,550 2,915,206 32.19 25.90 19.6%
2013 91,490 2,655,343 29.02 22.77 21.5%
4.4 Maintenance Operations
Spokane Valley contracts out the maintenance of its park facilities. In 2013, Spokane Valley
spent approximately$789,000 for the park maintenance,which equates to approximately
$5,905 per acre of developed park land.
4.5 Recreation Participation
The City of Spokane Valley offers a number of recreation programs including: summer day
camp; preschool, school age, and adult programs; and special events like Haunted Pool and
Breakfast with Santa. In 2012,there were approximately 42,000 participants in the
programs offered. The majority of participants, 35,000,were recreation swim participants,
that is, people who paid for recreational swim time at one of the three pools.
There are 0.47 participants per capita for the City of Spokane Valley sponsored programs.
Typically, communities that offer a full range of programs and services have per capita
participation ranging from 2.5 to 4.0.The City of Spokane Valley's participation rate is low,
in part, based on the general policy that recreation programs offered by the City should
only fill the gap left by private organizations. For example, if little league is offered by a
private organization, then City of Spokane Valley does not provide that program.
Page X29
Chapter 5.0: Needs Assessment
This chapter discusses the need for parks, facilities and other recreation services within the
city. It contains a summary of the findings from the household survey, the public visioning
workshop, focus group meetings, an earlier city-wide telephone survey, and an organized
sports questionnaire. From this information, Table 5.1 summarizes park and facility needs.
A more detailed analysis of the survey process and results is found in Appendix A and the
quantification of park and facility needs in Discussion Paper #5 (Needs Assessment).
This plan update presents a current needs assessment based on the findings of the
community survey, discussions with stakeholders and results of public outreach.
5.1 Stakeholder Interviews
The update process started with several one-on-one interviews with a variety of
stakeholders and interest groups in the Spokane Valley. Specific stakeholder groups
included school districts,trails groups, Spokane River Forum, private recreation program
providers, City staff, and the Police Department.
The following key findings emerged from the stakeholder interviews:
• Partnership - The City of Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department
maintains an excellent relationship with schools and private sports program
providers. The department should continue these mutually beneficial relationships
and work towards developing joint-use agreements with the schools.
• Schools - School property,both gymnasium and athletic fields, provide
opportunities for both formal (sports programs such as baseball) and informal
(enjoyment by neighbors). However, these sites are not always available for the
general public.
• Recreation Programs - The city's recreation program has limited offerings, due to
a lack of facilities and resources, but fills a niche. Opportunities likely exist for
expanded offerings for young children (3rd_ 6th grade) and introduction programs
(e.g. introduction to guitar, etc.).
• Spokane River - The Spokane River is an asset to the community and while there
are a number of access locations, additional access should be considered to realize
the full potential. Consideration for increased connectivity between parks via the
river and water trail is important.
• Neighborhood Parks - Providing park access to neighborhood kids on the block
should be the Parks Department's "highest calling". Ensuring that all areas of the
community have park land accessible should be an important priority.
• Economic Development -Access to parks or trails provides development and
investment incentives, and most people like to live and/or work near parks. The City
Page X30
should consider taking advantage of sports related tourism by providing
tournament quality facilities such as artificial turf and lighting. The city should also
consider creating a set of park sign standards to help "brand" the Parks and
Recreation Department.
• Facility Types - Generally the facility types available are adequate,yet some
facilities such as the horse arena at Valley Mission Park and the Western Dance Hall
may be under used and some modern facilities types like skate parks and pet parks
are unavailable. The city should consider new modern facility types and perhaps
repurposing older facility types.
• Acquisition-As the city becomes more urban, there will be an increased need for
park land especially to underserved areas. The amount of park land available is
inadequate to meet present and future needs especially as it relates to open space
and athletic fields.
5.2 Household Recreation Survey
A telephonic survey to determine the perceptions and recreation interests among
households within Spokane Valley was conducted during February 2013.Additionally,
those households that self-identified as having children between the ages of 10 and 18
years old were asked if those children would participate in an online survey. The results of
the online survey are not intended to be scientifically valid but instead to provide a sense of
the desires and perceptions of Spokane Valley's youth.
The survey had a sample of 360 households and had a margin error of+/- 5.15 percent,
which means, results have a ninety-five percent (95%) chance of coming within +/- 5.15
percentage points of results that would have been obtained if all households within
Spokane Valley city limits had
been interviewed.
To help identify th5K4?spc
needs of different rea the
City, the survey e. _
Figure 5-A shows how the four - North/northeast Zone
study areas were distributed '"e`Z�e 4 --
'�' -
East/southeast Zane. i1
across the City. The study
,_ 2
areas were created by South Cent?!Zone.
_ - }
aggregating Census blocks into `•
larger areas; the aggregation i W10
was necessary in order to
achieve statistical validity at
the given sample size.
Figure 5-A:Survey Study Area
Table 5-1 displays the
percentage of respondents
that visit certain parks by the study area in which they reside. In other words, of the 11
P g ,; X31
percent of all respondents that visit Park Road Pool (in the West Study Area), 4 percent
reside in the South Central Zone. Cells where the number is blue and bold signify a
percentage that was higher than average, at the 95% confidence level. Cells where the
number is red and italicized indicate a percentage that was lower than average, at the 95%
confidence level.
Table 5-1:Park Visits by Study Area
Stud Area of Partici•ants' Residence
Parks Study Park Total West South North/North- East/South-
Area /o Zone Central east Zone east Zone
Zone
West Park Road 11% 4% 7% 6%
Edgecliff 5% 6% 2% 2%
Terrace View 28% 8% 41% 17%
South Central Castle Park 1% - 3% - -
Browns Park 6% 2% 19°A 1% 2%
Mirabeau 48% 41% 41% 50%
Valley Mission 39% 43% 32% 23%
North/ CenterPlace 29% 20% 12% 34%
Northeast Sullivan 5% 4% 2% 6% 8%
Balfour 4% 4% 2% 7% 2%
Myrtle Point 1% 2% - 1% 1%
East/Southeast Greenacres 2% 1% 2% 1% 4%
Don't know 3% 3% 7% - -
Residents of the east/southeast zone were more likely to visit parks outside their own
study area than residents of the other study areas. It should be noted that the parks they
visited: Terrace View, Mirabeau, and CenterPlace are situated more closely than the other
parks in the City. However, the number may also reflect the relative newness of Greenacres
Park which opened in June of 2012.
The survey with its questions and responses can be found in Appendix A. In addition to the
above, the key findings of the survey include:
• Half of respondents reported that they or members of their household had visited
Mirabeau Point Park.
• Parks managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department received
the highest mean satisfaction score in a series that asked respondents to rate the
parks, pools, CenterPlace, and recreation programs. Half of respondents rated it at
the top of the scale.
• Recreation programs received the lowest mean satisfaction score,though two in five
(40%) respondents were unable or unwilling to rate them.
• Two in three respondents mentioned (unaided) that the areas managed by the
Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department were clean/well maintained.
1 32
• When asked to rate a list of eleven possible new or current amenities that could be
increased, urban trails received the highest mean score. Sand volleyball courts
received the lowest mean score.
• Respondents were read a list of three possible objectives for the Spokane Valley
Parks and Recreation Department and asked to rate their importance. Less than
three tenths of a point separated the highest ranked (increase recreation programs)
from the lowest (purchase property for future parks).All fell just above the
midpoint of the scale.
5.3 Public Workshop
As part of the update process, the City conducted a public workshop at CenterPlace. The
purpose of the workshop was to gauge the applicability and value of existing and proposed
goals and policies for the parks plan, to identify proposed locations for four neighborhood
parks and one community park, identify desired facility types, identify the locations of
special "new" facility types (dog park, splash pads, and skate parks), and to prioritize
proposed improvement and park development.
In the first step of the workshop, participants were asked to rate on a scale of 1 through 5
(1 being least important and 5 being most important) the goals and policies from the 2006
Park and Recreation Plan and the goals and policies from the Park and Recreation chapter
of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. The exercise generally found support for the goals and
policies presented. The key findings of the first step include:
• Parks and recreation facilities should be equitably distributed across the city and
provide diverse recreation opportunities.
• Park design should be flexible and be able to adapt to foreseeable changes in
recreating needs and/or desires.
• Participants did not place an emphasis on the policy to not duplicate services or not
compete with private organizations in the delivery of parks and recreation services.
• Participants identified the acquisition of park land with unique natural features or
natural resources as important.
The second step was to identify the location of four neighborhood parks and one
community park. The number of parks was determined using adopted levels of service and
population growth projection; section 5.4 provides a detailed description of the needs
analysis. Participants were provided a map and a guidebook. The guidebook described the
park types: typical size, facilities available, service area, and other assumptions. The
guidebook also included a list of park facilities: swimming pool, picnic shelter, and athletic
fields. Participants were asked to focus on the service areas instead of a specific location.
Neighborhood parks were given a service area of a half-mile radius and community parks
were given a service area of a two-mile radius.
g I33
Figure 5-B shows the results of the second step, identifying where parks were desired by
participants. The key findings of this step include:
• Provide new neighborhood parks in the north, southeast, and east areas of the City.
• Provide a new community park in the south portion of the City.
• Provide specialty park types (pet park, skate park) in existing facilities. Valley
Mission Park and/or Sullivan Park may have vacant or underused space for these
facilities.
• Consider using natural open space for a disc golf course.
g I34
-00
Spokane Valley Park Priorities
® .•• •
SSA net
A
0 0.5 1 1.5
%cure ilea SpIcw•A.,Mb
25
Figure 5-B:Results from Public Workshop 1
Page 135
5.4 Summary of Park Land Needs
This section provides the Needs Assessment for the City of Spokane Valley. It provides the
information necessary to make informed decisions on how many acres of parks and
numbers of facilities are needed to meet current and future needs. These needs are based
on the vision set forth by the community and the demand for recreation opportunities
measured in various public involvement venues. However, not all needs can be or should
be provided by the City. Some community needs can be met by other agencies, schools, the
County, private organizations and public service organizations such as the YMCA. The
community needs identified in this chapter were used to develop recommendations for the
park system presented in Chapter 6.
5.4.1 Methodology
Developing a statement of needs for parks and open space areas depends on localized
values, availability of land, financial resources, and desired service levels. To determine
specific park land needs for the Spokane Valley Planning Area, several analytical methods
were used. These include:
• Recreation demand (measured through public involvement activities)
• National trends and standards
• Land availability
• Geographical deficiencies for parks and open space areas
• Adopted level of service
In synthesizing this information, the adopted level of service standard is the main driver for
determining how much park land the City will need in the future, and the other
components help determine what types of park facilities are desired, available, and needed.
Using the adopted level of service in the comprehensive plan,the analysis determines the
amount of park land needed in 2033. The year 2033 was chosen because it represents the
most recently adopted population projection available at the time this plan was produced.
The analysis then establishes a demand need for park types; the demand need is expressed
as a percentage of the overall need for park land. The percentage of park land devoted to a
park type was determined based on local conditions, national trends, and land availability.
5.4.2 Adopted Level of Service Standards
The City's Comprehensive Plan Policy CFP-2.1 adopts 1.92 acres per 1,000 residents as the
minimum level of service for Parks. In order to maintain consistency with the adopted
comprehensive plan, this update to the Parks plan does not change the adopted level of
service standard.
The following service areas were used to help calculate park needs:
• Neighborhood Parks - Service area of 1/z-mile radius
• Community Parks - Service area of two-mile radius
t , _ I 36
• Special Use Area- No service area recommended as people will generally travel as
far as needed to use the facilities.
• Large Urban Park-Within 30 minutes by personal vehicle for cities of 25,000 to
250,000
• Natural Open Space - No service area recommended.
Figure 5-C shows the service areas for the existing Neighborhood and Community Parks as
identified above. For those park lands that do not have a recommended service area:
Special Use, Large Urban Park, and Natural Open Space only the names and location are
provided.
Page X37
1=
_.
,, ji.m.60.0111
�® ail ■
11, 111 ■'.. ■ `�i■■■off■ imp
k 'MI `. 1111 ■ ,
rim
= 1I
r�pow
Val
■
I� r
U
Spokane Valley Parks
clowmus
rea "C
--
-scrow nowm
soeamw®o0.5 tie an o'swYZre murv,
W
15
Miles
5
Figure 5-C:Park Service Areas for Spokane Valley Parks
Page 138
5.4.3 Summary of Park Land Needs
Table 5-2 shows that the City of Spokane Valley will need an additional 41.58 acres of park
land by 2033 to accommodate projected population at the currently adopted level of
service. The following terms are used in the analysis:
• Adopted LOS is the level of service standard adopted by the City of Spokane Valley
for park land. It is expressed as a ratio of acres per 1,000 people.
• 2033 Project Population is the adopted population projection for Spokane Valley
found in section 2.4 of the Comprehensive Plan.
• Total Need (year 2033) is the number of acres of park land that will be needed to
serve the City's residents in 2033. It is determined by multiplying the adopted LOS
by the quotient of the projected population divided by 1,000.
• Existing Park Land is the total designated park land with the City of Spokane Valley
and includes undeveloped park land but does not include park land or open spaces
owned by other agencies or land devoted to special facilities.
• Net Need (year 2033) is the amount of park acres that will be needed at build-out
after subtracting the existing park land.
Table 5-2:Future Park Land Demand at Adopted Level of Service
Adopted LOS 2033 Projected Total Need Existing Park Land Net Need
(ac/1,000 Population (2033) (2033)
residents)
1.92 105,668 202.88 164.70 38.18
While Table 5-2 shows an overall park land need of 38.18 acres, it does not help identify
the type of park land needed. Table 5-3 shows how the needed acreage would be allocated
to each park type.
Table 5-3:Proposed Acres Needed by Park Type
Park Land Need Park Land at
Park Type Existing Acres Existing Ratio at Existing Proposed Ratio Proposed Ratio
Ratios in 2033 in 2033
Community 40.1 25% 9.54 30% 11.45
Park
Large Urban 42.0 24% 9.16 10% 3.81
Park
Neighborhood 35.9 22% 8.39 40% 15.27
Park
Special Use 15.6 10% 3.81 5% 1.91
Area
Natural Open 31.1 19% 7.25 15% 5.73
Space
Total 164.7 100% 38.15 100% 38.17
Page X39
The analysis shows a need for additional park land in all categories, particularly for
neighborhood and community parks. However, while the strict mathematical calculation
captures the minimum park land needed at the adopted level of service,the City should
consider the following in its acquisition considerations.
• The mathematical calculation does not account for barriers to access,that is,how
residents access the park system. In other words,barriers like major arterials or
the river do not play a role in the calculation but do affect how people get to the
park and often act as a barrier to access.
• The mathematical calculation only accounts for the need across the 20-year
planning horizon.While this is suitable for planning purposes, it does not account
for how available land will be in the future as more people move to Spokane Valley.
This means, as more people move to the area, the harder it becomes to compile
property of sufficient size to create viable park space.
In conclusion,while the mathematical calculation provides the minimum amount of
additional park land needed to serve future residents, it may be necessary to acquire more
park land to provide better accessibility and take advantage of land acquisition
opportunities.
Figure 5-D illustrates the priority locations for parks as identified by the public using the
forecast need. Meeting park needs in some of these areas may be difficult because of the
lack of available land. Chapter Six addresses this issue and suggests ways those needs
might be met.
Page X40
arialL
adgimadllrdinPVA
or onomm
mrierptiwwnordmramiu
mum aml grip
Spokane Valley Park Priorities
nma
1.1 , .mo
4
0,5
1.5 2
Figure 5-D:Park Priority Areas as Indicated from Workshop 2
Page 141
5.5 Summary of Recreation Facility Needs
Similar to the discussion of park land needs, community needs for recreation facilities such
as sport fields, trails, etc., are described in terms of an existing ratio and suggested demand
standard based on an adopted level of service.
5.5.1 Methodology
The need for sport fields, pools, and trails was calculated using a similar analytical
approach used to calculate park land needs, that is,the number of facilities per a given set
of people.While this update used the ratios adopted in the 2006 Park Plan, it recognizes
that Spokane Valley is not an isolated provider of field space within the region; in fact,
based on stakeholder interviews, sports teams more typically use Spokane County facilities
such as Plante's Ferry Sports Stadium or school facilities. However, it is still important to
gauge demand so that as new facilities are built, sports fields can be considered in their
design.
For most sports in Spokane Valley, teams come from both within and outside the city limits.
As a result, it is difficult to determine the exact number of players or teams generated
within the community. The assessment of need presented in this section is for Spokane
Valley only, as if the City was completely separated from other communities. In this
manner, facility needs are forecasted based on the demand created by city residents only.
Table 5-4 summarizes the existing and future needs for recreation facilities. These needs
are based on an adopted level of service standard previously described.
Table 5-4:Summary of Recreation Facility Needs
Recreation Facility Existing Total 2006 Demand Net Need Year Net Need Year
Facilities Standard (1) 2012 2033 (2)
Baseball Fields 70 (3) 1,200 5 18
Softball Fields (4) 26 1,300 44 55
Soccer Fields (5) 83 1,900 -35(7) -27(7)
Pathways and Trails (6) 10.8 0.38 24 29
(1) Demand standard adopted in the 2006 Park and Recreation Plan expressed as the number of people
served per facility
(2) Based on forecasted 2033 population of 105,668 persons
(3) Includes 12 adult and 4 youth fields,along with 54 multi-use fields.
(4)The overall need presented in this table for softball fields may not be as great as the table indicates
because it is anticipated that much of the adult softball program is played at County sites.
(5) Includes 29 fields,along with 54 multi-use fields.
(6) Includes the Centennial Trail and 2 miles of Appleway Trail from Evergreen Road to University Road
(7) Negative number indicates a surplus;in this case,there is a surplus of 27 soccer fields.
Some of these multi-use fields should be considered for upgrades, and others that are
unused may be considered to address the shortage of softball fields.
Currently the City does not have some of the recreation resources found in many
communities such as recreation centers, indoor aquatic facilities, teen centers, arts center
and a comprehensive range of recreation programs. The development of these types of
facilities and services will generate more interest and participation in recreation activities.
P a gs. 142
Chapter 6.0: Recommendations
Many of the plan update's recommendations carry forward from the 2006 plan, but there is
now an increased emphasis on the acquisition of land to accommodate anticipated future
parks and recreation demand.
This chapter provides recommendations for developing and managing a parks and
recreation program in the City of Spokane Valley. These recommendations were developed
from staff input, public input, a community survey, and a comprehensive analysis of park
land conditions and current maintenance operations.
Recommendations are organized into the following sections:
• Section 6.1 includes a summary of the planning concept that underlies the proposed
recommendations.
• Section 6.2 presents park facility strategic plan, identifying priority park areas.
• Section 6.3 presents the recommendations for parks.
• Section 6.4 provides the trails plan and recommendations for trails, pathways, and
bikeways.
• Section 6.5 offers recommendations for recreation programs and services.
• Section 6.6 summarizes recommendations for administration and management of a
parks and recreation program.
• Section 6.7 presents recommendations for park maintenance.
• Section 6.8 presents the recommendations for river access.
6.1 Park Plan Concept
Spokane Valley inherited its park system from Spokane County. That system consists of
neighborhood parks, community parks, special use areas, and larger day-use parks. The
ideal park system for Spokane Valley should be one made up of a hierarchy of various park
types, each offering certain types of recreation and/or open space opportunities.
Separately, each park type may serve a primary function, but collectively,they will meet
the needs of the entire community. By recognizing this concept, Spokane Valley can
develop an efficient, cost effective, and comprehensive park system.
The basic concept of the park system for Spokane Valley is to provide park and open space
areas within convenient walking distance of most neighborhoods. In order to achieve this
goal, a total of six additional parks - five neighborhood parks and one community park- are
needed by 2033 to meet the forecast population growth. The plan also suggests these parks
be supplemented with other recreational resources, such as special use sites like skate
parks, off-leash dog parks, and disc golf courses.Additionally, some parks may contain
sports fields to meet projected demand.
Page X43
Figure 6-A identifies the general areas where additional parks should be located.
Generalized areas for park sites were used because the majority of the community is
already developed making specific site location a challenge.Acquiring and developing park
land will continue to be a challenge in the future. The focus should be in the areas identified
in Figure 6-A. To achieve its goal of acquiring park land, the City of Spokane Valley should
consider the following:
• Formalize partnerships with the school districts to provide playground and park
amenities that can be available to residents during non-school hours. Depending
upon the level of development proposed,the concept may mean that the City would
assist in funding improvements and maintenance of the outdoor play areas.
• Work Planning and Zoning to permit reduced lot sizes and compensate with
additional park space. This concept is often used under the provisions of a Planned
Unit Development (PUD).
• Be aggressive in pursuing the acquisition of park land as the availability of
undeveloped property continues to shrink.
• Continue to seek grants, private land donations, or property swaps.
• Finally, consider implementing the existing parks and recreation facilities
concurrency determination policy provided by Spokane Valley Municipal Code
section 22.20.
The planning concept also includes a comprehensive recreation trails system utilizing the
Centennial Trail along the Spokane River as the backbone element.Additional linear parks
include the Appleway Trail along the Appleway right-of-way south of Sprague Avenue; a
loop trail that would encircle the outer portions of the community; and other minor trails
to connect to the trail system. In total, it represents about 35 miles of trail including off-
street trails, on-street trails, and trails through parks and open space areas.
6.2 Park Layout Plan
The Park Layout Plan is a graphic representation of the proposed park system for Spokane
Valley. Figure 6-A illustrates the conceptual location and routing of proposed park sites and
trails, river access sites, special use facilities, along with the location of existing facilities.
The map does not pinpoint specific locations for future parks. Some important notes about
the layout plan include:
1. Each site is coded with letters and numbers (such as NP-1). The letter represents
the park type, the number is for site identification. The letter code is as follows:
NP Neighborhood Park
CP Community Park
SU Special Use Area
T Trail
2. On the Proposed Park Layout Plan map, colored clouds indicate proposed parks and
open space areas. The final location of park sites will be determined later in the
development of City plans and will be influenced by land availability, acquisition
costs, and property ownership.
s t 144
3. The proposed river access points are derived from the draft Shoreline Master
Program for precise location and description of river access please see the SMP.
4. The proposed and existing trails information is identified in the Spokane Valley
Comprehensive Plan Parks and Recreation Map.
Page X45
e
I T ■
Milda01.111116 zift,
digermi Np_4/9himarisft
15111111116111111111E1011 a,..,.•- i
=AIM WilEallialiiir
,_, ,
' 5 r top
vi NP-3
it P- T 5
OMNI
Figure 6-A:2013 Proposed Park Layout Plan
Spokane Valley Park layout Plan
•
A
�4�
Page 146
6.3 Park and Facility Recommendations
Preliminary recommendations for park land are listed by park classification (e.g.
Neighborhood, Community, Special Use). Both existing and proposed parks are listed by
park number (e.g., NP-1). In each classification,any new facility in that classification is
discussed first followed by recommendations for existing facilities. The discussion on trails
and proposed recommendations are found in section 6.4.
6.3.1 General Park Recommendations
Improve, coordinate and standardize park signage to minimize long term maintenance and
create an identity for Spokane Valley Parks
6.3.2 Mini-Park Recommendations
Currently the City does not own any mini-parks.The acquisition of mini-parks requires
careful consideration. These small parks typically have a greater maintenance cost per
area, and their size limits their recreational value. Since their size limits facilities and
activities that can be offered, they usually contain only a small children's playground.
However, in the case of the City of Spokane Valley,where park land is needed but larger
parcels will be difficult to obtain, small mini-parks may offer an alternative. Before
embarking on this approach, the City should seriously consider the maintenance
ramifications.
At the current time, no recommendations are made for developing future mini-parks.
However, as the City develops and redevelops stormwater areas, consideration could be
given to use those areas as mini-parks.
6.3.3 Neighborhood Park Recommendations
The Neighborhood Park should be central to the City's park system. It should provide most
of the open space and passive use within neighborhoods. If possible, they should be located
within easy walking distance without crossing major barriers or arterial streets.
The optimum size for neighborhood parks should be about five acres. In Spokane Valley,
the average size is 5.5 acres. However, in cases where the optimum size is not available
because of current development or where land costs prohibit acquisition of large sites,
smaller parcels may be considered.
The Neighborhood Park Service Area identified in Figure 5-C in Chapter 5 identifies current
neighborhoods that are served by a neighborhood park. Figure 5-C illustrates the need for
additional park land. The plan recognizes the difficulty the City will have in meeting the
goal of a park in every neighborhood of the City.As a result, the Plan proposes a
compromise between need, and the City's ability to acquire land.
In some cases, the best option is for the City to partner with the school districts and
upgrade school playgrounds to offer recreational facilities that will also serve the local
neighborhood. Starting below is a discussion on neighborhood park sites.
Page X47
New Neighborhood Park Priori
This proposed park site is located to serve central Spokane Valley north of Trent Avenue.
Priority should be given to develop City owned park space to ensure access to all residents,
but because very little undeveloped and available land exists in this area, additional
recreation facilities could be added to the existing school facilities.A school/park could be
developed at East Valley Middle or East Valley High School. Park improvements to the
school playground should include an additional children's playground, splash pad, upgrade
of the play fields and addition of a small picnic shelter and picnic area.
New Neighborhood Park Priority Area 2 Site NP-2
This proposed park is also intended to serve south central Spokane Valley south of Sprague
Avenue between Pines and Sullivan. Priority should be given to develop City owned park
space to ensure access to all residents,but because there is very little undeveloped land in
this area, an alternative to acquisition may be to add recreation facilities to the existing
Adams Elementary School. Park improvements should include a children's playground,
splash pad, play fields and a small picnic shelter and picnic area.
New Neighborhood Park Priority Area 3 Site NP-3
This site is proposed south of Sprague Avenue in the vicinity of Barker Road or Shelly Lake.
In the area near Shelly Lake, a drainage corridor exists that runs from Shelly Lake up into
the hills.An open space corridor is proposed along this drainage way that protects the
wetlands areas. This site should contain all of the facilities typically found in a
neighborhood park.
Balfour Park Extension (Proposed Wite NP
The City recently (2012) purchased 8.4 acres of vacant and undeveloped property west of
Balfour Park. The property is bordered by Sprague Avenue on the south, Herald St. on the
west, Main Ave. on the north, and Balfour Park, a private business and the City Fire Station
to the east.
Jointly with the Spokane County Library District, the City of Spokane Valley plans to
prepare a Master Development Plan for the property. The property is intended to be
developed as a city park that also has a new library as a major component of the plan.
There are no recommendations for the Balfour Park Extension beyond initiating the master
development plan.
The currently developed portion of Balfour Park will be included in the master
development plan for the Balfour Park Extension, how the existing park integrates into
future facilities will be decided during the master development plan process.
The following recommendations were identified prior to the adjacent property being
acquired and may not be relevant or necessary after the master development plan process.
They are included here to help inform that process.
Recommended Improvements:
• Resurface parking lot
P ., 48
• Provide frontage improvements along Main and Balfour Streets
• Repair the damage chain-link fence between parking lot and Fire Station parking
• Add parking lot lighting
• Install concrete mow curbs under fences and around shrub beds to improve
maintenance
• Replace existing drinking fountain with an ADA accessible fountain and access walk
• Add an ADA accessible water fountain at the restroom
• Replace existing wood playground edge with concrete edge and provide an ADA
access ramp to the play area
• Replace or repair wood edging around volleyball court.Add additional sand
• Consider expanding park to the west and including additional Neighborhood Park
amenities such as:
o Water Play Area
o Basketball Court
New Neighborhood Park Priority Area 5+ Site NP-5
This site is proposed in the vicinity of 16th and Bowdish.While the area has parks to the
south significant transportation barriers exist to make those parks (Browns and Terrace
View) viable neighborhood park options. This site should contain all of the facilities
typically found in a neighborhood park.
Browns Park Site NP-6
Recommended Improvements:
• Replace shelter
• Repair and update play structure which has some maintenance issues
• Increase accessibility to the park by adding sidewalks and access points through the
fence
• Modify/ change playground edging with a ramp to increase access
• Update and repair tables, dugout benches and bleachers
• Install lighting in parking lots, at restrooms, and park shelter to increase security
• Update and repair park entry sign and replace posts damaged by mower
• Develop Browns Park as a destination sand volleyball venue by adding additional
sand volleyball courts
• Consider adding a splash pad near the playground for younger kids in the
neighborhood
• Update and repair fencing
• Replace restroom
Castle Park Site NP-7
Recommended Improvements:
• Update and repair park signs
• Make minor repairs to parking lot
• Repaint or stain wood fence and consider adding a concrete mow strip under it to
ease maintenance
g I49
• Consider adding amenities such as restroom facilities, picnic shelter, playground
areas, slack lining area, sidewalks, water fountains, splash pad and basketball courts
Edgecliff Park Site NP-8
Recommended Improvements:
• Add sidewalk access to playground, park shelter, restrooms and water fountains to meet
ADA accessibility standards
• Replace tennis courts with new concrete and fences
• Replace or repair missing,cracked or damaged items on the play structure
• Repaint or stain restroom,bleachers and tables.
• Replace picnic shelter
• Replace restroom
• Replace play equipment
Additional Comments:
• Amenities such as splash pads,designated basketball courts and volleyball courts could
increase the use of this park
Terrace View Pai7111M6i1 Site NP-9
Recommended Improvements:
• Add basketball court to eliminate a safety conflict in the parking lot
• Replace restroom
Additional Comments:
• Park would benefit from having the street improvements, such as curbs and
sidewalks, along 24th Street and Blake Street
Site NP-10
Recommended Improvements:
• Complete establishment of turf throughout the park
• Implement Phase 2 of the park development which includes such features as
basketball and tennis courts, baseball field, community garden and a skate park.
6.3.4 Community Park Recommendations
While the neighborhood park system is designed to provide convenient passive recreation
areas for local neighborhoods, additional park sites are needed for the more structured
activities such as organized sports,large group gatherings, outdoor concerts and other
facilities that draw large groups of people. The proposed community park system
recommended in the Plan is designed to provide these facilities that attract users from
throughout the community.
New Community Park Priority Are
The planning process indicated a community desire to develop a new community park in
the south central area of the City; see Figure 6-A.While there are two neighborhood parks -
Terrace View and Browns Park- in this area, opportunities to expand those facilities to
meet the requirement of a community park are very limited.Additional opportunities may
Page 150
exist to acquire park land on or near the former Painted Hills Golf Course. The golf course
has recently closed and its future as a golf course is uncertain.Additionally property near
44th and Sands should be pursued for acquisition from Central Valley School District.
Valley Mission Park Site CP-2
Recommended Improvements:
• Repave parking lot
• Replace/repair concrete tennis court and basketball court
• Replace restroom
Valley Mission Park(South)
Part of the area is used as overflow parking for Valley Mission North. It has been paved and
has perimeter fencing and has had a pedestrian light installed to safely get people across
the street. Major cracking of the pavement and damage to some fencing are the major
maintenance issues.
Recommended Improvements:
• Patch cracks in the pavement
• Consider adding community garden or small scale off-leash dog park
Horse Arena
Additional recommendations for the horse arena are found in the Special Use Facility
Recommendations section below.
6.3.5 Large Urban Park Recommendations (LUP)
Large urban parks are park areas designed to serve the entire community and differ
primarily from community in their size.
Mirabeau Point Park Site LUP-1
Discovery Playground
This is a relatively new park and it has been well used, but the general maintenance has
been good. It is all ADA accessible; the safety surfacing is all adequate and maintained.
There are currently no recommendations for this area of Mirabeau Point Park. However,
active consideration should be given to update or add new features to maintain interest as
a destination playground. Consider new shade structures to improve usability.
Mirabeau Meadows
Recommended Improvements:
• Repair exterior maintenance to the restroom building
Mirabeau Springs
Mirabeau Springs has matured into a beautiful park, complete with a waterfall, overlook
areas, connection to the park trail systems, a rock and cedar park shelter and an ADA
accessible deck over the water. Maintenance is excellent, allowing the vegetation to assume
a natural state of growth without letting it take over. There are currently no
recommendations for this area of Mirabeau Point Park.
t 151
CenterPlace Regional Event Center
Recommendations for CenterPlace are found in the Special Use Facility Recommendations
section below.
6.3.6 Regional Park Recommendations (RP)
Regional Parks are large day-use parks designed to serve the entire region. There are no
regional parks in the City, although Plante's Ferry Sports Stadium is located on the edge of
the City limits. While many residents use Plante's Ferry,the City of Spokane Valley has no
jurisdiction over its operation.
6.3.7 Special Use Facility Recommendations (SU)
Special use areas typically are single-purpose areas or sites occupied by specialized
facilities. Special use facilities can be included as a component in a park, such as a splash
pad or be an independent component like an off-leash dog park. Special use facilities like
skate parks or disc golf courses can be located in parks,but their use restricts that space
from being used by other park users. Because they can vary in character and use, specific
site requirements and facilities offered will vary.
New Special Use Facilities Multiple Sites SU-1
Throughout the update process a number of special use facilities were identified as
important to the community. In some cases these facilities already exist, such as splash
pads; in others, no such facilities are available, such as off-leash dog parks. Figure 6.2.1
shows the proposed location of these facilities as colored dots.
Splash Pads
Discovery Playground and Greenacres Park each have splash pads that are extremely
popular. Splash pads were indicated as a desired amenity in new neighborhood parks in
NP-1, NP-2, and NP-3. Consideration should be given to add splash pads to all existing park
facilities.
Off-Leash Dog Park(Pet Park)
At the present time the City of Spokane Valley does not have an off-leash dog park/pet park
available to its residents or visitors. Through the public process this facility was indicated
as desirable. Locations vary from a new park facility to using an existing park facility.
Skate Park
Some indication has been indicated as a desirable facility. During the planning process
potential locations for a skate park were conceptually identified, including NP-4, Sullivan
Park, and Valley Mission,this plan recommends the City undertake a public process to
design and determine a site for a future skate park.
Disc Golf Course
While Greenacres Park possesses a disc golf course, disc golf participants in the city
indicated a desire for a facility that can accommodate a more advanced player with longer
distances between holes. During the planning process potential locations for a disc golf
I 52
course were conceptually identified. This plan recommends the City undertake a public
process to design and determine a site for a future disc golf course.
Valley Mission Horse Arena Site SU-2
The Valley Mission Horse Area consists of a riding arena and a number of covered stalls.
Currently the stalls and the arena are only in marginal condition. In the past, the facility
was rented up to 11 times a year. However, in recent years,the rental of the facility has
sharply declined. Currently, the three primary issues with the site are: who should pay for
the repairs, how it should be managed, and/or if the facility should continue in its present
state.
The following ideas are recommended for this site:
• User fees should be increased to reflect the cost of maintenance and custodial needs.
(The A-frame building and the stalls need major improvements).
• A surcharge should be initiated with the user groups. The funds should be dedicated
to improvements to the facility.
• An assessment and public process should be undertaken to evaluate the potential to
transition the horse arena to a different facility type such as a skate park.
Sullivan Park Site SU-3
Recommended Improvements:
• Parking lot areas need to be repaved
• The location sign needs to be repaired and repainted
• The maintenance shed on the upper parking lot needs to be painted
• Replace restroom
• Remove well water source
Additional Comments:
• There are several paths cut down to the river that are steep and prone to erosion.
These paths are used by kayakers to access the river. It is quite difficult for them to
maneuver their vessels down or up these paths.
• The river bank consists mostly of large boulders and rocky ledges. The water can
move very swiftly through this area. There are very few places along the shore to
enjoy the river easily, certainly not by handicapped visitors. One path on the west
side of the park had poison ivy growing abundantly.
• Sullivan Bridge is planned for replacement in 2014-2015. As part of this
replacement project, Sullivan Park will be expanded and new amenities will be
included, such as:
o New picnic tables and shelter
o New turf
o Improved public access
Radio Controlled Car Track
Currently the Radio Control Car Club of Spokane has a temporary agreement with the City
for a site in Sullivan Park to operate their track.While the site is managed and maintained
.. 153
by the Club, its condition and appearance is less than optimal. Recommended policies for
this facility are as follows:
• A formal lease should be developed with the provisions identified below.
o Site improvements should be made based on a plan approved by the City.
o The site should continue to be open and made available to the general public.
Western Dance Hall
The Western Dance Hall is located in Sullivan Park and is leased to the Western Dance
Association. The Association maintains the facility. Under the current agreement, the City is
also entitled to use the facility. It is recommended that as long as the two above conditions
are met,the use should continue. If the Western Dance Association discontinues its use of
the facility, the City should consider alternative uses for the site.
Site SU-3
CenterPlace is the City of Spokane Valley's regional event center and houses the Senior
Center and the Parks and Recreation Office. The condition of this facility is in excellent
condition, including maintenance of the grassy areas, planting areas and parking lots. There
are no recommendations for the facility.
Park Road Pool Site SU-4
Recommended Improvements:
• Entrance needs to have overgrown plantings removed or pruned
• Repave the parking lot surface
Additional Comments
• There are no mow strips on the south side of the site between the grass and the
shrub area
• Also, there are no mow strips under the fences, creating additional maintenance
• The north side of the parking lot does not have a curb
• Consider purchasing adjacent property to the south to expand the park
West Entry Sign and Landscape Site SU-5
The gateway sign installed in 2012 is well maintained and nicely landscaped. It provides a
pleasing visual gateway into the City's west side. There are no recommendations at this
time.
Myrtle Point Park Site SU-6
This site is located on the south side of the Spokane River and is only accessible from the
Centennial Trail. The large rocks in this portion of the river attract swimmers and sun-
bathers.An uplands area along the south bank of the river in the vicinity of these rocks
could offer a pleasant area for picnicking and general passive use. This is generally a
natural open space site. The City should consider the development of a master plan for this
area to guide future development.
I 54
6.4 Trails, Pathways and Bikeways
The purpose of the proposed trail plan is to connect residential areas with parks, open
space, and other recreational areas. The trail plan uses the Centennial Trail as its
centerpiece, supplemented by a loop trail system encircling the entire community using
park and open space areas and streets. While the proposed trail system is primarily an off-
street recreation trail system, it is expected that it will also serve as a mode of
transportation throughout the community and to regions beyond.
While most people prefer off-street, paved pathways for pedestrian and bicycle use, where
trail segments cannot pass through public land, it may be necessary to construct on-street
bike lanes to complete specific segments. It also will be necessary to coordinate with
adjoining cities and the County to make connections to their trail systems. Since much of
the community is developed, an aggressive approach will be needed to connect individual
segments.
The proposed plan only identifies existing and conceptual routes for pathways and trails.A
more specific analysis of a specific trail segment will be needed to locate specific routes and
design requirements. Potential trail types are described in Chapter 11 of the
comprehensive plan as part of the Bike and Pedestrian Master program.
6.4.1 Trail Plan Recommendations
Figure 6-A above illustrates the proposed trail plan and how the proposed and existing
trails fit into the park system. Each trail should be assessed for its suitability as part of the
overall trail system. The number represents the number found on Figure 6-A.
Centennial Trail __ Site T-1
Barker Road Trailhead
• The parking lot should be paved and the metal fence surrounding the property
repaired
• Make the restroom ADA accessible
Island Trailhead(This is the north access point for Myrtle Point Park. The site is a county-
owned and maintained property.)
• Address the erosion issues between parking areas, preferably through low impact
means
• Repair/replace reader board and restroom roof
Mission Trailhead
• Repaint trail access bollards
• Seek to add a buffer from future apartments on the south side
• Remove knapweed along trail and replace with native shrubs and trees (Ponderosa
pine, Serviceberry, Buckthorn, Mahonia, Roses, Snowberry, etc.).
• Develop formal trailhead with parking
I 55
Mirabeau Point Trailhead South
• Continue ongoing maintenance of graffiti removal
• Reopen restroom with potable water
Mirabeau Point Trailhead North
• Address the erosion issues between trailhead parking areas and the river,
preferably through low impact means
Sullivan Road Trailhead
• Develop a designated parking area for trailhead
Appleway Trail Corridor (Milwaukee Railroad ROW) Proposed Site T-2
Planning for the Appleway Trail Corridor started in 2013. The conceptual plan includes
transforming the former rail corridor (Appleway alignment) into a multi-use trail that
includes plazas, public art, perennial gardens, community gardens, plantings, and play
space.
Recommended Improvements:
• Implement and develop Appleway Trail Corridor consistent with Appleway Trail
Corridor plan.
Burlington Northern Trail (Proposed) - 3 miles Site T-3
This appears to be an abandoned rail line from eastern city limits along Boone to Barker,
then north along Barker to Mission and Centennial Trail.
Spokane Loop - Eastern Segment (Proposed) - 1.5 miles Site T-4
This segment begins at the BN Trail and travels north to Centennial Trail.
Spokane Loop - Southern Segment (Proposed) - 3.5 miles Sit
This segment runs east-west from Sullivan Road to Dishman Road, generally following
32nd Avenue.
Spokane Loop - Southwestern Segment (Proposed) - 3 miles Site T-6
A northerly segment that lies within the proposed Chester Creek Open Space corridor, then
turn westerly through Camp Caro ending at Park Road.
Spokane Loop -Western Segment (Proposed) - 3.5 miles Site T-7
This segment runs north-south mostly within Park Road right-of-way. The trail eventually
turns east to connect to Argonne Road where it crosses the River and connects to the
Centennial Trail.
Chester Creek Connection (Proposed) - 1 mi Site T-8
A segment connecting the Spokane Loop at 32nd Avenue with Chester Creek.
I 56
Spokane Loop - Southeastern Segment (Proposed) -4 miles Site T-9
This segment runs north-south segment generally along Conklin and Flora from the
Centennial Trail to 32nd.
6.5 Recreation Programs and Services
The current policy for recreation programing is that the City will not compete or duplicate
services provided by private special interest groups.As a result of this policy,the
Department offers a limited recreation program. Many of the special interest groups in the
community are satisfied with managing their own programs. However, these groups
appreciate the continued collaboration and relationship they have with the City.
However, in the long term,the Department should consider expanding its range of
recreation programs and services, finding those niche services or programs that are not
being provided by special interest groups. In the short term, the Department should be
conservative in its approach and build a program based on past experiences.
6.5.1 Recreation Program and Services Recommendations
Program Coordination and Collaboration
Recommendation:
• Spokane Valley should serve as the overall coordinator for the programs and classes
offered in Spokane Valley to assure that community needs are met. This could be
done by creating a citywide task force representing the various recreation providers
and interest groups. The City's role should be to help establish this group and
provide administrative support.
Program Offerings
Recommendations:
• The City should consider offering/ continuing recreation programs and classes in
the following areas:
o Aquatics
o Summer playground programs
o Non-sport related youth programs
o Underserved youth sport programs (Kindergarten - 6th grade)
o Special events (Breakfast with Santa, Haunted Pool, Paws in the Pool)
o Instructional classes like introduction to guitar, country dances, etc.
o Limited indoor adult sports
o Specialty programs like Bridal Boot Camp
Program Costs
Recommendations:
• In general, the Recreation Program as a whole should seek 100% cost recovery
target based on direct costs. However,the City should explore new program
offerings without expecting them to be self-supporting.
• Program fees for aquatics should be raised to match other surrounding agencies'
fees.
157
Senior Age Programs
The Spokane Valley Senior Center is located at CenterPlace and the Spokane Valley Senior
Citizens Association is responsible for senior specific programs. Programs are offered
Monday through Friday for adults 50 years of age and older. The specific terms of this
arrangement are spelled out in a written agreement.
Recommendations:
• Work with the Spokane Valley Senior Citizens Association to ensure senior
recreation program needs are being met. Some considerations include:
o Active recreation programs and activities such as aerobics, health and fitness
and senior competitive sports
o Intergenerational activities and programs in addition to the more traditional
age group oriented programming
o Special interest classes
Youth Programs
Recommendation:
• Build a new youth activity center.
• Initiate a youth and teen program. Two options for managing youth programs are
possible:
o Option 1: Partner with the Boys and Girls Club to manage a program. This
has the advantage that this agency has the experience and would not require
involvement of the City.
o Option 2: Have the City run the youth program; pattern the Boys and Girls
Club model and youth programs. If this were to occur, some of the programs
should include:
• Drop in program for the youth to just"hang out"
• Special interest programs and classes
• Life skill classes
• Limited recreation level sports
• Tours and field trips
• Job skill classes
Arts and Culture:
Recommendation:
• Continue providing arts, drama and dancing programs by using existing spaces such
as the stage at Mirabeau Meadows, the stage in the Great Room at CenterPlace, the
auditorium at CenterPlace, and the classrooms at CenterPlace for art classes. The
City's role in cultural arts could include:
o Provide space for cultural arts activities such as art in the park,theatre
concerts, and art shows
o Provide small grants to cultural oriented organizations for special events,
classes and other activities
o Assist the Arts Council in grant applications and other administrative tasks
o Partner with other local or regional art providers
Pap , I 58
o Compile an artist/instructor resource list
6.6 Administration and Management
The overall goal of the Parks and Recreation Department is to provide quality recreation
programs, acquisition, renovation, development, operation, and maintenance of the parks
and recreation facilities. The Administration Division provides direction and leadership for
the Parks and Recreation Department in implementing the goals and objectives of the City
Council and facilitates the general upkeep of parks and public areas. The following
recommendations are for administering a program of recreation services.
Management and Services
In considering the financial impact of offering parks and recreation services, the major
factors that determine the efficiency of a parks and recreation program are:
(1) The ability to generate revenue from services rendered and
(2) The cost to maintain facilities
While good design can help reduce operating costs,the greater impact usually comes from
facilities and activities that generate revenue. Currently,the City offers limited facilities and
activities that generate revenue - rentals at CenterPlace, park shelter rentals, and
recreation programs.While the operating budget may be higher when offering more
activities,the potential for revenue generation also increases; thus the net financial cost to
the taxpayer may be nearly the same.
6.6.1 Management Services Recommendations
Recommendations:
• Consider offering a comprehensive recreation program,to help offset the operating
cost.
• In providing a services program, consider the four basic approaches:
o Maintain the current level of park development
o Develop a more elaborate system of parks,trails and other recreational
facilities
o Provide a balance between parks and recreation programs
• Continue to promote and establish parks and recreation facilities and services as a
necessary service to the community. In general,the City's role should include:
o Be responsible for assessing park and recreation needs in the community,
and help coordinate service delivery efforts with the various organizations
o Develop a quality park system
o Provide a level of recreation programs and services that meets needs not
filled by other leisure service providers
• Create an identity and improve visibility. Some of the actions the Department should
take are:
o Offer special events that attract large numbers of participants and promote
City services
o Offer recreation programs to both youth and adults
. g X59
o Publish articles in the City newsletter and other forums promoting the
benefits of parks and recreation
o Advertise special events and programs in the media
o Offer sustained, year round programs
• Consider creating a Park and Recreation Advisory Committee. Over time and as the
City grows in responsibility,the City Council will find it more difficult to devote
adequate time to these park and recreation issues.A parks and recreation advisory
board should be created to develop advisory policies related to parks and recreation
services, assess park and recreation needs, and generally provide a forum for public
input.
• Promote park and recreation services. To help promote the Department, consider
the following:
o Continue to develop promotional and informational brochures
o Make presentations to neighborhood and service groups
o Display information at community events, and host special programs and
informational events.
• Encourage volunteerism. Potential volunteer projects could include:
o Conduct maintenance tasks
o Assist in special events
o Assist in recreation programs
o Offer internships to college students
• Prepare a marketing plan. To efficiently offer services, the Department should
develop a marketing plan that describes how services will be provided and how the
services will be marketed.
• Form and enhance partnerships. Continue to seek partnerships with other providers
to help meet the needs and distribute the responsibilities and costs.
• Offer staff training. To help manage a parks and recreation program more
efficiently, staff should be encouraged to attend special training classes, schools and
other technical seminars.
• Currently, three private user groups lease/use space at city parks. These include the
Radio Control Car Club of Spokane and the Western Dance Association at Sullivan
Park and Splashdown at Valley Mission Park. Leases assure access by private groups
to a specialized facility. This is particularly important if the private group has spent
substantial money to develop the facility. On the other hand, park facilities should
be made available to all residents. It is recommended that private user groups may
lease park property under the following conditions:
o The use will meet a recreation need that is not provided by the City.
Page X60
o The use should be a suitable recreation use. The use will not impact the
enjoyment and use of the park or nearby property owners.
o The user group must pay for the construction, management and maintenance
of the facility.
o The general public will have access to the facility except when the user group
is hosting a special event.
o The user group maintains the facility in a well-kept appearance comparable
to the rest of the park.
o The user group will post a deposit or some other means of assuring that the
facility will be removed and replaced to the original condition when the
facility is no longer in use.
o The City may charge a fee for the lease.
6.6.2 Financial Resources/Funding Recommendations
Financing and funding parks and recreation is a challenge in most communities and since
the adoption of the 2006 Park and Recreation Plan has become even more challenging
because of budget cuts and reductions in property values. However,the same general
principals and methods are still available to the City.
Recommendations:
• Consider adopting/implementing park dedication requirement.At the present time,
the City may consider parks and recreation as for concurrency. Concurrency can be
used to meet the needs of the community that are attributable to new development.
Dedication may include the following:
o The dedication of land
o Money in lieu of land, or
o Some combination of land and money
• To meet existing deficiencies not attributable to new development, or to reduce
potential impacts of dedications,the City should consider the following:
o Seek grants: Adoption of the Parks and Recreation Plan will make the City
eligible for State and Federal parks and recreation grants. The City should
actively seek grants to help leverage local contributions.
o Create a foundation: The City could create a foundation for donations of park
and recreation facilities.
o Consider the creation of a Park District.
6.7 Maintenance
Almost since incorporation, the maintenance of the Spokane Valley park system has been
done by a private contractor under contract with the City. This agreement appears to be
satisfactory for the city and its citizens; in fact, in an unprompted survey question about
what they like most about Spokane Valley parks, 66 percent replied our parks are
clean/well-maintained.While contracting out park maintenance services may be a more
efficient means of maintaining parks and eliminates the cost of purchasing equipment and
it appears to meet the satisfaction of residents,there are other issues that should be
considered. This section provides the recommendations for the maintenance of parks.
I 61
6.7.1 Maintenance Recommendations
• Dedicate time and resources to check on the work being performed.
• Continue to incorporate into the contract policies and procedures on how park
maintenance personnel will interact with the public. Park maintenance staff will be
in more contact with the public than anyone else will in the City. Their actions and
relationships will reflect on the City.
• Establish a maintenance funding goal calculated on a per acre basis and define
minimum maintenance service levels.
• Develop an integrated pest management plan to define use of herbicides and
pesticides in parks and open space areas.
• Develop a schedule to assess the replacement and upgrade needs for all parks and
facilities.
6.8 River Access
The Spokane River corridor is the only major river within the City of Spokane Valley. The
River offers a number of existing public access opportunities. The public access plan for the
Shoreline Master Program offers a detailed analysis of both existing and potential river
access opportunities. The proposed future access points have been identified in Figure 6-A,
but if there is any conflict, the Shoreline Master Program rules. This section summarizes
how this plan and the Department should interface when considering park development in
shoreline areas.
6.8.1 River Access Recommendations
• In considering development near the Spokane River or other significant shoreline,
review the Shoreline Master Program for the following:
o Potential river access point or improvements
o Shoreline regulations and policies that may impact park development
• The Parks Department should work with Community Development to identify
potential acquisition sites that may meet the needs of this plan and the SMP.
g I 62
Chapter 7.0: Aquatic Facilities
The City of Spokane Valley owns and operates three seasonal outdoor swimming pools and
contracts with the Spokane YMCA to operate and maintain the pools. Two of the pools are
associated with existing parks, Terrace View and Valley Mission. The third pool, Park Road
Pool, is not associated with a park but adjacent to a school. The pools were upgraded in
2008-2009 and are in good condition.
Table 7-1:Existing Aquatic Facilities in Spokane Valley
Facility Notes Ownership
Park Road Pool 6-land x 25-yard outdoor pool with slide City of Spokane Valley
Terrace View Pool 6-land x 25-yard outdoor pool with lazy City of Spokane Valley
river
Valley Mission Pool 6-land x 25-yard outdoor pool and zero City of Spokane Valley
depth entry pool
Spokane Valley YMCA Leisure and lap pools YMCA
Splashdown Outdoor aquatic park Private/leased
Within the region but outside the City of Spokane Valley are five outdoor pools in the City
of Spokane and a number of private pools like the YMCA.Additionally, the Spokane River
and nearby; lakes provide summer swimming opportunities for residents.
7.1 Aquatic Facility Background
The 2006 Park and Recreation Plan dedicated an entire chapter to aquatic facilities. The
stated purpose of that chapter was to analyze the need for indoor and outdoor aquatic
facilities. It provided a detailed analysis of indoor and outdoor pool demand, an analysis of
attendance potential, and finally a financial analysis of operating revenue for an indoor
pool.
In part, the driving force behind the aquatics chapter in 2006 was to identify and publically
vet how to spend $1.6 million on aquatic improvements that was to be transferred from
Spokane County. Originally intended to fund an indoor pool, the $1.6 million was found to
be inadequate for that purpose. The aquatics chapter from 2006 concluded with the three
following concept aquatic recommendations:
1. Upgrade and add leisure component to three existing outdoor pools
2. Add large water play component to one existing outdoor pool and preform basic
upgrades to two existing pools.
3. Build an indoor aquatic complex
In the 2006 plan, concept 1 and concept 2 were considered short term solutions to Spokane
Valley's aquatic facilities, and concept 3 was considered a long-term solution. In 2008 and
Page X63
continuing into 2009, the City implemented a combination of both short-term concepts.
The improvements included:
• Upgraded existing facilities
• Added lazy river
• Added free standing water slide
• Increased sun deck size
• Added zero depth entry pool
The 2013 update did not analyze the need for an indoor aquatic facility. Throughout the
public process, only one comment was received indicating a desire for an indoor facility; as
such, this plan suggests the following recommendations:
• The City of Spokane Valley could at some point in the future consider updating a
needs assessment to determine if an indoor aquatic facility is still desired or needed
in the Spokane Valley. The updated needs analysis may include:
o A design process to determine an appropriate location for an indoor aquatic
facility
o A demand and financial analysis to determine construction and operational
costs and potential use
o A design program to determine the activity spaces,type, and size of facility
Page X64
Chapter 8.0: Implementation
This chapter is updated in its entirety to identify the full range of implementation projects,
programs and initiatives. Many of these items carry over from the 2006 plan,but many are
also new, reflecting the community's changing needs and the City's success in
implementing many of the 2006 plan's recommendations.
8.1 Funding Sources
The following are possible funding sources for acquiring, developing, and maintaining
parks and other recreational areas in the City of Spokane Valley:
• General Fund: This is the City's primary source for operating revenue. Most of this
revenue comes from taxes levied on property and the sale of merchandise within
the City's boundary.
• Municipal Capital Improvement Program Funding: This is a six-year financing
program for major capital expenditures funded from the General Fund.
• General Obligation Bond: These are voter-approved bonds with the assessment
placed on real property. The money may only be used for capital improvements.
This property tax is levied for a specified period of time (usually 15-20 years).
Passage requires a two-third's majority approval with 50% of the voters voting.
Major disadvantages of this funding option are the high approval requirement and
the interest costs.
• Special Serial Levy: This is a property tax assessed for the construction and/or
operation of park facilities. This type of levy is established at a given rate for three to
five years and requires a simple majority for voter approval. The advantage of this
type of levy is that there are no interest charges.
• Revenue Bonds: These bonds are sold and paid for from the revenue produced from
the operation of a facility. The City does not have any recreational facilities funded
in this manner.
• Donations: The donation of labor, land, or cash by service agencies, private groups
or individuals is a popular way to raise small amounts of money for specific projects.
Service agencies, such as Kiwanis, Lions and Rotary Clubs, often fund small projects
such as playground improvements.
• Exchange of Property: If the City has an excess parcel of land with some
development value, it could be traded for private land more suitable for park use.
• Joint Public/Private Partnership: This concept has become increasingly popular for
parks and recreation agencies. The basic approach is for a public agency to enter
into a working agreement with a private corporation to help fund, build, and/or
operate a public facility. Generally,the three primary incentives a public agency can
offer are free land to place a facility (usually a park or other parcel of public land),
Page X65
certain tax advantages and access to the facility.While the public agency may have
to give up certain responsibilities or control, it is one way of obtaining public
facilities at a lower cost.
• Lifetime Estates: This is an agreement between the City and a land owner, where the
City gives the owner the right to live on the site after it is sold.
• Park Impact Fees: Park Impact Fees are fees imposed on new development because
of the impacts the projects have on the City's infrastructure.While common in most
Washington cities, Spokane Valley has not imposed this fee yet.
• Certificates of Participation: This is a lease-purchase approach where the City sells
Certificates of Participation (COPs) to a lending institution. The City then pays the
loan off from revenue produced by the facility or from its general operating budget.
The lending institution holds title to the property until the COPs are repaid. This
procedure does not require a vote of the public.
Public/Government Grant Programs:
• HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): These grants from the Federal
Department of Housing and Urban Development are available for a wide variety of
projects. Most are distributed in the lower income areas of the community. Grants
can cover up to 100% of project costs.
• Conservation Futures Funding: The Spokane County Conservation Futures Program
was conceived in 1994 with the voters' approval of an advisory ballot measure
authorizing the County to levy a property tax of(up-to) 6.25-cents per $1,000 of
property value (2013 - levy rate at 4.3 cents per $1,000) to acquire, preserve and
otherwise protect the County's open space, streams, rivers, and other natural
resources. The tax money is solely for the acquisition of property and development
rights to benefit wildlife, conserve natural resources, increase passive recreation
and educational opportunities, and improve the quality of life for area residents.
Fifteen percent of the annual Conservation Futures levy revenue is dedicated
toward maintaining, protecting and enhancing these properties in perpetuity.
• Land and Water Conservation Fund: This is a federal grant program that receives its
money from offshore oil leases. The money is distributed through the National Park
Service and is administered locally by the Washington State Resources Conservation
Office (RCO). In the past,this was one of the major sources of grant money for local
agencies. In the 1990s, funding at the federal level was severely cut, but in recent
times more money has become available. In the current proposed federal budget, a
small amount of money has been allocated to this program. The funds can be used
for acquisition and development of outdoor facilities and requires a 50% match.
• Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century(MAP-21): Through the years,
Washington has received considerable revenue for trail-related projects. These
funds can generally be used for landscape and amenity improvements related to
trail and transportation projects.
; g ° X66
• Youth Athletic Fund: The Youth Athletic Fund is a grant program designed to
provide funding for new, improved, and better maintained outdoor athletic facilities
serving youth and communities. This program was established by State Statute
(RCW 79A.25.800-830) as part of the State Referendum 48,which provided funding
for the Seattle Seahawks Stadium.Applicants must provide matching funds of at
least 50 percent.
• Boating Facilities Program: This is a grant program funded through the RCO.
Projects eligible under this program include acquisition, development, planning, and
renovation projects associated with launching ramps, transient moorage, and
upland support facilities. Grants are distributed on an annual basis and require a 25
percent match.
• Aquatic Land Enhancement Account: This program is administered by the RCO and
is intended to provide support for the purchase, improvement, or protection of
aquatic lands for public purposes and access to these resources.Applicants must
provide a minimum of a 50 percent match.
• Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program: This program is administered by the
RCO. There are two accounts under this program: 1) Habitat Conservation; and 2)
Outdoor Recreation. Projects eligible under this program include acquisition and
development of parks,water access sites,trails, critical wildlife habitat, natural
areas, and urban wildlife habitat.Applicants must provide a minimum of a 50
percent non-RCO match.
• Exactions: Costs of necessary public improvements are passed onto the adjacent
landowners.
• Public Land Trusts: Private land trusts, such as the Trust for Public Land, Inc. and
the Nature Conservancy will acquire and hold land for eventual acquisition by a
public agency.
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW): USFW may provide technical assistance and
administer funding for projects related to water quality improvement through
debris and habitat/vegetation management, watershed management and stream
bank erosion, and sediment deposition projects.
Other Potential Sources:
• Partnerships: The City is in a unique position to develop additional partnerships
with other jurisdictions or agencies to implement projects identified in the plan.
Some potential partners include the YMCA, Boys and Girls Club, private sport
groups, neighborhood organizations, Spokane County, and the City of Spokane.
• Private Grants and Foundations: Private grants and foundations provide money for
a wide range of projects. They are sometimes difficult to find and equally difficult to
secure because of the open competition. They usually fund unique projects or ones
of extreme need.
Page X67
8.2 Recommended Capital Projects
Table 8-1:Parks and Recreation Capital Projects List
Project Project/ Estimated
Site/Park Priority Year
# Description Costs
Master development
1 NP-4 plan for Balfour Park High 2013
Extension
2 Barker Trailhead Pave parking lot $45,000 High 2014
3 Browns Add eight sand $120,000 High 2014
volleyball courts
4 Discovery Add new equipment $50,000 High 2014
Playground
5 Discovery Install shade $15,000 High 2014
Playground structure
6 Park Road Pool Paint pool tank $35,000 High 2014
7 Valley Mission Determine alternate High 2014
use of horse arena
Property acquisition
and development for $ 3,000,000
8 CP-1 new neighborhood - 6,000,000 High 2015
park 10-50 acres
9 Balfour Add basketball court $25,000 High 2015
10 Balfour Add picnic shelter $150,000 High 2015
11 Browns Replace picnic shelter $150,000 High 2015
12 Browns Replace bathroom $150,000 High 2015
Develop an off-leash
pet park as either a
13 Unknown new facility or $50,000 High 2015
component of an
existing park
Develop a skate park
facility,location to be
determined but
14 Unknown conceptually $ 250,000 High 2015
identified as NP-4,
- $500,000
Sullivan Park, or
Valley Mission.
15 CenterPlace Repair roof $300,000 High 2015
Develop a disc golf
course as a
16 Unknown component of an $50,000 High 2016
existing facility in
conjunction with
other agencies
I 68
Project Site/Park Project/ Estimated Priority Year
# Description Costs
Property acquisition
and development for $ 1,000,000
17 NP-2 new neighborhood - 2,400,000 High 2017
park 3-7 acres.
Property acquisition
and development for $ 1,000,000
18 NP-1 new neighborhood - 2,400,000 High 2018
park 3-7 acres
Property acquisition
and development for $ 1,000,000
19 NP-3 new neighborhood - 2,400,000 High 2019
park 3-7 acres.
20 All Install new park signs $100,000 Medium 2014-
-phased 2020
21 Balfour Add splash pad $75,000 Medium 2015
22 Browns Add basketball court $25,000 Medium 2015
23 Browns Replace playground $200,000 Medium 2015
equipment
24 Centennial Trail Repair sections of Medium 2015
trail
25 Terrace View Add splash pad $50,000 Medium 2016
26 Castle Pa k lop slack lining $20,000 Medium 2016
27 Browns Add splash pad $50,000 Medium 2017
28 Sullivan Park Resurface and $40,000 Medium 2017
restripe parking lot
29 Valley Mission Repair tennis courts $50,000 Medium 2018
30 Edgecliff Replace picnic shelter $100,000 Medium 2019
31 Edgecliff Replace restroom $100,000 Medium 2019
Property acquisition
and development for $ 1,000,000
32 NP-5 Medium 2020
new neighborhood - 2,400,000
park 3-7 acres
33 Edgecliff Add splash pad $50,000 Medium 2020
34 Mirabeau Provide potable $75,000 Medium 2020
Trailhead water at trailhead
35 Valley Mission Add splash pad $50,000 Medium 2021
36 Edgecliff Replace playground $100,000 Medium 2022
equipment
37 Mirabeau Park Develop geological $30,000 Low 2015
trail
38 Myrtle Point
Master development $45,000 Low 2016
Landscape and
39 Sullivan Park improve radio control $75,000 Low 2017
car area
Page X69
Project Project/ Estimated
Site/Park Priority Year
# Description Costs
40 Terrace View Replace restrooms $150,000 Low 2020
41 Edgecliff Replace fencing $35,000 Low 2022
42 Greenacres Develop Phase 2 $1,500,000 Low 2023
43 Terrace View Update pool $200,000 Low 2023
bathhouse
44 Park Road Pool Update pool $200,000 Low 2025
bathhouse
45 Valley Mission Update pool $200,000 Low 2025
bathhouse
46 Unknown Develop recreation Low ?
center
47 Unknown Develop new public Low ?
events venue
48 Various Develop community $25,000 Low ?
garden
49 Valley Mission Replace restrooms $150,000 Low ?
8.3 Preliminary Project Priorities
The total cost for all the improvements identified in Table 8-2 is nearly $12 - $19 million,
the range depending on the number of acres acquired for the new parks. This is more than
the City can, or will, finance in the near term. To be able to direct funding toward the most
significant projects in terms of meeting community needs, all projects recommended in the
plan were prioritized. The recommended actions listed in priority order are:
• Acquire park land: It is important to acquire park land while it is available. The
highest acquisition priority should be the proposed neighborhood park site NP-1.
Additionally as opportunities arise, park land should be acquired in sites: NP-2, NP-
3, NP-5, and CP-5
• Upgrade existing park facilities: Since all of the parks need some improvements,this
is a place where immediate action could occur. Upgrading of park sites should be a
six-year program.
• Install splash pads at existing or new parks.
• Create an off-leash dog park.
• Create a disc golf course.
• Install eight sand volleyball courts at Browns Park.
8.4 Basis for Estimating Costs
Development costs can vary widely depending on the location, facility type, construction
method, off-site costs, quality of development, and other constraints on the project. For
purposes of estimating cost, the following assumptions were made:
• Land Acquisition: For development, land prices were estimated at$50,000 per acre.
In some areas of the City, land acquisition could well exceed this amount. For open
g I 70
space acquisition, costs were placed at$1,000 per acre. This assumes that most of
the land acquired will be undevelopable because of environmental constraints.
• Development: Potential costs were established for each element of park
development for each park site. These costs excluded street improvements and any
other off-site costs. For typical neighborhood and community parks, an assumption
of$150,000 per acre was used.
• School Park Improvements: An estimated cost of$100,000 per site was used.
• Design: The figures assume a project designed by a professional design firm and bid
through a competitive public bidding process. Design costs were estimated at 10%
of construction cost.
• Contingency: A contingency of 15% was used.
8.5 Capital Costs
Table 8-2 summarizes probable construction costs of all the projects listed in the plan.
Table 8-2:Summar of Probable Costs for Recommended Im I rovements
Item Cost
Land Acquisition $2,900,000
Park and Facility Upgrades $5,000,000
New Park Development $11,020,000
Total $18,920,000*
*Land acquisition and park development costs assume a total of 58 acres of new park land.
8.6 Current Funding Availability
The City has an adopted Capital Improvement Program that will be primarily funded
through the General Fund. For parks,the funding allocation is as follows:
Table 8-3:Funding Allocations for Parks,Years 2014-2019
Year Allocations
2014 $100,000
2015 $100,000
2016 $100,000
2017 $100,000
2018 $100,000
2019 $100,000
Total $600,000
Even with this level of funding ($600,000), the City has a significant deficit of financial
resources to implement the improvements recommended in the plan.
8.7 Financing Strategy
It is recommended that the City embark on a conservative park capital development plan.
While community needs exist to warrant a more aggressive financing strategy,the City
P ., 71
should first demonstrate the ability to develop several smaller park projects before
embarking on a much larger one.
The short-term capital improvement plan presented below represents the current City CIP
plus some additional outside sources. However, recognizing the magnitude of need, a more
aggressive funding plan, including a tax-supported measure, should be considered as soon
as practicable. This larger funding package would be used to acquire land and develop
several of the new neighborhood and community parks.
8.8 Capital Improvement Plan
Table 8-4 summarizes the recommended projects and funding sources for the years 2014 -
2019.
Table 8-4:Summary of Funding and Expenditures 6-year Capital Improvement Plan
Project 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total
Expenditures
Park $280,000 $7,070,000 $180,000 $2,800,000 $65,000 $1,545,000 $11,940,000
Improvements
Park Acquisition 0 $1,500,000 0 $700,000 0 $350,000 $2,550,000
Total 0 $1,500,000 0 $700,000 0 $350,000 $2,550,000
Expenditures
Revenues
General Fund $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000
REET#1 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000
Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Loans/Levies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Revenues $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000
Surplus/(Deficit) $100,000 ($1,400,000) $100,000 ($600,000) 100,000 ($250,000) ($1,950,000)
Page I 72
Appendix A. Telephone Survey Report
I 73
arks SjiÔkane
Va11ey®
•
Plan
Update
Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department
Executive Summary Report
February 2013
Prepared by:
Studio K.2-7-7;
Cascade
Canmunity Plmnnq B Reslon°"-T�
: r ROBINSON .RESEARCH=
SURVEYS FOCUS GROUPS
Contents
Statement of Methodology 3
Executive Summary 4
Detailed Observations 5
Q.1 Which parks do members of your household visit, if any? 5
Using a five-point scale,where one is not at all satisfied and five is completely satisfied,
please rate your satisfaction with each of the following. 7
Q.2 Parks managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department 7
Q.3 Pools managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department 7
Q.4 Recreation Programs managed by the Parks and Recreation Department 8
Q.5 CenterPlace 8
Q.6 Name three things you like. 9
Now I will read a list of possible new amenities and current amenities that could be increased
if the citizens were willing to fund them. After I read each one, please indicate how important
it would be to you in future developments by the City of Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation
Department. Please use a scale of one to five, where one means not at all important and five
means extremely important 10
Q.7 Increased river access for rafters, kayakers, and similar non-motorized activities 11
Q.8 Additional parks 11
Q.9 Urban trails 12
Q.10 Off-leash dog park 12
Q.11 Skate park 12
Q.12 Formal athletic fields 12
Q.13 Outdoor courts such as for basketball and tennis 12
Q.14 Outdoor aquatic facilities 13
Q.15 Indoor recreation facilities 13
Q.16 Sand volleyball courts 13
Q.17 Splash pads 13
Now I will read three possible objectives for the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation
Department. After I read each one,please tell me how important it is, using the same scale. 14
Q.18 Purchase property for the development of future parks 14
Q.19 Increase recreation programs and services 14
Q.20 Create multi-use indoor recreation facilities 15
Demographic Profile 16
`Other' Responses 17
Q.6 Name three things you like. 17
Zone Map 18
Robinson Research 2 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Statement of Methodology
Robinson Research was commissioned by Studio Cascade and the Spokane Valley Parks and
Recreation Department to conduct a telephone survey among households with Spokane Valley
city limits. Cell phones were not excluded from our sampling.
The overall purpose of this project was to determine perceptions of Spokane Valley parks, pools,
recreation programs, and CenterPlace.
For this study, 360 telephone interviews were conducted at Robinson Research's facility from
February 2, 2013 to February 12, 2013. The sample size of 360 was chosen to fit a finite budget.
No fewer than fifteen percent (15%) of the interviews were monitored in their entirety, and an
additional ten percent(10%)were called back by a supervisor for verification of key points of
the data. Interim trial runs of the data were cross-tabulated by interviewer as a quality assurance
procedure.
A 360-sample survey has a margin of error of+/- 5.15%percent,which means that, in theory,
results have a ninety-five percent (95%) chance of coming within+/- 5.15 percentage points of
results that would have been obtained if all households within Spokane Valley city limits had
been interviewed.
Spokane Valley was divided into four Study Groups areas, labeled 1, 2, 3, and 4. A map can be
found at the end of this report. For the sake of clarity, we have renamed the zones based on their
locations on the map.
1 West Zone
2 South Central Zone
3 North/Northeast Zone
4 East/Southeast Zone
Questions can be directed to:
William D. Robinson
President
Robinson Research
1206 N. Lincoln St., Suite 200
Spokane, WA 99201
(509) 489-4361
billr @robinson-research.com
Robinson Research 3 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Executive Summar
• Half of respondents reported that they or members of their household had visited
Mirabeau Point Park.
• Participants residing in the east/southeast zone were more likely than average to visit
parks outside of their area, specifically, Terrace View Park, Mirabeau Point Park, and
CenterPlace.
• Parks managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department received the
highest mean satisfaction score in a series that asked respondents to rate the parks,pools,
CenterPlace, and recreation programs. Half of respondents rated it at the top of the scale.
• Recreation programs received the lowest mean satisfaction score, though two in five
respondents were unable or unwilling to rate them.
• Two in three respondents mentioned (unaided) that the areas managed by the Spokane
Valley Parks and Recreation Department were clean/well maintained.
• When asked to rate a list of eleven possible new or current amenities that could be
increased, urban trails received the highest mean score. Sand volleyball courts received
the lowest mean score.
• Respondents were read a list of three possible objectives for the Spokane Valley Parks
and Recreation Department and asked to rate their importance. Less than three tenths of a
point separated the highest ranked (increase recreation programs) from the lowest
(purchase property for future parks). All fell just above the midpoint of the scale.
Robinson Research 4 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Detailed Observations
Q.1 Which parks managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department do
members of your household visit,if any?
Respondents were not read a list of possible responses from which to select. Multiple responses
were allowed. Interviewers had a list of the parks that included the nearest major intersection. If
a respondent was unaware of the park's name, but could provide directional information, the
interviewer would tell them the name of the park and select it.
Q.1 Which Parks Managed By The Spokane
Valley Parks And Rec Department Do Members
Of Your Household Visit?
Mirabeau Point Park I 48%
Valley Mission Park I 39%
CenterPlace I 29%
Terrace View Park I 28%
Park Road Pool 111%
Browns Park I 6%
Sullivan Park I 5%
Edgecliff Park I 5%
Balfour Park I 4%
Greenacres Park 7 2%
Castle Park ] 1%
Myrtle Point Park ] 1%
Don't know I 3%
I I I I I
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Nearly half(48%) of participants reported that they or members of their household had visited
Mirabeau Point Park.
The average respondent mentioned 1.85 parks.
Spokane Valley residents between the ages of 18 and 36 were significantly less likely than
average to mention CenterPlace and more likely than average to mention Valley Mission Park.
Robinson Research 5 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Respondents who reported residing in Spokane Valley from one to ten years were more likely
than average to mention Mirabeau Park.
The following table displays the difference (percentages)between the zone in which the
respondents resided and the zone in which the park is located. Cells where the number is blue
and bold signify a percentage that was higher than average, at the 95% confidence level. Cells
where the number is red and italicized indicate a percentage that was lower than average, at the
95% confidence level.
Zones of Participants' Residences
Parks Park Total % West Zone South North/north- East/south-
Clustered Central east Zone east Zone
Zone Zone
West Park Road 11% 26% 4% 7% 6%
Edgecliff 5% 11% 6% 2% 2%
South Terrace View 28% 8% 48%
Central Castle Park 1% - 3% - -
Browns Park 6% 2% 19% 1% 2%
Mirabeau 48% 41% 41% 50% 60%
Valley Mission 39% 43% 32% 58% 23%
North/ CenterPlace 29% 20% 12% 34% 51%
northeast Sullivan 5% 4% 2% 6% 8%
Balfour 4% 4% 2% 7% 2%
Myrtle Point 1% 2% - 1% 1%
Else Greenacres 2% 1% 2% 1% 4%
Don't know 3% 3% 7% - -
Respondents in the east/southeast zone were more likely than the residents of the other three
zones to visit parks in an area other than their own. It should be noted that while Terrace View
Park, Mirabeau, and CenterPlace are not located within the east/southeast zone,they are situated
more closely than the other parks and are not very far outside of the east/southeast zone.
Robinson Research 6 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Using a five-point scale,where one is not at all satisfied and five is completely satisfied,
please rate your satisfaction with each of the following.
Please Rate Your Satisfaction With Grand Mean 4.13
Each Of The Following.
Parks 4.38
CenterPlace 4.35
Pools 3.92
Recreation programs 3.87
I -I
1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Q.2 Parks managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department
Parks were ranked first among the four tested facilities managed by the Spokane Valley Parks
and Recreation Department(4.38).
Participants who reported that they or members of their household had visited Balfour Park were
significantly more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Spokane Valley residents who reported having children who frequently visited(but who did not
live with them)were significantly more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Q.3 Pools managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department
Pools were ranked third among the four tested facilities (3.92).
One in three (36%) respondents were unable or unwilling to rate the pools managed by the Parks
& Rec Department.
Robinson Research 7 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Spokane Valley residents who reported having children who frequently visited(but who did not
live with them)were significantly more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Q.4 Recreation Programs managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation
Department
Recreation programs were ranked last of the four tested facilities (3.87).
Two in five (43%)participants were unable or unwilling to rate the recreation programs.
Responses spanned the tested subsets quite evenly.
Q.5 CenterPlace
CenterPlace ranked second among the four tested facilities (4.35).
One in four(26%)respondents were unable or unwilling to give a rating.
Respondents in the 70+ age group were more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Female were more likely than average to give a higher rating; males were more likely than
average to give a lower rating.
"Good"voters were more likely than non-voters to give a higher rating.
Robinson Research 8 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Q.6 Name three things you like about the parks,pools,recreation programs, or
CenterPlace managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department?
Participants were not read a list of possible responses from which to select. Respondents were
not allowed to name more than three things they liked, but were allowed to name fewer.
Q.6 Name Three Things You Like
About The Parks, Pools, Recreation
Programs, Or CenterPlace?
Clean/well maintained I 64%
-
Amenities provided I 25%
-
Landscaping I 22%
-
Proximity to home/work 121%
That they exist I 19%
-
Variety of recreation opportunities I 17%
-
Quality of fields/equipment I 17%
Availability of parking I 13%
Neighbors/people 111%
Safety of parks I 9%
Classes/camp/events I 8%
Family/kid friendly I 6%
Quantity of fields/equipment I 6%
I
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Two in three (64%) respondents mentioned clean/well maintained as something they liked.
The average participant mentioned 2.5 aspects they liked about the parks,pools, recreation
programs, or CenterPlace.
Robinson Research 9 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Now I will read a list of possible new amenities and current amenities that could be
increased if the citizens were willing to fund them. After I read each one, please indicate
how important it would be to you in future developments by the City of Spokane Valley
Parks and Recreation Department. Please use a scale of one to five,where one means not at
all important and five means extremely important.
Now I Will Read A List Of Possible New Amenities
And Current Amenities That Could Be Increased.
Please Indicate How Important It Would Be To You.
Grand Mean 3.29
Urban trails 3.74
Splash pads 3.65
Outdoor acquatic facilities 3.61
Indoor recreation facilities 3.48
Outdoor courts 3.46
Additional parks 3.32
Formal athletic fields 3.26
Increased river access 3.21
Off-leash dog park 2.85
Skate park 2.82
Sand volleyball courts 2.79
1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Robinson Research 10 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
The following table displays the difference (means)between the zone in which the respondents
resided. Cells where the number is blue and bold signify a mean that was higher than average, at
the 95% confidence level. Cells where the number is red and italicized indicate a mean that was
lower than average, at the 95% confidence level.
Zones of Participants' Residences
Amenity Mean West Zone South Central North/north- East/south-
Zone east Zone east Zone
Increased river 3.21 3.38 3.11 3.02 3.34
access
Additional parks 3.32 3.44 3.34 3.08 3.42
Urban trails 3.74 3.64 3.57 3.66 4.09
Off-leash dog 2.85 2.77 2.56 2.85
park
Skate park 2.82 3.04 2.77 2.81 2.66
Formal athletic 3.26 3.37 3.07 3.14 3.46
fields
Outdoor courts 3.46 3.56 3.44 3.33 3.52
Outdoor aquatic 3.61 3.76 3.59 3.62 3.48
facilities
Indoor recreation 3.48 3.59 3.34 3.40 3.59
facilities
Sand volleyball 2.79 2.81 2.89 2.68 2.80
courts
Splash pads 3.65 3.90 3.65 3.50 3.55
The total difference between the most important and least important amenity was less than one
point, on a five-point scale.
Q.7 Increased river access for rafters,kayakers, and similar non-motorized activities
This amenity was ranked eighth of the eleven tested(3.21).
Participants who reported that they or members of their household had visited Sullivan Park were
more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Q.8 Additional parks
This amenity was ranked sixth among the eleven tested(3.32).
Responses spanned the tested subsets quite evenly.
Robinson Research 11 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Q.9 Urban trails
This amenity was ranked first of the eleven tested (3.74).
Participants who reported that they or members of their household had visited CenterPlace were
more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Respondents in the east/southeast zone were more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Q.10 Off-leash dog park
This amenity was ranked ninth among the eleven tested(2.85).
Participants who reported that they or members of their household had visited Terrace View Park
were more likely than average to give a lower rating.
Spokane Valley residents residing in the west zone were more likely than average to give a
higher rating.
Q.11 Skate park
This amenity was ranked tenth of the eleven tested (2.82).
Participants who reported having children who did not live with them,but regularly visited, were
more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Q.12 Formal athletic fields
This amenity was ranked seventh among the eleven tested (3.26).
Participants who reported that household members had visited Edgecliff Park (which has formal
athletic fields)were more likely than average to give a lower rating.
Respondents in the 55 to 60 age group were significantly more likely than average to give a
lower rating.
Q.13 Outdoor courts such as for basketball and tennis
This amenity was ranked fifth of the eleven tested (3.46).
Participants who reported that household members had visited Balfour Park were more likely
than average to give a lower rating.
Respondents in the 18 to 36 age group were more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Robinson Research 12 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Respondents in the 55 to 60 age group were significantly more likely than average to give a
lower rating.
Q.14 Outdoor aquatic facilities
This amenity was ranked third among the eleven tested(3.61).
Participants who reported that household members had visited Balfour Park were more likely
than average to give a lower rating.
Q.15 Indoor recreation facilities
This amenity was ranked fourth of the eleven tested (3.48).
Participants who reported children residing in the household were more likely than average to
give a higher rating.
Q.16 Sand volleyball courts
This amenity was ranked last among the eleven tested(2.79).
Responses spanned the tested subsets quite evenly.
Q.17 Splash pads
This amenity was ranked second of the eleven tested (3.65).
Participants who reported that household members had visited Balfour Park were more likely
than average to give a lower rating.
Participants who reported children residing in the household were significantly more likely than
average to give a higher rating. Support waned as the age of the households' children increased.
Respondents in the 70+ age group were more likely than average to give a lower rating.
Robinson Research 13 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Now I will read three possible objectives for the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation
Department. After I read each one,please tell me how important it is, using the same scale.
Now I Will Read Three Possible Objectives For
The Spokane Valley Parks & Rec Department.
Grand Mean 3.53
Increase recreation programs and
3.69
services
Create multi-use indoor recreation
facilities 3.50
Purchase property for the development
of future parks 3.41
1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
Less than three-tenths of one point separated the highest rated objective from the lowest rated.
Q.18 Purchase property for the development of future parks
This objective was ranked last among the three tested (3.41).
Responses spanned the tested subsets quite evenly.
Q.19 Increase recreation programs and services
This objective was ranked first among the three tested(3.69).
Respondents with children in the household or who had children (but did not live with them)
between the ages of 3 and 6 who regularly visited, were more likely than average to give a higher
rating.
Robinson Research 14 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Q.20 Create multi-use indoor recreation facilities
This objective was ranked second among the three tested(3.50).
Spokane Valley residents who reported having children between the ages of 3 and 6 that
frequently visited(but did not live with them)were more likely than average to give a higher
rating.
Non-voters were more likely than average to give a higher rating.
Robinson Research 15 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Demographic Profile
• One in three (34%) respondents reported children residing in their household
• Half(47%)reported no children
• One-fifth (19%) of Spokane Valley residents reported that no children lived in their
household, but that there were children who frequently visited
• Children's ages
(Percentages Age range Percentage
based on 0-2 21%
households 3-6 50%
with children or 7-9 40%
that had 10-12 33%
children who 13-15 31%
regularly 16-17 16%
visited): Refused 1%
• The average participant had resided in Spokane Valley for 26.47 years
• Eighty-four percent of respondents reported owning their home
• The average age of respondents was 54.13
• The average yearly, combined, household income was $49,770
• Fifty-three percent of respondents were female (quotas were established)
• One-quarter of interviews were conducted among participants in each of the four zones
• Thirty-eight percent of respondents were "good"voters (voted in at least three of the last
four general and primary elections), forty-four percent were voters, but did not qualify as
"good"voters, and eighteen percent were non-voters
Robinson Research 16 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
`Other' Responses
"Others"are responses that fell outside the predetermined categories and for which no new
category was created. These are the actual responses which were coded as "other" in the
database.
Q.6 Name three things you like about the parks,pools, recreation programs, or
CenterPlace managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department?
Dog friendly
The temperature at which the pool is kept
Open all year
Size of the parks
Convenient hours
System is growing
CenterPlace is a nice facility
Educational facilities
CenterPlace is large and spacious
Suitable for kids with disabilities
Extended pool hours
Hours
Robinson Research 17 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
Zone Map
- ,T e O
,..,,,,:. ,_,,_ ,, , i i , _, 4 1111�i11 u..1.
I
g
11■ un him
` 111 .617111111�� ��;AB
Nt■ ■'
'r ilVIiu I �..
_ ��G'iil
r EN I4itIHIW`..p
.../i / y_ ..
1■ f■i■■ii Cil 1i`
IAi l.iiiiii I 191 {'I �``,l�
86111111 ` r=
T_ � I
v
I -
r _ .,,1 __.-, , iiii -,- - , = iv, , .,
' , 1 -.._,, ImmumEsu _ opfprinri , 1 :,., •,, . -
• - Ili,_- 1 1 graf y, err" —
j
:� 11 II l
r
® ,
—
�
1II®!
ai—
AI l_ _
7
m
I
r _
— . — ' 7 {I I 11, , i.,._.: ,...„. -_,_ ., 1- ., „--1,
mor - : ;. - , . i
_ 1
r:
!II
1 =West Zone 2 = South Central Zone 3 =North/Northeast Zone 4= East/Southeast Zone
Robinson Research 18 Studio Cascade
Executive Summary Report February 2013
City of Spokane Valley
Park and
y ' ecreation Plan '6,.
, . .. „.. if, 4,4 ..4
, i,+.._...... .4,, _
, . _44.4 . _ . _
i , , .
. .
..,
_ .
_,. .
N.
tlF .¢.. - .,
` '" "
,A'
Y 1.
,I .r.
r!.4,..---. i , rw 'y
>s1", � . } ii, R .1,� _i � ,
1
.tl i -{ '._K y •" pF 1 .-3, .' ::::-.-t __—
{ 1 ■{! -^-.
1 IYYYYi R
APRIL 2006
a 4.
s e . '
. *hp% . .rPl.
A Submitted by:
MIG, Inc.
815 SW 2nd Ave, Suite 200
1. Portland, OR 97204
(503) 297-1005
www.migcorn.corn
PREFACE
The Plan presented in this document provides the foundation for a park
and recreation program for Spokane Valley, Washington. This plan is
somewhat unique in that it is for a new city that was incorporated in
March 2003. Instantly becoming a city of nearly 84,000 people, the
Park and Recreation Department faced the task of maintaining an ?w
aging park system and developing policies for the delivery of leisure r _
services. _
The challenge for this Plan has been to define a strategic position fore '
the City in park and recreation services. Until the City's incorporation, �,} s ''
Spokane County offered limited parks in the area, and the YMCA,
private sport groups and the City of Spokane provided most recreation �¢�' ' 4g_
and organized sport programs. The City of Spokane Valley has
assumed primary responsibility for providing parks. Spokane County y' 4
manages the adult softball program and leases several of the sport ,. ��
fields owned by Spokane Valley. Youth sports are still primarily k`
provided by the YMCA and private youth sport groups.
This brings up the following questions:
• What programs and services should Spokane Valley
provide?
• What would be the most efficient makeup of a park and
recreation program?
The major factors that determine the efficiency of a park and
recreation program are: 1) the ability to generate revenue from
services rendered; and 2) the cost to maintain facilities. While good
design can help reduce operating costs, the greater impact usually
comes from facilities and activities that generate revenue. The chart
below illustrates the potential revenue from three basic types of leisure
services:
Parks Only 115%
Programs Only 90%
Major Facilities 150%
Financial Return for Services
This Plan recommends a balance between parks, recreation programs,
and major facilities.
The Plan has identified several key issues and actions the City should
address in the near future. These are:
• Community Support: The park and recreation program in
Spokane Valley is new and, as a result, has had little direct contact
with interest groups within the community. The Department needs
to develop an advocacy group to champion the benefits of park
and recreation services. The Plan identifies a number of actions to
take to meet this goal.
• Park Rehabilitation: The current park system is not only limited in
terms of the areas it serves, but also faces a great need for facility
improvements. A program of park rehabilitation to address the
years of deferred maintenance should be initiated.
• Aquatics: The City owns three outdoor swimming pools. While
they are in adequate condition, the pools do need some upgrades
to meet safety codes and operational requirements. The County
has earmarked $1 .6 million dollars for the City of Spokane Valley
to build a swimming pool. While this is enough money to build a
very modest outdoor pool, it is not enough to build a suitable
public indoor pool. As a result, the Plan recommends upgrading
the three pools to meet standards and develop a major water
playground at Valley Mission Park. In the long term, the City may
wish to pursue the development of an indoor aquatic center,
although the anticipated development of a major aquatic center in
Coeur d'Alene could impact that decision.
• New Parks: Many neighborhoods in Spokane Valley are not
conveniently located near a park. Meeting park needs should be
one of the highest priorities for the City. This will be a challenge in
some neighborhoods where little vacant land exists. However, the
Plan addresses how this can be achieved. Of most importance is
for the City to acquire parkland while some parcels exist. This is
particularly true for the Greenacres Neighborhood.
• Recreation Programs and Services: Recreation classes and
programs provide a considerable benefit and reach a significant
number of city residents. Because some of the cost of these
services can be offset by program fees, the net cost to the City can
minimal. Because of these factors, the Parks and Recreation
Department should develop a comprehensive recreation program
that serves all age groups and abilities.
• Partnerships: The City cannot and should not provide all of the
recreation services needed in the community. It is important for the
City of Spokane Valley to monitor community needs and note
where overlap and voids exist. One way of efficiently providing
park and recreation services is to partner with private and non-
profit organizations.
• Plan Update: Because The City of Spokane Valley was recently
incorporated, the Plan should be reviewed and updated in
approximately four years. This will give the community time to
establish its roles and responsibilities and reflect on the
recommendations of the Plan.
CHAPTER 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION PAGE
1 .1 Introduction 1-2
1 .2 Public Involvement 1-3
1 .3 Report Organization 1-4
1 .4 Goals, Policies and Objectives 1-5
CHAPTER 2: PLANNING CONTEXT
2.1 Regional Context 2-2
2.2 Planning Area 2-3
2.3 Demographic Characteristics 2-3
2.4 Land Use 2-9
2.5 Housing 2-11
2.6 Population Growth 2-11
CHAPTER 3: EXISTING PARKS AND FACILITIES
3.1 Park Land Definitions 3-1
3.2 Park Land Inventory 3-2
3.3 Park Site Analysis 3-10
3.4 Summary of Recreation Facilities 3-22
CHAPTER 4: EXISTING OPERATIONS
4.1 Organizational Structure 4-2
4.2 Staffing Levels 4-5
4.3 Operations 4-6
4.4 Maintenance Operations 4-11
4.5 Recreation Participation 4-11
CHAPTER 5: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
5.1 Household Recreation Survey 5.1
5.2 Public Visioning Workshop 5-3
5.3 Focus Group Meetings 5-3
5.4 Telephone Survey 5-4
5.5 Organized Sports Questionnaire 5-4
5.6 Summary of Park Land Needs 5-5
5.7 Summary of Recreation Facility Needs 5-12
CHAPTER 1
CHAPTER 6: RECOMMENDATIONS PAGE
6.1 Parkland 6-1
6.2 Trails, Pathways, and Bikeways 6-30
6.3 Administration and Management 6-34
6.4 Maintenance 6-40
6.5 Recreation Programs and Services 6-41
6.6 Riverfront Access 6-43
CHAPTER 7: AQUATIC FACILITIES
7.1 Current Swimming Opportunities 7-1
7.2 Demand for Outdoor Pools 7-1
7.3 Leisure Pool Concept 7-2
7.4 Demand for Indoor Family Leisure Pool 7-3
7.5 Aquatic Recommendations 7-9
CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENTATION
8.1 Funding Sources 8-1
8.2 Capital Projects 8-5
8.3 Preliminary Project Priorities 8-6
8.4 Basis for Estimating Costs 8-7
8.5 Capital Costs 8-8
8.6 Current Funding Availability 8-8
8.7 Financing Strategy 8-9
APPENDICES
City Park and Recreation Areas A
Park Land and Recreation Facility Inventory B
Demand Analysis C
Design Guidelines D
Park and Recreation Plan 1-6
CHAPTER 1
CHAPTER l:
INTRODUCTION
In the Spring of 2004, the City of Spokane Valley initiated a study to
assess community needs for parks and recreation facilities and develop
a vision for meeting those needs. The outgrowth of this study is a 20-
year Park and Recreation Plan that assesses public demand for park
and recreation facilities, establishes policies and guidelines for park
planning and development, proposes future parks and trails,
recommends improvements to existing facilities, and describes a
financing strategy for funding the actions. 'Abtl
The City of Spokane Valley was incorporated in March 2003, and with id
a population of 83,950, became the eighth largest city in Washington
State. The City encompasses approximately 38.5 square miles of land
area. For a new city, Spokane Valley already has a large service area
and population in need of park and recreation services.
Within its boundaries, the City of Spokane Valley contains 543 acres of
parks, open space, and recreation areas located at 18 sites within the
community. Of that amount, the City owns 163 acres. Nearly 380
acres include natural areas and corridors owned by the State of
Washington. Most sports fields and facilities in Spokane Valley are
provided by the three school districts—West Valley, Central Valley, and
East Valley. At this point, the City has a limited recreation program
and contracts out park maintenance and the operation of the three
swimming pools.
Today, the City has taken steps to position itself as a regional leader in
recreation. For example, CenterPlace which was opened in the Fall of
2005, will combine with the recently completed Mirabeau Meadows
Park and Mirabeau Springs to form a conference and cultural center
with regional appeal.
Great opportunities exist for the development of a comprehensive park
and recreation program in Spokane Valley. The Park and Recreation
Plan will help identify those opportunities and create an overall vision
for the community's future. As Spokane Valley grows, the City will
need clear direction on how to balance community needs for parks,
facilities, programs, and services. These needs include improvements
to existing parks, the acquisition of neighborhood and community
parks, the development of sports fields, swimming opportunities, and
trails, and the expansion of program and recreation services. This
plan provides guidance on how to address these divergent needs while
developing an innovative park system to represent the new city.
1- 1 Park & Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 1
1 .1 PLAN DEVELOPMENT
The planning process for developing the City's Park and Recreation
Plan was made up of four phases (Figure 1 .1).
Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV
LIIMI 4WLIIMI <=Laum tOINI■
Spring-Fall 2004 Winter 2005 Spring-Summer 2005 Summer 2005
Figure 1-1: Planning Process
• Phase I: To establish a framework for the plan, Phase I included an
inventory and analysis of existing recreation resources in the Spokane
Valley planning area. This information incorporated a community profile,
a review of population growth patterns,an inventory of the City's existing
parks and recreation facilities,and an analysis of park and recreation
operations, maintenance,and programs.
• Phase II: A comprehensive assessment of recreation needs in the Spokane
Valley area was conducted by measuring public opinion, recreation
patterns,and perceived needs through several public involvement venues.
These included a household survey,a public visioning forum, input from
staff and stakeholders and a survey of organized sports organizations.
Based on community demand, needs were determined for park land,
open space, facilities and recreation programs.
• Phase III: In Phase III, recommendations were developed for
improving existing parks and acquiring and developing new parks,
trails, and recreational facilities. In addition, strategies were
proposed to expand programming and to bring park maintenance
in line with community expectations.
• Phase IV: The final phase involved creating an action plan to
implement recommendations and developing a financing strategy
to fund priority improvements.
Park and Recreation Plan 1-2
CHAPTER 1
1 .2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
To develop a solid foundation for the Park and Recreation Plan,
Spokane Valley residents contributed to the development of the plan
through five public involvement venues:
• Household Recreation Survey: A city-wide survey of public attitudes,
recreation interests, and recreation participation was conducted in
Fall 2004 and Spring 2005. Questionnaires were distributed to
selected households in the City limits of Spokane Valley, and 398
completed returns were received.
• Public Visioning Workshop: Approximately 33 residents participated
in a community workshop on November 4`h, 2004, to discuss their
vision for parks, recreation facilities, and programs and services in
Spokane Valley.
• Focus Group Meetings: Eight focus group meetings were held to obtain
additional input from special interest groups, including youth sports,adult
sports,cultural arts,SCOPE,trails/open space,seniors,Green Acres
Neighborhood, Ponderosa Neighborhood,and representatives from the
Planning Department and Planning Commission. Detailed findings of
these meetings are found in Appendix C (Demand Analysis) but some of
the key points were:
• More emphasis should be placed on City managed facilities
rather than relying entirely on school facilities.
• There is a lack of programs, services and facilities for the youth
(age 5-12).
• The City should raise the awareness of benefits of park and
recreation activities and build public support for its programs.
• The City should develop partnerships with other cities, Spokane
County, schools, service organizations, and the public in general
to share in the cost of service delivery.
• Telephone Survey: A citywide telephone survey was conducted in the
Spring of 2004. This survey was conducted for the City's Comprehensive
Plan and provided valuable park and recreation information. All totaled,
1-3 Park & Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 1
409 responses were received from 3,775 attempted calls. The survey
addressed many City services, including questions regarding the delivery of
park and recreation services.
• Sports Group Survey: During the Fall of 2004,organized sport
questionnaires were sent to all organized sport groups providing services
within Spokane Valley.
In addition to the public processes described above, key staff members
met regularly throughout the planning process to discuss critical issues.
1 .3 REPORT ORGANIZATION
The Park and Recreation Plan is organized into eight chapters and four
appendices:
• Chapter 1: Introduction describes the purpose of the report, the
planning process, the public involvement activities, and the
organization of this document.
,Pty„ 4'v., • Chapter 2: Community Context discusses the profile of Spokane
Valley that provides the framework for the Plan. This includes a
discussion of the planning area, the regional context, natural
features, climate, and demographic characteristics.
• Chapter 3: Existing Parks and Facilities summarizes the park and facility
inventory and analyzes the City's park land according to a park
classification system.
• Chapter 4: Existing Operations analyzes the organizational structure
of the Park and Recreation Department and presents an
assessment of staffing, operations, maintenance, and programs.
• Chapter 5: Needs Assessrnent presents an overview of the
methodology and results of the park and recreation facility needs
assessment process.
• Chapter 6: Recommendations includes recommendations for
improvements to existing parks and for the acquisition and
development of new sites and specialized facilities. It also
introduces strategies for recreation programming and the
administration and maintenance of parks and facilities.
• Chapter 7:Aquatic Facilities contains a market analysis for aquatic
facilities in Spokane Valley, including cost estimates and
recommendations for design.
Park and Recreation Plan 1-4
CHAPTER 1
• Chapter 8: Implementation identifies potential funding sources and
financing strategies for priority capital improvements.
• Appendix A: City Park and Recreation Areas provides a summary
description of existing City parks, along with their facilities,
condition, and planned improvements.
• Appendix B: Park and Recreation Facilities Inventory contains a detailed
inventory of park land by provider, private facilities, and sports
fields, tennis courts, gymnasiums, and pools within the Spokane
Valley planning area.
• Appendix C: Demand Analysis is a compilation of data from the
Recreation Survey.
• Appendix D: Park Design Considerations presents acquisition
guidelines and design standards for park development
In addition to the above appendices, a series of background
reports called Discussion Papers were prepared.
1 .4 GOALS, POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES
The goals, planning policies, and objectives listed below create a
framework for implementing the Park and Recreation Plan. The goals
are statements about Spokane Valley's desired future. These goals are
supported by policies that guide plan implementation and objectives
that provide realistic, achievable, and measurable steps toward
reaching the goals. Together, the goals, policies, and objectives can
be used to help measure the plan's success.
Goal 1 : To develop a balanced, diverse, and accessible park and
recreation system that meets the specific needs of the residents of
Spokane Valley.
Policy 1-A: The City of Spokane Valley will endeavor to provide
park land and recreation facilities equitably throughout the city at
conveniently located and easily accessible sites.
Objective 1-A (1): Establish and regularly update a
comprehensive inventory of existing park and recreation
resources.
Objective 1-A (2): Consider all options, including partnerships
and collaborations, to acquire and develop neighborhood
parks and community parks in unserved or underserved areas,
as identified in the Recreation Needs Assessment.
1-5 Park & Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 1
Objective 1-A (3): Prioritize the acquisition and development of
park and recreation facilities that contribute to community
identity and community pride in Spokane Valley.
Policy 1-B: The City of Spokane Valley will attempt to provide
equitable and diverse recreation opportunities and activities for the
benefit of Spokane Valley residents and visitors to our community.
Objective 1-B (1): In the near term, offer a limited recreation
program that builds public interest and support. In the long
term, offer comprehensive program services to all ages,
abilities, and economic and cultural backgrounds.
Objective 1-B (2): Adapt programming to meet community
needs and desires as identified through community
questionnaires, focus group meetings, and public meeting
processes.
Objective 1-B (3): Periodically and systematically monitor,
evaluate, and revise existing programs and services to ensure
quality programming.
Objective 1-B (4): Identify anticipated service areas
(neighborhood, community, city-wide, regional) for future parks
and recreation programs to equitably serve all users.
Objective 1-B (5): Maximize the use of existing facilities and
programs to support local needs, while encouraging tourism
and regional use.
Goal 2: To maintain and manage the appropriate social, cultural,
physical, and natural resources required to maintain and improve the
quality of life in Spokane Valley.
Policy 2-A: The City of Spokane Valley will strive to design and
maintain parks and recreation amenities and facilities in a safe,
attractive manner, to contribute to the health, safety, and welfare of
the community.
Objective 2-A (1): Adopt and utilize Design Guidelines for site
selection and development in the acquisition and/or
development of parks within each park classification.
Objective 2-A (2): Prioritize the renovation and upgrade of
existing facilities to improve site safety and encourage facility
use.
Park and Recreation Plan 1-6
CHAPTER 1
Objective 2-A (3): Periodically assess the condition of park
amenities and facilities.
Objective 2-A (4): Establish a program and budget for
addressing deferred maintenance.
Objective 2-A (5): Embrace environmentally sound practices as
natural resource stewards.
Policy 2-B: The City of Spokane Valley will work to define and
standardize maintenance procedures for park land and significant
City resources.
Objective 2-B (1): Establish minimum maintenance standards
for the park system and establish a goal for minimum
maintenance cost per acre.
Policy 2-C: Within budget resources, the City of Spokane Valley will
seek to acquire park land with unique natural features or significant
natural resources in order to protect or preserve them for present
and future generations.
Objective 2-C (1): Seek to acquire riparian corridors where
feasible to protect these natural resources and to offer potential
sites for trail development.
Objective 2-C (2): Develop effective natural resource
management plans for significant natural areas within parks
and other City-owned or controlled lands to identify
management priorities and to guide development and
restoration decisions.
Objective 2-C (3): Directly and/or cooperatively acquire and
protect land within the flood zone of the Spokane River and
other drainage corridors. Plan park and recreation facilities
and public access to these areas where appropriate.
Objective 2-C (4): Prioritize critical natural resource areas
within Spokane Valley, including wetland areas, fish and
wildlife habitat areas, floodways/floodplains, and geologic
hazard areas.
Goal 3: To coordinate park and recreation planning, services, and
development to provide the highest level of service in a cost-efficient
and fiscally responsible way.
1-7 Park & Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 1
Policy 3-A: Generally, the City will not duplicate service nor
compete with private organizations in the delivery of park and
recreation services, unless other service providers are not meeting
the unique and specific needs of Spokane Valley residents.
Policy 3-B: The City of Spokane Valley will continue to foster
cooperative development of park and recreation resources and the
provision of services through private and public collaborations.
Objective 3-B (1): Work closely with the City Manager, City
Council, and other City departments to achieve mutually
beneficial objectives.
Objective 3-B (2): Work in cooperation with governmental
agencies, educational institutions, private and regional
recreation organizations, and citizen interest groups to
maximize the provision of parks and services.
Objective 3-B (3): Pursue partnerships as a key means for
leveraging resources to meet community needs for park land,
sports facilities, and services, while minimizing duplications of
effort.
Goal 4: Spokane Valley will continue efforts to provide an efficient
level of park and recreation services based on current financial
resources and the ability of residents to pay for those services
Policy 4-A: The City of Spokane Valley will strive provide facilities,
programs, and qualified personnel in a fiscally responsible and
cost effective manner.
Objective 4-A (1): Pursue cost sharing and cost recovery
mechanisms where appropriate.
Objective 4-A (2): Weigh the costs and benefits of
Departmental services and facilities to assist in decision-making
regarding programming and facility development.
Objective 4-A (3): Establish equitable fee structures for facilities
and programs to help ensure the long-term maintenance and
operation of facilities while ensuring affordability.
Objective 4-A (4): Establish more revenue-generating programs
to increase program funding and to help fund or subsidize
other programs and services.
Park and Recreation Plan 1-8
CHAPTER 1
Objective 4-A (5): Offer programs at a range of costs (free,
low-cost, full price) and implement other strategies to ensure
program affordability, while meeting city financial goals.
Policy 4-B: The City of Spokane Valley will strive to provide the
highest level of service possible within identified budget
parameters.
Policy 4-C: The City of Spokane Valley will periodically update and
revise the Master Plan to meet changing fiscal conditions.
Objective 4-C (1): Identify funding options for all proposed
projects.
Objective 4-C (2): Make fiscally reasonable recommendations
for the development of facilities and services that reflect
community desires and needs.
Policy4-D: Encourage the acquisition, maintenance and
preservation of public art that inspires and enriches citizens of
Spokane Valley.
Objective 4-D (1): Identify public art opportunities that
highlight the cultural and historical connections of
Spokane Valley through local history, environmental
systems and visual symbols.
Objective 4-D (2): Reflect community identify using public
art to create unique community places, define or re-define
public spaces, or suggest experiences that evoke a strong
sense of orientation.
Objective 4-D (3): Use public art to create visible
landmarks and artistic points of reference. These projects
should serve as a source of community pride and
reinforce and further define community identify.
Objective 4-D (4): Encourage public art in private
development by providing incentives to include works of
art in private development.
Objective 4-D (5): Utilize public art in Spokane Valley to
attract visitors to the City.
1-9 Park & Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 2
PLANNING CONTEXT
CHAPTER 2
CHAPTER 2•
PLANNING CONTEXT
This chapter provides a profile of Spokane Valley, Washington, in the
planning context of parks, recreation facilities, and programs. This
profile includes a description of the region, planning area and sub-
areas, natural resources, climate, demographics, land use, housing,
and population projections.
Key Findings
The following key findings emerged from an evaluation of the planning
context:
• Several natural resource areas in Spokane Valley are important for
recreation. These lands may be environmentally sensitive and have
limited development potential, but they are often conducive to
park, open space, and recreation uses. The most notable natural
resource in the city is the Spokane River and its adjoining riparian
corridor and flood zone.
• Spokane Valley has a four-season climate that supports diverse
recreation opportunities year-round. Indoor and outdoor facilities
should be considered to take advantage of this climate.
• Spokane Valley is the eighth largest city in Washington and the
second largest in Spokane County, with an estimated 2005
population of 85,010.
• Demographic characteristics often provide insights regarding
recreation demand, interests, and participation. Since Spokane
Valley was incorporated in 2003, there is no specific historical data
to illustrate demographic variations. However, population
characteristics for the area can be derived from regional
population statistics.
• Based on the assumptions developed in Spokane Valley's draft
Comprehensive Plan, the build-out population (year 2025) is
expected to reach over 107,000 people within the current city
limits.
Park and Recreation Plan 2- 1
CHAPTER 2
2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT
The City of Spokane Valley is located near the eastern border of the
State of Washington in an inland valley that stretches from the west
plains in Eastern Washington, eastward through Spokane and Spokane
Valley to Post Falls and Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Spokane Valley is
located in the heart of Spokane County. In general, the City is
bordered on the west by the City of Spokane and on the east by
unincorporated Spokane County, with the newly formed City of Liberty
Lake nearby. The City is located approximately 15 miles west of the
Idaho border and 110 miles south of the Canadian border. Figure 2-
1 illustrates this regional context.
Figure 2-1
Regional Context
G
O
3
o 'S
a m
vt +n
Long Lake o
Interstate vv City of Coeur d'Alene
ScoG(7ae River
City of Spobane __- City of Liberty Lake
Liberty Lake
City of Spokane Valley
Coeur d'Alene Lake
Ln
2-2 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 2
2.2 PLANNING AREA
The planning area for the Spokane Valley Park and Recreation Plan
lotimo
includes land within the city limits plus land within the City's urban iz
growth area (UGA) (Figure 2-2).
The City of Spokane Valley encompasses roughly 38.5 square miles
(24,640 acres) and generally follows the boundaries described below:
• North the City is bounded by the Town of Millwood, the '
Spokane River, and Swanson Avenue/Foster Road.
• East: Spokane Valley is bordered by Hodges Road, with the
City of Liberty Lake nearby.
• South: the City has an irregular boundary on the south but
generally located in the vicinity of 32nd Avenue.
• West: Havana Street is the primary divider on the western side
of the City.
2.3 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Demographic characteristics often
provide insights assessing recreation £+,
needs. The existing population base
in Spokane Valley serves as the "r- 7• ``
foundation for park and facility
demand. Factors such as age and
income significantly affect the level of `w '
participation and overall interest in
recreational activities. Employment,
education and ethnicity also play a '
role. " ;
ti
Spokane Valley is the eighth largest ",#)±'
City in Washington and the second '
largest in Spokane County with an
estimated 2005 population of 85,010. 16_
Table 2.1 illustrates population growth in Spokane County and the
State of Washington. There is no historical data prior to city
incorporation in 2003.
Since no 2000 Census data is available for Spokane Valley, it is
assumed that the age distribution of the City of Spokane Valley is
Park and Recreation Plan 2-3
CHAPTER 2
similar to the rest of Spokane County. As illustrated in Table 2.3,
approximately 25% of the population in Spokane Valley is expected to
be under the age of 18. Between 12-14% of City residents are likely
over the age of 65.
Seniors in Spokane Valley are better represented demographically than
in the State of Washington overall. In general, the older the
population, the less they participate in active or competitive recreation
activities. In contrast, youth tend to participate in recreation activities
more frequently than any other age group and favor more active and
competitive activities. These activities historically have included
basketball, baseball, soccer, and swimming. However, an emerging
trend has been toward non-competitive extreme sports, including
skateboarding, in-line skating, mountain biking and rock climbing.
Young adults (ages 18-35) are also an active age group and typically
form the core of adult competitive sports. While college students
represent a large percentage of Spokane Valley's overall population,
particularly for this age group, they may not reflect the needs or desires
of the community as a whole. Furthermore, universities and colleges
typically provide recreation programs and facilities to meet most of the
recreation needs of students. This dramatically reduces the demand
for City-provided programs and facilities for this age group.
Older adults (ages 35-65) typically have less time to devote to
recreational activities and tend to have a more passive interest in
recreation programs. They may, however, participate in parent/child
activities or spend time as a spectator at youth events. Personal
recreational time is at a premium and often limited to weekends and
evenings.
2-4 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 2
Table 2.1
Historical Population Growth 1900-2000
City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County and Washington
Year City of % Spokane % State of %Increase
Spokane Increase County Increase Washington
Valley
1900 -- -- 57,542 -- 518,104 --
1910 139,404 142.3 % 1,141,990 54.6%
1920 -- -- 141,289 1.4% 1,356,621 15.8 %
1930 -- -- 150,477 6.5% 1,563,396 13.2 %
1940 -- -- 164,652 9.4% 1,736,191 10.0%
1950 -- -- 221,561 34.6% 2,378,963 27.0%
1960 -- -- 278,333 25.6% 2,853,214 16.6%
1970 -- -- 287,487 3.3 % 3,143,250 9.2 %
1980 -- -- 341,835 18.9% 4,132,353 23.9%
1990 -- -- 361,333 5.7% 4,866,669 15.1 %
2000 -- -- 417,349 15.5% 5,894,121 17.4%
Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management
Table 2.2
Age Distributions - 2000
Selected Geographic Areas
Ages Under Ages 18 Age 65 Median
Area 18 to 64 and Over Age
State of Washington 25.7% 61.1 % 11.2 % 35.3
Spokane County,WA 25.7% 61.9% 12.4% 35.4
Spokane MSA,WA(1) 25.7% 61.9% 12.4% 35.4
Spokane CCD,WA(2) 25.2 % 61.2 % 13.6% 35.5
City of Spokane Valley,WA NA NA NA NA
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID 24.9% 60.3 % 14.8% 34.8
City of Kennewick,WA 29.6% 60.2 % 10.2 % 32.3
City of Spokane,WA 24.8% 61.2 % 14.0% 34.7
City of Yakima,WA 29.4% 56.6% 14.0% 31.4
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Spokane Metropolitan Statistical Area (1), and Spokane
Valley Census District (2) (MSA: Metropolitan Statistical Area, CCD: Census County
Division)
Income levels also reveal important recreation participation
characteristics. In general, higher income groups tend to be more
active and participate in more expensive types of recreation. Low
Park and Recreation Plan 2-5
CHAPTER 2
income groups may rely on the provision of subsidized programs or
free facilities, such as play areas, trails, and non-scheduled sports
fields.
Income levels within the region are lower than the state as a whole, but
they are higher than many of the surrounding communities. A
comparison of the 2000 household incomes is shown in Table 2.3.
Income characteristics for Spokane Valley are not available prior to
2003.
Table 2.3
Median Household Income Levels - 2000
Selected Geographic Areas
Area 2000 Household 2000 Per Capit
Income Income
State of Washington $45,776 $22,973
Spokane County,WA $37,308 $19,233
Spokane MSA,WA $37,308 $19,233
Spokane CCD,WA $35,432 $19,168
City of Spokane Valley,WA NA NA
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID $33,001 $17,454
City of Kennewick,WA $41,213 $20,152
City of Spokane,WA $32,273 $18,451
City of Yakima,WA $29,475 $15,920
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
An analysis of the labor force in the region reveals the largest class of
employment is "management, professionals and related occupations."
This employment class was followed closely by"sales and office
occupations." Table 2.4 summarizes employment classifications
around Spokane Valley and in comparable cities. Major employers in
the Spokane region are listed in Table 2.5.
2-6 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 2
Table 2,4
Employment Classification - 2000
Selected Geographic Areas
N
o 0
o v°)
C -o C c
- o C
a a s a
aci O v O c y c 0 a U _ .- o
E ® Q -o .� " m .4 c c .4 0 .4
W.y N 6 fa C L0 0_ i 17 a) C j Q.2 0_
CS 0 N C J N 7
CD CI ® ° a
CD 8 , v 0 ov o2av
Q gace co ol0 w o0 Owg0 0- I- g0
State of Washington 35.6% 14.9% 25.9% 1.6% 9.4% 12.7 %
Spokane County 33.0% 16.9% 28.4% 0.4% 8.6% 12.7%
Spokane MSA 33.0% 16.9% 28.4% 0.4% 8.6% 12.7 %
Spokane CCD 32.2 % 17.4% 29.1 % 0.3 % 8.2 % 12.7%
Ci of Spokane Valle ,WA NA NA NA NA NA NA
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID 27.8% 19.4% 28.2 % 0.5% 11.9% 12.2 %
City of Kennewick,WA 32.4% 16.3 % 26.4% 1.5 % 10.5% 12.9%
City of Spokane,WA 32.4% 18.7% 28.5% 0.4% 7.9% 12.2 %
City of Yakima,WA 28.0% 18.2 % 23.1 % 5.7% 8.4% 16.5%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Table 2.5
Major Employer - 2003
Spokane Areas
Employer Number Service Area
Fairchild Air Force Base 4,969 Military
Spokane School District 81 3,147 Education
Sacred Heart Medical Center 2,950 Health care
State of Washington 2,522 Government
Empire Health Services 2,092 Health care
City of Spokane 2,083 Government
Spokane County 1,961 Government
Kaiser Aluminum&Chemical Corp. 1,628 Aluminum products
U.S. Postal Service 1,482 Government
Community Colleges of Spokane 1,458 Education
U.S. Government 1,401 Government
URM Stores, Inc 1,314 Food service
Avista Corp 1,300 Utility
Park and Recreation Plan 2-7
CHAPTER 2
An analysis of race and ethnic background in the region revealed that
the ethnic composition of Spokane Valley is largely Caucasian white.
Ethnicity is important in terms of recreation interests. Some ethnic
groups have a higher participation level in specific types of recreational
activities, which would increase the demand for certain types of
recreational facilities. A breakdown of race is listed in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6
Race - 2000
Selected Geographic Areas
c a
• c ¢ o
o a Q ® c c
Area s s ° o ° 2 V
g Q 1 E 0 N V
Q a� E ? a
a®
E w Z
State of Washington 81.1 % 4.6% 5.5% 3.2 % 1.6% 0.4%
Spokane County,WA 91.4% 0.8% 1.9% 1.6% 1.4% 0.2 %
Spokane MSA,WA 91.4% 0.8% 1.9% 1.6% 1.4% 0.2 %
Spokane CCD,WA 91.0% 0.8% 2.0% 1.6% 1.5% 0.2 %
Ci of S•okane Valle ,WA NA NA NA NA NA NA
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID 95.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.2 % 0.8% 0.1 %
City of Kennewick,WA 82.9% 9.4% 2.1 % 1.1 % 0.9% 0.1 %
City of Spokane,WA 89.5% 0.9% 2.2 % 2.1 % 1.8% 0.2 %
City of Yakima,WA 68.8% 22.0% 1.2 % 2.0% 2.0% 0.1 %
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Note: Approximately 3%of the white category are Hispanic
Table 2.7 presents a summary of total population of Hispanic or Latino
descent. As can be seen, Spokane Valley maintains a relatively low
percentage of residents of Hispanic/Latino descent compared to other
jurisdictions.
2-8 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 2
Table 2.7
Percentage Hispanic/Latino by Jurisdiction - 2000
Selected Geographic Areas
_.N.frffi,Area %Hispanic or Latin.=
State of Washington 7.5%
Spokane County,WA 2.8%
Spokane MSA,WA 2.8%
Spokane CCD,WA 2.8%
Ci of Spokane Valle ,WA NA
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID 2.7%
City of Kennewick,WA 15.5%
City of Spokane,WA 3.0%
City of Yakima,WA 33.7%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
An analysis of education levels revealed a majority of the adult
residents in the Spokane area (88 percent) have a high school degree
or higher level of education (Table 2.8). Over a quarter of the
residents (24 percent) have a bachelors, or graduate degree. Overall,
the breakdown of the educational attainment would suggest a fairly
educated community.
2.4 LAND USE
Land use plays an important role in the location, distribution, and
availability of park and recreational facilities. An evaluation of land
use patterns in the Spokane Valley area helped identify the most
effective means of meeting the City's park and open space needs. For
example, residential areas need near-by, highly accessible parks to
serve the people who live in each neighborhood. Industrial areas may
need open space or natural area buffers and parks for employee use
during the day. High-density commercial areas are more likely to
require plazas and small areas for passive recreation.
Based on geographic information supplied by the City, the total land
area of the City of Spokane Valley is 24,640 acres. Only 21,405 acres
within the City are considered to be buildable. A majority of this land
is zoned for residential use (67.4 percent), industrial use (21 .8
percent), and commercial/mixed use (10.8 percent).
Park and Recreation Plan 2-9
CHAPTER 2
Table 2.8
Educational Attainment -2000
Selected Geographic Areas
a o o ass)
`
m o - Z s m o
. E o 0 (1) '5 a
a c -a a E ° o °' o N 'o U a as m sa
. 73 an -0 0 40 I -w o ®
to
Q ca
State of Washington 4.3 % 8.6% 24.9 % 26.4% 8.0% 18.4% 9.3 %
Spokane County,WA 2.9% 8.0% 26.8% 27.2 % 10.1 % 16.3 % 8.7%
Spokane MSA,WA 2.9% 8.0% 26.8% 27.2 % 10.1 % 16.3 % 8.7%
Spokane CCD,WA 3.0% 8.2 % 26.9% 27.0% 10.0% 16.1 % 8.7%
City of Spokane Valley, NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
WA
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID 3.9 % 10.5% 28.9% 28.7% 8.5 % 13.2 % 6.3 %
City of Kennewick,WA 6.6% 10.1 % 25.0% 26.1 % 10.1 % 14.7% 7.4%
City of Spokane,WA 3.1 % 8.8% 26.3 % 26.7% 9.7% 16.2 % 9.2 %
City of Yakima,WA 16.0% 14.6 % 26.6% 21.6% 5.3 % 10.1 % 5.9%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Since most of the developed land in the City is classified residential, the
proximity and location of parks and support facilities within
neighborhoods were important criteria to consider for park planning.
Also, the overall level of development within the City was particularly
important in terms of locating future park and recreation facilities.
The challenge in developing a comprehensive park system in Spokane
Valley is the lack of available vacant land. According to the Available
Lands Study prepared by the City of Spokane Valley, there are few
totally vacant sites. There are many partially developed sites (i.e., a
house on a 1-5 acre lot), but few parcels of 15 acres or more in size.
This land use pattern makes it difficult to acquire larger sized parcels
for park use.
2-10 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 2
2.5 HOUSING
Based on the 2000 census data, a majority of the households in the
Spokane area are 1 -unit detached households. Such residential
development is less dense than apartment complexes, mobile home
parks, etc., and would allow a larger service area for parks than more
densely populated areas.
Table 2.9
Housing Units 2000
City of Spokane Valley
I Year Spokane County Spokane MSA Spokane CCD
(%of Total) (%of Total) (%of Total)
1 Unit Detached 66.0% 66.0% 65.5%
1 Unit Attached 2.9% 2.9% 2.8%
2 Units 3.6% 3.6% 4.0%
3-4 Units 3.5% 3.5% 3.8%
5-9 Units 3.4% 3.5% 4.0%
10-19 Units 4.1 % 4.1 % 4.7%
20 or More Units 9.5% 9.5% 11.3 %
Mobile Home 6.9% 6.9% 3.8%
RV,Van, etc. 0.1 % 0.1 % 0.1 %
TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
2.6 POPULATION GROWTH
In most cities, significant population growth occurs because of new
development or the annexation of existing developed areas. Based on
the assumptions developed in Spokane Valley's draft Comprehensive
Plan, the build-out population (year 2025) is expected to reach over
148,000 people. Within the current city limits, this number is expected
to reach 107,000.
Table 2.10 shows the population projection for the City of Spokane
Valley through the year 2025, based on growth at the County rate.
Park and Recreation Plan 2- 1 1
CHAPTER 2
Table 2.10
Population Projections
City of Spokane Valley
Year Spokane County Spokane Valley %of Total Cou
Population ' Population 2
2000 417,939 -- --
2003 432,000 83,950 19.4%
2010 509,327 98,976 19.4 %
2015 555,873 108,022 19.4 %
2020 606,802 117,919 19.4 %
2025 657,946 148,523 22.6 %
'Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management
2 Source: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. Note populations forecasts between
the Comprehensive Plan and the Park and Recreation Plan may vary slightly.
2-12 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 3
EXISTING PARKS AND FACILITIES
CHAPTER 3
CHAPTER 3•
EXISTING PARKS AND FACILITIES
The City of Spokane Valley is the one of the primary providers of park
and recreational facilities in the city. Other public and private
providers also contribute parks and open space in the area. Three
school districts (West Valley, Central Valley and East Valley) provide a
variety of athletic facilities that contribute to the diversity of facilities
available in the City.
This chapter summarizes the proposed park classification system, 1111111''' 4 -
along with key findings regarding existin g parks, open space, and I17117 �' � e.���a 1� 't
recreation facilities. A complete inventory of park land and recreation i - . t-- -y
facilities in the Spokane Valley Planning Area is included in Appendices
B.
3.1 PARK LAND DEFINITIONS
In order to address specific planning needs for park, open space, and
recreational areas, park classifications have been proposed. Each
park class provides a distinct type of recreational opportunity. The
ideal community park system is made up of several different types or
classifications of parks. Design guidelines for each park type is found
in Appendix D. The classification system proposed for Spokane Valley
is as follows:
• Neighborhood Parks: Neighborhood parks are designed primarily
for non-supervised, non-organized recreation activities. They are
generally small in size (about 3-7 acres) and serve people living
within approximately one-half mile of the park. Since these parks
are located within walking and bicycling distance of most users, the
activities they offer serve the entire neighborhood, including
children. Typical facilities found in a neighborhood park include:
playgrounds, picnic areas, trails, open grass areas for passive use,
outdoor basketball courts, restrooms, picnic shelters, and multi-use
open grass areas for practice field sports.
• Community Parks: A community park is planned primarily to
provide active and structured recreation opportunities for young
people and adults. Community park facilities are designed for
organized activities and sports, although individual and family
activities are also encouraged. Community parks can also provide
indoor facilities to meet a wider range of recreation interests.
Community parks serve a much larger area and offer more
facilities. As a result, they require more support facilities, such as
parking, restrooms, and covered play areas. Community parks
Park and Recreation Plan 3-1
CHAPTER 3
usually have sport fields or similar facilities as the central focus of
the park. Their service area has roughly a 1-2 mile radius.
• Large Urban Parks: Large urban parks are parks designed to serve
the entire community. Generally, they provide a wide variety of
specialized facilities, such as sports fields, indoor recreation areas,
and large picnic areas. Due to their size and facilities offered, they
require more in terms of support facilities, such as parking,
restrooms, and play areas. Large urban parks usually exceed 50
acres in size and should be designed to accommodate large
numbers of people.
• Regional Parks: Regional parks are large recreation areas
designed to serve an entire region beyond the city limits. Often
they are acquired to provide a specific and sometimes unique
recreation opportunity.
• Special Use Areas: Special use areas are sites often occupied by a
specialized recreation facility. Some uses that fall into this category
include waterfront parks, boat ramps, botanical gardens,
community gardens, single purpose sites used for a particular field
sport, or sites occupied by recreation buildings.
• Linear Parks: Linear parks are developed landscaped areas and
other lands that follow linear corridors such as rivers, creeks,
abandoned railroad rights-of-way, canals, powerlines, and other
elongated features. This type of park usually contains trails,
landscaped areas, viewpoints, and seating areas.
• Natural Open Space: Natural open space is defined as
undeveloped land primarily left in its natural form with recreation
uses as a secondary objective. It is usually owned or managed by
a governmental agency and may or may not have public access.
This type of land may include wetlands, steep hillsides, or other
similar spaces. In some cases, environmentally sensitive areas are
considered open space and can include wildlife habitats, stream
and creek corridors, or unique and/or endangered plant species.
• Undeveloped Land: This land is undeveloped and has not yet
been designated for a specific park use.
3.2 Park Land Inventory
The City of Spokane Valley is joined by the State of Washington and
Spokane County in providing park land in the planning area. This
section summarizes the parks, open space, and recreation areas
provided by these entities. The Plan recognizes that there are several
park and open space sites located just outside the Urban Growth
Park and Recreation Plan 3-2
CHAPTER 3
Boundary, such as the Dishman Hills Conservation Area. These sites
are not included in the parkland inventory shown on Table 3.1
Figure 3-1 on following page illustrates the location of the existing
parks and open space areas in the Spokane Valley Planning Area.
Key Findings
• The park system managed by Spokane Valley consists of active and
passive recreational areas. There are 5 neighborhood parks, 1
community park, 1 large urban park, 3 special use areas and 3
undeveloped sites in the park system. In total, the city owns 13
parcels representing more than 163 acres of land.
• In terms of overall design and site utilization, most of the parks
provide a balance between active use areas and general open
space. However, several of the sites are undeveloped and one
(Castle Park) is only minimally developed.
• In general, the City parks are well maintained but many of the
facilities are in need of renovation. Many playgrounds, picnic
shelters, and restrooms, while functional, are old and need to be
modernized.
• Park amenities, such as signage, picnic tables, trash receptacles,
bike racks, etc., are either deficient or in poor condition in most
City parks.
• There are a number of County and State parks sites that either
border the City or are nearby. These nearby recreation resources
are noted in Appendix B and should be recognized as contributing
to the open space character of the community.
• In total, 543 acres of parkland, open space, and recreation areas
are located inl 8 sites within the planning area. This land is
managed by the City of Spokane Valley and the State of
Washington (See Table 3.1). Spokane County manages several
sites that are located just outside the city limits.
• The current ratio of park land to the community population is 6.46
acres per 1,000 population. This ratio for Spokane Valley is low
when compared to similar communities in Oregon and
Washington.
Park and Recreation Plan 3-3
J I I U U U U U U U • w
ii
o
c,.
c 0
UC
0(k)
Ow
( _ —1
CC
.\ _ Z Z
■ p
4
I N ri
N E
•/ m I •
c
o
N c
U Zia
Ir / a. �
III
C Z c
m 0 p
c
2 2 0
m o f c
N L
0 3 N
G U
--- W=_ / N m N 0 �
U=_ P,1 UDnII IPS S
1, U d
O N T 01 E
L
@ ps uon11ln5 N d W @
> t y N■ N °N m
Na E = 7
W 2 O y A
N� 2.'.- p (n W
c E
W
III N N o,Y.-` a9 (F) '-' c)
LI!
m m > c 8 > as
' E2
E E a . I— a
o ,' v 0 c y m m Pb
uaa�6aan3 S
• ` Q U cnw c c
a) E
° E r
y
p E
N
• LO : c
- p
■ II c _c U wU
w as w s N= ,_ U W .O a O
1.
d d z o t`o c c m N L m d
d o d0
---
.-
Z 1. �y d L' O OW y pW '= C ,
_
>.
JI1II .N. C - 47 c N N Y) > E y U N U■ w w ` m
' (6 OS N O N • E c
• > d N II3 T a5 a5 c ��co -moo E
• Z m an d o� p U
• 5 aa' o srM w 1 c as
.L'. E TS.
W c 6
1111 L
as to
• °
m a
E
E
,, In
d o m o
C W L • a c i E U
• 2 O N y
m e m 3 U• >
• y E fw a
• N a ' n O E
• a W . co (6
ID
• c
•• ,. l-'.'
• -O 0 t
• m o c U Z CC
U c E•/� • OQd 1MOUW ® C7 I , \II c �I L p
O W m W
CX3 a) as IL CL d
N.
m .
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CHAPTER 3
Table 3.1
Summary of Parks and Facilities (All Agencies)
Spokane Valley Planning Area
I Park Site Total Park Land 1�• ,, •.
(Acres)
City of Spokane Valley Parks and Facilities
Neighborhood Parks 27.58 5
Community Parks 21.91 1
Large Urban Parks 41.91 1
Special Use Areas 20.16 3
Linear Parks 0 0
Natural Open Space 0 0
Undeveloped Land (Undesignated) 51.89 3
Total City Areas 163.45 13
State of Washington
Linear Parks 113.48 1
Natural Open Space Areas 260.94 3
Undeveloped Land (Undesignated) 5.13 1
Total State Areas 379.55 5
Total 543.00 18
Table 3.2
Summary of Current Ratios (All Agencies)
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Current Ratio
Park Land Type (Acres per 1,000 People)
Neighborhood Parks 0.33
Community Parks 0.26
Large Urban Parks 0.50
Special Use Areas 0.24
Linear Parks 1.35
Natural Open Space Areas 3.11
Undeveloped Areas 0.67
TOTAL 6.46
Park and Recreation Plan 3-6
CHAPTER 3
Table 3.3
Total Parkland Comparisons with Other Agencies
Ratio
Agency (Acres per 1,000 People)
Spokane Valley 6.46
Spokane 18.01
Pasco 16.15
Boise 15.87
Washington 30 cities 34.27
Oregon 45 cities 15.96
Montana (6 cities) 20.61
Nevada (2 cities) 6.76
TOTAL 6.46
Source: MIG database
Park and Recreation Plan 3-7
CHAPTER 3
Table 3.4
Summary of Parks by Type (City Only)
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Park Site Acrea•e Statt
Neighborhood Parks
Balfour Park 2.86 Developed
Browns Park 8.03 Developed
Castle Park 2.71 Minimally Developed
Edgecliff Park 4.74 Developed
Terrace View Park 9.24 Developed
Subtotal 27.58
Community Parks
Valley Mission Park 21.91 Developed
Subtotal 21.91
Large Urban Parks
Mirabeau Point Park 41.91 Developed
Subtotal 41.91
Special Use Areas
Park Road Pool 2.00 Developed
Sullivan Park 16.07 Developed
Valley Senior Center 2.09 Developed
CenterPlace 13.60 Developed
Subtotal 33.76
Natural Open Space Areas 0.0
None
Subtotal 0.0
Linear Parks 0.0
None
Subtotal 0.0
Undeveloped Park Land
Myrtle Point Park 31.07 Undeveloped
Valley Mission Park (South) 7.22 Undeveloped
Subtotal 38.29
Total 163.45
Park and Recreation Plan 3-8
CHAPTER 3
Table 3.5
Summary of City Parks, Open Space, and Recreation Areas
Park Area
III
Services Matrix ta
7
7:1 l3 — -E
1 ., 4; 1 43 2 -E 2 = eF . 6 A '3 2
— ' .I' — 7 < (5 < 1 ?) E 2 1
te2 u- t = 12 < .c, D
03 o .- ,n 6' a) c -° 0) -= •2 ce " 4- "a
Z 72
c2
— c2 0 _ _v) co ci ul — 45
Neighborhood Park MMMMMMMMMMMM MMM
Balfour Park(2.86 acres) MMMM M M MM MMM
Browns Park(8.03 acres) MM M M M MMM
Castle Park(2.71 acres) MMMM M====== MMM Storage building
Edgecliff Park(4.74 • • . ••• Storage building
acres
Terrace View Park(9.24 II . 1. ll III Pool,bathhouse,
acres)
horseshoe pit
Community Pa
Valley Mission Park Pool,bathhouse
(21.91 acres) ll 1 . III riding arena bathhouse,
Large Urban Parks ============
Mirabeau Point Park Stage,viewing
(41.91 acres) III 1111 iii platform,
trailhead
Specia0 Use Areas I =========== ===
Park Road Pool (2.00 ••••••••... •MEM Pool,bathhouse
acres
Sullivan Park(16.07 1111 III
gazebos Dance e hs all,r a d i 0
2.09 cr
control car area
acres)
Valley Senior Center ••••••••••• ME Reception hall
es
Linear Park Areas ============ ===
None MMM=M====== MMM
Natura0 Open Space Areas =========== ===
None MMMMM=MMMMM MMM
Undevekped Lands =========== ===
Ceres nterplace(13.60 ••••••.E.M•
...
ac
Myrtle Point Park(31.07 •••••• Wil.
acres
Valley Mission Park ....... / I I 1
South 7.22 acres
Park and Recreation Plan 3-9
CHAPTER 3
3.3 Park Site Aria lysis
BALFOUR PARK
Address: 105 N. Balfour Road
Size: 2.8 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (35 spaces, 1 of which is accessible),
restroom building, playground area, sand volleyball court, open turf area,
site amenities (park sign, drinking fountain, 14 trash receptacles, 13 picnic
tables)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along Main and Balfour Streets; deteriorating edge
restraint around playground and volleyball courts; no permanently affixed
picnic tables; no ADA access (ramp) to the playground area; parking
surfacing is showing signs of age; perimeter fencing limits access to site;
absence of typical neighborhood park facilities (e.g., internal pathways,
shelter, permanent picnic tables and sport courts for basketball) and
absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: Water playground area, new park signage
Comments: Park lies adjacent to Fire Station. Some consideration should
be given to expanding the site to the west on currently vacant land.
t..
Park and Recreation Plan 3-10
CHAPTER 3
BROWNS PARK
Address: 3019 S. Pines Road
Size: 8.2 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (83 spaces),softball field,restroom building,
shelter building,playground area,sand volleyball courts(4),open turf area,site
amenities(park sign,drinking fountain,7 trash receptacles, 15 picnic tables-6 of
which are permanent on concrete pad,2 barbeques)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g. curbs, sidewalks,
street trees) along Cherry Street;traffic and congestion associated with
parking along adjacent residential neighborhood streets; parking surfacing
is showing signs of age; picnic shelter is old and showing signs of age;
playground area is old; playground safety material is gravel; no accessible
routes to the playground area, picnic areas or restrooms; property damage
from fly balls associated with softball play; poor ball field drainage;
deteriorating edge restraint around playground and volleyball courts;
picnic tables are old and showing signs of wear; perimeter fencing limits
access to site; absence of typical neighborhood park facilities (e.g., internal
pathways and sport courts for basketball) and absence of park signage
(rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: The site is located across 32nd Avenue from University High School
•
fi
_ 4
Park and Recreation Plan 3-11
CHAPTER 3
CASTLE PARK
Address: 3415 S. University Road
Size: 2.7 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed (minimally)
Existing Facilities: Parking area (undetermined size), open turf area,
storage building, site amenities (3 picnic tables, 2 trash receptacles)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: General absence of neighborhood park facilities
(playground, picnic shelters, sports courts, pathways, etc.), drainage
problems, no permanently affixed picnic tables, parking is not clearly
defined or improved and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: This site provides a nice setting.
e ? ;a 4,;O:
r it
n s , 'rqL, �ihie, �,PA I
1. 4& 't. - ..
a
l _r. `�� Y , ^
Park and Recreation Plan 3-12
CHAPTER 3
CENTERPLACE
Address: 2426 N Discovery Place
Size: 13.6 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Completed in September 2005
Planned Improvements: 54,000 square foot building (includes senior
center, meeting space, classrooms, auditorium, great hall, student lounge)
Comments: This site lies adjacent to Mirabeau Park, close to the
Centennial Trail and the Spokane River.
f: A V,'.
A, Iii' __ _ 'x°'�4.
..;.r , ,,i� � Valr �~.1:?° 1 IRS . ` "ice
•-•-' 1, d }d cam: '` • : `a.111 " r 4' :�'`..
F t v-:- q -.: 400Rg °��1ri�'Filli4, >I *s 0-". I1 r+z,� '.
H +S a ?
r. ' ' rp� ..te * . / . x� 1)
_fi . ` . `y, cr - 1. /`
4"'4 x' f 'Y r¢ f f •.'f • !
•: l::
1 4"
Park and Recreation Plan 3-13
CHAPTER 3
EDGECLIFF PARK
Address: 800 S. Park Road
Size: 4.8 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (35 spaces), softball field, restroom
building,tennis courts (2), basketball court on tennis court, shelter building,
playground area, open turf area, storage building, site amenities (park
sign, 2 drinking fountains, 13 trash receptacles, 25 picnic tables—9 which
are on a permanent concrete pad)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along 6th Street, Park Avenue and 8th Street; parking
surfacing areas showing signs of age; concrete area behind softball field is
deteriorated; restroom is old and is showing signs of age; playground
safety material is gravel; picnic shelter is old; picnic tables are showing
signs of wear;tennis courts surfacing is completely worn; fencing around
tennis courts is too low and damaged; playground area is old; no
accessible routes to the playground area; restroom building; softball fields
and tennis courts; perimeter fencing limits access to site; absence of typical
neighborhood park facilities (e.g., internal pathways and sport courts for
basketball) and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: This site provides a nice setting.
4 4
y, 3a.-. �+ v i, �1 iAty 4...., . .... .,. . _... ,.., ,,,.„,... . ...,,. .,, ,i, . . . „, ,. „ ...,A , t v . , . . , , , ,
il
i
' _ `".'- - .f '" a ..
Park and Recreation Plan 3-14
CHAPTER 3
MIRABEAU POINT PARK
Address: 13500 E. Mirabeau Parkway
Size: 41.9 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (81 spaces), restroom building, shelter
building (2), stage, site amenities (park sign, 15 trash receptacles, 18
picnic tables —3 which are on a permanent concrete pad; 5 benches, bike
rack)
Mirabeau Meadows: Large shelter with utilities
Mirabeau Springs: Small shelter, viewing platform, boardwalk, pond,
waterfall, Centennial Trailhead
Condition: Overall, the site is in excellent condition
Deficiencies/Problems: None
Planned Improvements: Playground area
Comments: This is the newest the park facility developed in the City of
Spokane Valley.
teaa_
• a
5!
',w f i
.ur+ w
.}V ac�
y�'41.:•:
Park and Recreation Plan 3-15
CHAPTER 3
MYRTLE POINT PARK
Address: 12300 E. Upriver Drive
Size: 31.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Undeveloped
Existing Facilities: None
Condition: Not applicable
Deficiencies/Problems: No vehicular access
Planned Improvements: None at this time
Comments: This site is only accessible from the Centennial Trail. It is
bordered by the Spokane River on one side and undeveloped land on the
other. The adjacent property presents an excellent opportunity to develop
a greenbelt along the Spokane River.
_ ,
t._
II
Park and Recreation Plan 3-16
CHAPTER 3
PARK ROAD POOL
Address: 906 N. Park Road
Size: 2.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (50 spaces), restroom building, swimming
pool (25 yard x 6 lane), bathhouse, site amenities (park sign, 2 picnic
tables,trash receptacles, drinking fountain)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Parking surfacing is old and showing signs of
repair; fencing and decking is showing sign of age
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: Site lies adjacent to Centennial Middle School and offers
some opportunity for expansion.
j
T
Park and Recreation Plan 3-17
CHAPTER 3
SULLIVAN PARK
Address: 1901 N. Sullivan Road
Size: 10.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley(portion leased to private concessionaire)
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (37 spaces, of which 2 are ADA
accessible), restroom building, shelter building (3), gazebo (2), playground
area, open turf area, Western Dance Hall, caretaker, radio control car
course, site amenities (park sign, 9 trash receptacles, 12 picnic tables, 3
drinking fountains, barbeque)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along Sullivan Road; lack of parking area
improvements (tree, landscaped areas, etc.); parking surfacing is showing
signs of age; site is not current connected to the city's infrastructure (e.g.,
sewer, water); no accessible routes to connect park facilities; shelters are
old and deteriorating; irrigation system is antiquated; playground is old
and lacks diversity; absence of external restroom building, internal
pathways and sport courts for basketball; lack of access to the river front;
and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage.
Comments: This site offer river access to the Spokane River
044 .WW
xri
r4 k �(
Ye.
Park and Recreation Plan 3-18
CHAPTER 3
TERRACE VIEW PARK
Address: 13525 E. 24'Avenue
Size: 9.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (100 spaces), softball field, restroom
building, playground area, open turf area, basketball court in parking lot,
horseshoe pits, swimming pool (25 yard x 6 lane), bathhouse, site
amenities (park sign, 10 trash receptacles, 31 picnic tables - 8 of which are
permanent on concrete pad, 3 drinking fountains, 3 barbeques)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along 24th and Blake Streets; parking surfacing is
showing signs of age; shelters are old and deteriorating; playground area
is old; playground safety material is gravel; no accessible routes to the
playground area, restroom, softball field; deteriorating edge restraint
around playground; absence of typical neighborhood park facilities (e.g.,
internal pathways; shelters and sport courts for basketball); pool fencing
and decking is showing sign of age;, perimeter fencing limits access to site;
and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: None
S
! ! 'r ri
Park and Recreation Plan 3-19
CHAPTER 3
VALLEY MISSION PARK
Address: 11123 E. Mission Avenue
Size: 17.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley(portion leased to private concessionaire)
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (225 spaces), softball field, restroom
building (2),tennis courts (2), basketball court, shelter building,
playground area, open turf area, swimming pool (25 yard x 6 lane),
bathhouse, riding arena,waterslide, site amenities (park sign, 17 trash
receptacles, 38 picnic tables - 10 of which are permanent on concrete pad,
2 drinking fountains)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along Mission Avenue and Bowdish Street, lack of
parking area improvements (tree, landscaped areas, etc.), parking
surfacing areas showing signs of age, restroom is old and is showing signs
of age, playground area is old, no accessible routes to park facilities (e.g.,
playground area, shelters, restrooms); playground safety material is gravel;
picnic shelter is old and showing signs of age; picnic tables are showing
signs of wear;, tennis courts and basketball court surfacing is completely
worn; irrigation system is antiquated, absence of internal pathways and
absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: A new master plan should be prepared prior to any additional
public investment in this site. As part of this study,some consideration should be
given to removing the horse arena and converting it to another recreational use.
Splashdown,a private water park,is located within this park.
- .� ya fro A 4�;
1' 1 xi dr ' .°
.ri a .h
4.
r rra .... _ 7
`. �" +�I�#} II
AIL
INt
Park and Recreation Plan 3-20
CHAPTER 3
VALLEY MISSION PARK (SOUTH)
Address: E. Mission Avenue
Size: 10.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Undeveloped
Existing Facilities: None
Condition: Not applicable
Deficiencies/Problems: Not applicable
Planned Improvements: None at this time
Comments: This site lies across Mission Avenue from Valley Mission Park.
Due to its size it offers a number of opportunities for future development
se-
r
r f
�y
a....,...ae .r— r --- r-a--� = a
Park and Recreation Plan 3-21
CHAPTER 4
EXISTING OPERATIONS
CHAPTER 4
CHAPTER 4:
EXISTING OPERATIONS
This chapter reviews the existing operations and
management of the Spokane Valley Parks and
Recreation Department. The review includes an analysis
of the Department's organizational structure, staffing
levels, and operations, including the operating budget,
revenue and expenditures, and maintenance costs. The
chapter also discusses current program participation.
, - . 1,-
Key Findings
The following key findings emerged from the analysis of
park and recreation operations and management.
• Park and recreation services in Spokane Valley are
grouped within one department, the Parks and
Recreation Department. Within the department,
aquatics and park maintenance operations are privately
contracted.
• For its first full operating year, The City budgeted four full time
positions. With the completion of CenterPlace, this number was
increased to seven positions in 2005.
• In 2004, park and recreation services accounted for 6.2% of the
City's General Fund. For 2005, expenditures will increase to 7.1%.
For most cities studied by MIG, the average amount spent for park
and recreation services is about 10-12% of the General Fund.
• The ratio of cost to revenue for park and recreation services in
Spokane Valley is 7.6%. Based on comparisons of more than 50
cities studied by MIG, this ratio ranges from a low of 25% to a high
of 75%. The reason for the low ratio for Spokane Valley is that few
facilities or programs are offered that generate revenue.
• Spokane Valley spends approximately $5,822 per acre of
developed parkland for maintenance. Based on comparisons of
more than 50 cities studied by MIG, this amount is slightly above
average for cities east of the Cascades but low for cities on the
western side of the State.
Park and Recreation Plan 4-1
CHAPTER 4
4.1 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
The organizational structure of the Parks and Recreation Department,
along with its position within the government of the City of Spokane
Valley, affects the management and provision of park and recreation
services.
City Structure
P ; In Spokane Valley, there are six separate departments that provide
_ _ -- municipal services to Spokane Valley residents: Executive and
Legislative Support, Community Development, Police, Public Works,
Operations and Administration, and Parks and Recreation. Each of
these departments reports to the City Manger/CEO, who in turn
transmits information to the Mayor and City Council and ultimately the
citizens of the community. Currently, several City services are
contracted out to private businesses or agencies. These include street
maintenance, park maintenance, and aquatic operations.
Figure 4-1 presents the organization of the City of Spokane Valley.
Parks and Recreation Department
Within the Parks and Recreation Department there are six primary
areas of responsibility: Park Administration, Parks Maintenance,
Recreation, Aquatics, Senior Services, and CenterPlace. Each of these
areas is managed and/or supervised by the Parks and Recreation
Director.
• ParkAdministration: The Park Administration division is responsible for
implementing the City Council's goals and objectives for providing park
and recreation services.
• Park Maintenance: This division is primarily responsible for monitoring the
general upkeep of parks and public areas throughout the City,consistent
with the goals and objectives set forth by the City Council. Currently, park
maintenance services are contracted with a private operator.
• Recreation: The Recreation Division is responsible for coordinating and/or
providing park and recreation services within the City. Currently, programs
include a summer day camp, indoor gym for tiny tots, free playground
programs,and limited special events.
• Aquatics: This division is responsible for the operation and maintenance of
the City's three swimming pools. The City of Spokane Valley contracted
with the YMCA to operate and maintain the three pools starting in 2005.
4-2 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 4
Spokane Valley
Citizens
\i/ _
City Council
City
Manager/CEO
Deputy City
Manager COO
Executive & Community Police Public Works Parks & Operations&
Legislative Development 1 Administration
Support I (Contract) Recreation
V V V
Planning, Building and Engineering, Storm water Finance,Legal and
Code Compliance and Transportation Administration
V
Park Administration, Parks
Maintenance,Aquatics,
Recreation Programs, Senior
Center and CenterPlace
Figure 4-1: City Organizational Structure
Park and Recreation Plan 4-3
CHAPTER 4
• Senior Services: The Senior Services Division is responsible for coordinating
services at the Spokane Valley Senior Center. The Senior Center programs
and services was moved from its original building to CenterPlace.
• CenterPlace: This division is responsible for the operation and
management of the CenterPlace community building.
Figure 4.2 illustrates the organization of the Parks and Recreation
Department.
Parks & Administrative
Recreation Assistant
Director(1 FTE) (1 FTE)
Park
Recreation Aquatics Senior Center CenterPlace
Maintenance Operation Operation
V V Center Place
Contracted Contracted Coordinator
Services Services (1 FTE)
Recreation Senior Center Admin Assistant
Coordinator Specialist (1 FTE)
(1 FTE) (1 FTE)
Maintenance
(1 FTE)
Figure 4-2: Parks and Recreation Department
Organizational Structure
4-4 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 4
4.2 STAFFING LEVELS
In order to meet the demand for park and recreation services, the City
has budgeted for a staff of seven full time positions. Table 4.1 below
shows the number of employees (full time equivalents) since the City's
incorporation in 2003.
Table 4.1
Staffing Levels since Incorporation
City of Spokane Valley
Fiscal Total City Parks and Recreation Percentage of Park
Year (FTE's) Department and Recreation FTE t
(FTEs) Total City FTE's
2003 (1) 44.90 4.0 8.9%
2004 (2) 46.95 5.0 10.7%
2005 (3) 60.00 7.0 11.6%
(1) 9 Month Actual
(2) Amended Budget
(3) Budgeted
The table above illustrates a low ratio of employees for park and
recreation services. This is primarily attributed to the lack of a
developed recreation program and the fact that the City contracts out
park maintenance and aquatics operations.
Based on the 2004 amended budget, the ratio of FTE's to population is
1 employee per 16,790 population. This is up slightly from 2003
where there was 1 park and recreation employee per 20,501
population (Table 4.2).
In communities with an extensive park system and an established
recreation program, it is common to see a ratio of park and recreation
employees to population in the 5,000-7,000 range. While Spokane
Valley's ratio is much lower, the City was incorporated in 2003 and
has yet to expand is current range of services.
Park and Recreation Plan 4-5
CHAPTER 4
Table 4.2
Ratio of FTE to Population
City of Spokane Valley
Fiscal Population TOTAL Ratio of
Year (Year) Employees FTE to Populatio
(FTEs)
2003 (1) 82,005 4.0 20,501
2004 (2) 83,950 5.0 16,790
2005 (3) est. 85,900 7.0 12,271
(1) 9 Month Actual
(2) Amended Budget
(3) Budgeted
4.3 OPERATIONS
Full Time, Part Time and Seasonal Employees
Staffing in Spokane Valley for fiscal year 2004 included four full-time
employees and some seasonal/hourly employees.
Many communities are increasingly utilizing seasonal employees to
meet peak demand needs and reduce operating costs. The City of
Spokane Valley utilizes seasonal employees for recreation programs
and CenterPlace operations.
City Operating Budget
Table 4.3 shows the City's General Fund budget and the budget for
parks and recreation services. Recognizing that the 2003 budget
represented a start-up budget when the City was incorporated, there is
little data available to provide a historical perspective on budgetary
items.
In 2003, park and recreation services accounted for a small fraction of
the City's overall General Fund budget. For the 2004 year, 6.2% of
the City's General Fund was allocated for park and recreation services.
For 2005, the figure is expected to increase slightly to 7.1%.
4-6 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 4
Table 4.3
Budget Allocations— 2003 - 2005
City of Spokane Valley
Year City General Fund Budget Parks and Recreation Percentage of
)1)(2) Budget )1) Total
2003 (3) $13,892,900 $921,770 6.6%
2004 )4) $25,804,125 $1,601,780 6.2%
2005 (5) $27,187,186 $1,932,186 7.1%
(1) Excludes Capital Outlay
(2) Excludes Debt Service
(3) 9 Month Actual
(4) Amended Budget
(5) Budgeted
Table 4.4 below illustrates the comparisons of General Fund and Park
and Recreation Fund for selected cities.
Table 4.4
General Fund and Park and Recreation
Fund
Selected Communities—2004
Agency City General Fund Parks and Recreation Percentage of
Budget (1)(2) Services Budget (1)(2) Total
Ci of Spokane Valle $25,804,125 $1,601,780 6.2%
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID $19,445,214 $1,752,575 9.0%
City of Kennewick,WA $31,200,000 $2,862,000 9.1%
City of Spokane,WA $122,107,903 $13,300,000 11.9%
City of Yakima,WA $48,335,133 $4,200,000 8.7%
(1) Excludes Capital Outlay and Debt Services
(2) Adopted Budget
In communities that offer a full range of park and recreation services,
MIG has found that the ratio of General Fund to Park and Recreation
Fund ranges from 10-12%.
Park and Recreation Plan 4-7
CHAPTER 4
When compared to other communities in the region (Table 4.4), the
total share of resources allocated to park and recreation services in
Spokane Valley (2004) is below average of the selected communities.
However, because the City is newly incorporated, it has yet to develop
a comprehensive park and recreation program.
Departmental Expenditures
Table 4.5 illustrates Departmental expenditures for each area of
service. In 2004, Administration and Park Maintenance received a
majority of the budget. This was because expenditures were attributed
to the maintenance contract for the park system and swimming pools.
In 2005 these budget items were separated to better reflect cost
centers.
Table 4.5
Park and Recreation Services Budget Breakdown
City of Spokane Valley
Division 2004 Percent of 2005 Percent
Amended Budget Toto0 Budgeted To
Expenditures (2) Expenditures (3)
Parks Administration(5) $215,425 11.1%
Park Maintenance (^- $980,262 61.2% $854,837 44.2%
Recreation $103,433 6.5% $158,215 8.2%
Aquatics(4) $263,074 16.4% $255,818 13.2%
Senior Center $129,371 8.1% $126,592 6.5%
CenterPlace(4) $125,640 7.8% $321,299 16.6%
TOTAL $1,601,780 100.0% $1,932,186 100.0%
(1) 9 Month Actual
(3) Amended Budget
(3) Budgeted
(4) Excludes capital outlay
(5) Prior to 2005,parks administration and maintenance were combined as one budget.
In most communities, park maintenance (excluding administration)
receives about 40%-50% of the total operating budget for park and
recreation services. Similarly, administration usually accounts for
roughly 10% and the remaining budget is divided among other
recreation programs and services.
4-8 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 4
Based on the 2005 budget information, the various divisions in
Spokane Valley appear to receive an appropriate amount relative to
the overall allocation of resources.
Department Revenues
Aside from local taxes (property tax, retails sales and use tax, excise
tax), some parks and recreation services can generate a considerable
amount of revenue through fees and charges associated with
recreation programs and facility rentals.
When compared to the total budget, revenues from park and
recreation services in Spokane Valley account for only 9.3% of the total
operating budget (Table 4.6). For most communities, studied by MIG,
the rate of return for services range from a low of 25%to a high of
75%. Some of the revenue sources for the various areas of service
include:
• Park Administration can generate revenue through grants and
donations. The collection of park impact fees is also another
source of revenue.
• Park Facilities can generate revenue through reservations and
facility rentals. However, at the present time, this potential is
minimal due to the lack of facilities in the existing parks.
• Recreation Programs can generate significant revenues from class
fees and services. Currently, this revenue source is very limited due
to the lack of classes offered. However, much of the cost can be
recovered through the registration fee.
• Aquatic operations generate revenue through admission fees and
swim lessons. Revenues from this operation could be increased by
adding facilities and activities that generate more usage.
• Senior Services operations generate revenues from user fees
associated with programs and services.
• CenterPlace, once fully operational, will generate revenue through
admissions, lease of space, rentals and sale of concession items.
One means of analyzing revenue production is to compare operating
costs on a per capita basis. The gross cost per capita is the total cost
of the services divided by the number of persons in the service area.
However, this is not necessarily the true cost to the taxpayer because it
does not reflect the net cost after revenue is deducted.
Park and Recreation Plan 4-9
CHAPTER 4
Since parks and recreation services in Spokane Valley generate very
little revenue, the gross and net cost of services is fairly similar.
However, in some communities, the difference can be more than
twofold due to the amount of revenue generated from fees and
charges.
Table 4.6 shows the comparison of revenue and costs for the various
service areas of the Department. Table 4.7 compares Spokane Valley
with other communities.
Table 4.6
Revenue/Expenditures 2004 &05
City of Spokane Valley
Division 2004 2004 Revenue as
Revenues P) 2004
0) a Percent of
Total
Parks Administration
$16,625 $960,961 1.7%
Park Maintenance
Recreation $25,379 $77,332 32.8%
Aquatics $74,930 $249,547 30.0%
Senior Center $12,100 $77,726 15.6%
CenterPlace $0 $14,675 0.0%
TOTAL $129,034 $1,380,241 9.3%
(1) Amended budget
Table 4.7
Cost Per Capita —Selected Cities 2004
City of Spokane Valley
City Popukation Operating Gross Cost Net Cost Revenue di
Budget' /Capita /Capita Rat
City of Spokane Valley 83,950 $1,601,780 $19.08 $17.63 9.3%
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID 36,259 $1,752,575 $48.33 $44.66 7.6%
City of Kennewick,WA 58,970 $2,862,000 $48.53 NA NA
City of Spokane,WA 197,400 $13,300,000 $67.38 $49.64 26.3%
City of Yakima,WA 79,480 $4,200,000 $52.84
4-10 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 4
4.4 MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS
Table 4.8 compares the cost of maintenance for selected cities.
Table 4.8
Maintenance Cost Per Acre - 2004
City of Spokane Valley
Parks Maintained Cost
City Maintenance Acres(2) Per Acre
Budget(1)
Ci of Spokane Valle; 0) $649,539 111.56 $5,822
City of Coeur d'Alene, ID $841,180 156.30 $5,382
City of Kennewick,WA $1,456,000 312.00 $4,667
City of Spokane,WA(4) $7,500,000 1,035.20 $7,245
City of Yakima,WA $1,300,000 330.38 $3,935
(1) Excludes capital outlay
(2) Excludes open space and undeveloped park land
(3) Park maintenance services contract
(4) Excludes golf course maintenance
In communities throughout the
Northwest, cities spend on average ,'
$6,000-$7000 per acre for parks q.
maintenance. Some Northwest cities and
—
park districts spend as much as $8,000-
10,000 per acre.
Spokane Valley spends approximately
$5,822 per acre of developed parkland
for maintenance. Based on comparisons of more than 50 cities
studied by MIG, this amount is slightly above average for cities east of
the Cascades but low for cities on the western side of the State.
4.5 RECREATION PARTICIPATION
Listed below is a summary of the recreation programs and services
offered by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department.
Park and Recreation Plan 4-11
CHAPTER 4
Table 4.9
Participation in City Sponsored Recreation Programs - 2004
Program Participants Participant Hours
Recreation Division
Day Camp 258 11,610
Indoor Playground 29 580
Play Camp 14 210
Supervised Playgrounds 135 1,626
Subtotal 436 14,026
Aquatics Division
Swimming Lesson 1,012 5,060
Recreation Swim 16,083 32,166
Subtotal 17,095 37,226
Senior Center
Health Services 204 72
Lectures 142 342
Wellness 64 2,136
Arts and Crafts 132 352
Trips/Tours 481 4,192
Subtotal 1,023 7,094
TOTAL 18,556 58,346
Participant Hours represents the total hours of attendance for the class
or activity. For example, if a class is offered 3 times a week for an
hour for 10 weeks, then there are 30 participant hours per person.
Based on the statistics above, there are 0.69 participations per capita
for the City of Spokane Valley sponsored programs. Typically,
communities with an average participation level that offer a full range
of program and services have per capita participation ranging from
2.5 to 4.0. Some communities with high levels of participation have
per capita participation levels of 6.5 or higher.
4-12 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 5
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CHAPTER 5
CHAPTER 5•
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
This chapter discusses the need for parks, facilities and -.111,r,
other recreation services within the city. It contains a
summary of the findings from the household survey, thepublic visioning workshop, focus group meetings, an earlier 1 city-wide telephone survey, and an organized sports
questionnaire. From this information, Table 5.1
' %lop
summarizes park and facility needs. A more detailed
analysis of the survey process and results is found in , T+
Appendix C and the quantification of park and facility '' I
needs in Discussion Paper #5 (Needs Assessment). A
5.1 HOUSEHOLD RECREATION SURVEY
survey of public attitudes, recreation interests and
recreation participation characteristics was made in the City
of Spokane Valley during Winter of 2004 and Spring of
2005. Questionnaires were distributed to randomly selected
households within the City limits of Spokane Valley. Each member of
the household age 10 and over was asked to fill out a separate
questionnaire.
The survey results reflect resident opinions city-wide within a margin of
error of plus or minus 5% at a 95% confidence level. In other words, it
is 95% certain that these results should vary no more than 5% from the
results if everyone in the city had been surveyed. A total of 398 surveys
were returned.
Key findings from the recreation survey include:
• Overall, school recreation areas receive the most usage by
Spokane Valley residents with "a park near my home" as second
highest. Centennial Trail was third.
• When asked by residents who do not use Spokane Valley parks,
31%stated that they had no desire to use the facilities. "Don't
have facilities I'm interested in"was the second rated reason.
• The most common reason residents traveled outside the City of
Spokane Valley to participate in recreation activities was for
organized sports.
• Residents indicated that acquiring additional land along the
Spokane River was very important.
Park and Recreation Plan 5-1
CHAPTER 5
• When asked if more parkland was needed, slightly less than half
(46%) supported the idea.
• When asked what projects should have the highest priority, an
indoor swimming pool,the development of a city-wide trail
system and acquisition of riverfront property were cited most
often.
• Over 37% of respondents cited a multi-tank, indoor swimming
pool as the preferred option for meeting future swimming needs.
• When asked what programs should be offered, "after-school
activities for youth", and "summer youth activities" received the
most support.
• Over 81% of the respondents indicated there are not adequate
programs for the teenage youth in Spokane Valley.
• Roughly 78% of the residents indicated there is a need for before
and after school programs.
• When asked what cultural arts programs are most needed,
"performances or concerts in the parks" and "community art
festivals and special events" received the most support.
• When asked where the City should place its emphasis in park
services, the most frequently cited response was "upgrading
existing park facilities". "Acquire new parks sites and open space
areas" also received strong support.
• 72% of the respondents indicated they would support some type
of tax measure for additional park and recreation facilities.
However, this support would depend on the amount and type of
projects.
• Participation in 40 identified recreation activities by Spokane
Valley residents is roughly 58% higher than the MIG average.
• The activities with the highest latent demand (defined as activities
they would like to participate in if the facilities were more
available) were:
o Arts
o Drama (attending)
o Dancing (social)
o Arts (Painting/Sketching)
o Crafts (Pottery/Ceramics)
o Basketball
5-2 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 5
o Tennis
o Concerts (attend)
o Museums/Galleries
o Swimming in a lake or river
5.2 PUBLIC VISIONING WORKSHOP
In November, 2004, a Public Visioning Workshop was held.
Approximately 33 residents participated in the meeting, which was held
at the Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene.
The following key findings emerged from the visioning workshop:
• Vision for City: Provide a balanced and dispersed network of
parks (large and small) and trails. Integrate with other public
facilities.
• Most Needed Facilities: Participants identified a need for
indoor facilities (recreation center, aquatic center and outdoor
facilities (trails, skate parks, sport fields and river frontage).
• Improvements to Existing Parks: Improvements are needed to
existing facilities including the horse arena and more park
amenities.
• Emphasis on Park and Recreation Services: Participants felt
the Parks and Recreation Department should place an
emphasis on the acquisition of land,trail development, park
improvements and program development.
• Role of City in Programs/Services: The City should coordinate
and support existing service providers and provide additional
programs and services in areas of identified need.
5.3 FOCUS GROUP MEETINGS
Several focus group meetings were held to obtain additional input from
special interest groups. Specific groups included youth sports, adult
sports, cultural arts, SCOPE, trails/open space, seniors, Green Acres
Neighborhood, Ponderosa Neighborhood, and planning
representatives (Planning Department and Planning Commission).
The following key findings emerged from the focus group meetings:
Park and Recreation Plan 5-3
CHAPTER 5
• Vision for City: The City should offer a wide range of programs
and services. Responsibility should be shifted away from the
schools to the Parks and Recreation Department.
• Role of City in Programs/Services: The role of the City should be to
provide parks and facilities and coordinate programs and services.
• Issues: Participants noted several issues, including priority of park
and recreation services relative to other City services; partnerships;
funding for park and recreation services; land acquisition; and the
development of park impact fees.
• Needs: Identified needs included indoor facilities (community
center space, day care space) and outdoor areas (local parks, sport
fields, trails/bike lanes, pool, gardens, garden plots, equestrian
facilities, etc).
5.4 TELEPHONE SURVEY
A citywide telephone survey was conducted in the Spring of 2004. All
totaled, 409 responses were received from 3,775 attempted calls. The
survey addressed many City services, including a few questions
regarding the delivery of park and recreation services.
The following pertinent findings emerged from the citywide telephone
survey:
• New Parks: Only 14% of the respondents indicated that building
new parks was a high priority, but 42% felt that it was a medium
priority.
• Quality of Recreation Facilities: On a 5-point rating scale, 71% of
the respondents rated facilities as good, very good, or excellent.
• Proximity to Recreation Facilities: Only 59% of the respondents
indicated that there were park/recreation facilities in close proximity
to their neighborhood.
5.5 ORGANIZED SPORTS QUESTIONNAIRE
During the Fall of 2004, organized sport questionnaires were sent to
all organized sport groups providing services within Spokane Valley.
Key findings include:
• Overall, a majority of the sport groups indicated there are sufficient
fields to meet the demand of their leagues. However, field
condition in some cases is an issue.
5-4 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 5
5.6 SUMMARY OF PARK LAND NEEDS
The detailed methodology for assessing park and facility needs is
found in Discussion Paper #5. Stated below is a summary of the
findings stated in quantifiable terms. These needs are based on the
vision set forth by the community and the demand for recreation
opportunities measured in various public involvement venues.
The Needs Assessment provides the information necessary to make
informed decisions on how many acres of parks and number of
facilities are needed to meet current and future needs. However, not
all needs can be or should be provided by the City. Some community
needs can be met by other agencies, schools, the County, private
organizations and public service organizations such as the YMCA. The
community needs identified in this chapter were used to develop
recommendations for the park system presented in Chapter 7.
Methodology
Developing a statement of need for parks and open space areas
depends on localized values, availability of land, financial resources,
and desired service levels. To determine specific park land needs for
the Spokane Valley Planning Area, several analytical methods were
used. These include:
• Recreation demand (measured through public involvement
activities)
• National trends and standards
• Land availability
• Geographical deficiencies for parks and open space areas
In synthesizing this information, park land standards were developed
for each park classification. These standards are based on a ratio of
park acreage to population, expressed in terms of number of acres per
1,000 people. The standard indicates a level of service necessary to
meet the park and recreation needs of all residents in Spokane Valley.
The level of service standard developed in this Plan is based on local
conditions and does not reflect national standards. As a result, they
vary somewhat from the standards developed in the Comprehensive
Plan.
The analysis looks at the existing ratio of park land in comparison to
the city's existing population. By establishing a recommended level of
service, a demand standard can be calculated based on a model
developed by MIG. Applying the demand standard to the existing and
Park and Recreation Plan 5-5
CHAPTER 5
future population forecast, existing and future parkland needs can be
determined.
Adopted Level of Service Standards
The following level of service standards (LOS) were used to calculate
park needs:
• Mini-Parks (no LOS was established since this type of park is
not recommended.
• Neighborhood Parks —Service area of mile radius
• Community Parks —Service area of 1 mile radius
Summary of Parkland Needs
Table 5.1 summarizes existing and forecasted park land needs for the
Spokane Valley Planning Area. These needs are based on an adopted
level of service standard based on a service area, density or other
factor adopted by the City. The following terms are used in the
analysis:
• Existing ratio is the amount of existing park land divided by the existing
population. The existing ratio is expressed in terms of acres per 1,000
people.
• Proposed demand standard is the desired amount of park land based on
an adopted level of service. It is also expressed in terms of acres per
1,000 people. The standard is derived by calculating the total amount of
park land or facilities needed and divided by the build-out population of
the planning area.
• Total need (year 2005) is the number of acres needed in Spokane Valley
to meet today's needs of all City residents.
• Net need (year 2005)takes into account Spokane Valley's existing park
sites and determines if more acreage is needed to meet current
community needs. If additional parks are needed,the number of acres
and sites needed are noted in the table.
• Total need (year 2025) is the park acreage that will be needed in
Spokane Valley at build-out (the year 2025) to serve the City's future
population.
• Net need (year 2025) is the amount of park acreage that will be needed
at build-out in addition to existing sites.
Based on the analysis, there is a need for additional park land in all
categories, particularly for neighborhood and community parks.
Figures 5.1 and 5.2 illustrate the underserved areas for neighborhood
parks and community parks respectively. However, meeting park
5-6 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 5
needs in some of the neighborhoods will be difficult because of the
lack of available land. Chapter Six addresses this issue and suggests
ways those needs might be met.
Table 5.1
Summary of Park Land Needs
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Park Recreation Areas Existing Existing Proposed Total Need Net Need Total Need Net Need
Total Park Ratio(1,2) Demand Year Year 2005 Year Year 2025
Land (in I` Standard 2005 (in (in Acres) 2025 (in (in Acres
Acres) l (2) Acres) Acres) (s>
Neighborhood Parks 27.58 0.33 1.39 116.69 89.11 177.78 150.20
Community Parks 21.91 0.26 1.74 146.07 124.16 222.55 200.64
Large Urban Parks 41.91 0.50 0.72 60.44 18.53 92.09 50.18
Special Use Areas 20.16 0.24 1.64 137.68 117.52 209.76 189.60
Linear Parks 1 13.48 1.35 1.36 114.18 0.70 173.94 60.46
Natural Open Space 260.94 3.11 3.21 269.48 8.54 410.56 149.62
Undeveloped Land 54.30
TOTAL 543.00 6.47 10.06 844.54 358.56 1,286.68 800.70
(1) Ratio of park land to an existing population of 83,950 persons
(2) Expressed in acres per 1,000 population
(3) Based on forecasted population of 1 27,900 persons
Park and Recreation Plan 5-7
CHAPTER 5
5.7 SUMMARY OF RECREATION FACILITY NEEDS
Similar to the discussion of park land needs, community needs for
recreation facilities such as sport fields, trails, etc., are described in
terms of an existing ratio and suggested demand standard based on
an adopted level of service.
Methodology
The need for sport fields, pools, and trails was calculated using several
analytical approaches. Methodology included an analysis of present
recreation participation levels derived from the surveys, facility needs
expressed in the public involvement processes, play and practice time
requirements for sports leagues as indicated in a sport group survey,
and mathematical models developed over the years from other studies.
To determine the need for sport fields, a demand model was created
that compared the supply of fields against the demand created by the
number of teams using them. Within this demand model, there are
many variables (or service levels) that will affect the eventual need
statement. These variables include:
• Demand variables: These include the number of teams in the
community, along with the number of games and practices
permitted per team per week.
• Supply variables: These include the number of fields, number
of games and practices permitted per field per week, and the
existence of lighted or unlighted fields. Factors such as
weather, playing season, and field constraints affect the
supply of fields.
For most sports in Spokane Valley, teams
come from both within and outside the The facility needs described
city limits. As a result, it was difficult to in this document represent a
determine the exact number of players or demand based on the
population of Spokane Valley.
teams generated within the community. However, it is recognized that
To forecast the number of teams many teams in the area are
generated by the population of Spokane formed by both resident and
Valley, MIG relied on a database of non-residents players.
team-generating data collected from 79
different communities over the years. The
assessment of need presented in this report is for Spokane Valley only,
as if the City was completely separated from other communities. In this
manner, facility needs are forecasted based on the demand created by
city residents only.
5-10 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 5
Table 5.2 summarizes the existing and future needs for recreation
facilities. These needs are based on an adopted level of service
standard previously described.
Table 5.2
Summary of Existing and Future Facility Needs
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Recreation Facility Existing Existing Proposed Total Net Need - Total Net Need -
Total Ratio(1) Demand Need Year 2005 Need Year 2025
Facilities Standard Year (3) Year (2)
(2) 2005 2025
Baseball Fields 70(4) 1,200 1,200 70 0 91 21
Softball Fields 26 3,230 1,300 63 (5( 37 98 72
Soccer Fields 83 (6) 1,011 1,900 44 <39> 68 0
Pathways/Trails (7) 9.8 miles 0.12 miles 0.38 miles 31.6 21.8 48.6 17.0
per 1000 per 1000
people people
(1) Current number of people served per facility, based on an existing population of
83,950 persons
(2) Suggested guideline for number of people served per facility
(3) Based on forecasted 2025 population of 127,900 persons
(4) Includes 12 adult and 4 youth fields, along with 54 multi-use fields.
(5) While the need appears to be high for softball fields, many of the multi-use fields
which are in poor condition are presently being used. Also, it is anticipated that
much of the adult softball program is played at County sites and at the site in Post
Falls. As a result, the overall need presented in this table for softball fields may
not be as great as the table indicates.
(6) Includes 29 fields, along with 54 multi-use fields.
(7) Includes the Centennial Trail
Some of these multi-use fields should be considered for upgrades, and
others that are unused may be considered to address the shortage of
softball fields.
Currently the City does not have some of the recreation resources
found in many communities such as recreation centers, indoor aquatic
facilities, teen centers, arts center and a comprehensive range of
recreation programs. The development of these types of facilities and
services will generate more interest and participation in recreation
activities. In the next plan update (in 4-6 years), a new assessment
should be made to determine if the above standards are still valid.
Park and Recreation Plan 5-11
CHAPTER 6
RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 6
CHAPTER 6•
RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter provides recommendations for developing and
managing a park and recreation program in the City of -"
Spokane Valley. These recommendations were developed C.,
from staff input, public input, a community survey, and a
comprehensive analysis of park an conditions and current
maintenance operations.
ti� do,are organized into the following sections:
•
Section 6.1 presents recommendations for parkland
including a summary of the planning concept that
underlies the proposed Facility Plan.
Section 6.2 presents a trails plan, along with specific
recommendations for trails, pathways, and bikeways. ",.
ri
Section 6.3 summarizes recommendations for administration and
management of a park and recreation program.
Section 6.4 presents preliminary recommendations for park
maintenance
Section 6.5 offers recommendations for recreation programs and
services.
6.1 PARKLAN D
Planning Concept
Spokane Valley has a park system that was inherited from Spokane
County and consists of neighborhood parks, special use areas and
larger day-use parks. However, much of the community is not served
by any public park or open space area. The following is a description
of a park system for Spokane Valley.
The ideal park system for Spokane Valley should be one made up of a
hierarchy of various park types, each offering certain types of
recreation and/or open space opportunities. Separately, each park
type may serve a primary function, but collectively, they will meet the
needs of the entire community. By recognizing this concept, Spokane
Valley can develop an efficient, cost effective, and comprehensive park
system.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-1
CHAPTER 6
The basic concept of the park system for Spokane Valley is to provide
park and open space areas within convenient walking distance of most
neighborhoods. This will be a challenge because much of the
community is already developed. To achieve this goal, the City should
seek partnerships with the school districts to provide playground and
park amenities that can be available to residents during non-school
hours. Depending upon the level of development proposed, the
concept may mean that the City should assist in funding improvements
and maintenance of the outdoor play areas. In order to achieve the
goal of a park within convenient walking distance of most residents, a
total of 12 additional parks will be needed, of which six could be
located on school playgrounds.
Because of the developed nature of the community, locating suitable
land for some of the remaining six neighborhood parks will be a
challenge. One option is to develop small mini-parks consisting of one
traditional residential lot. This type of park provides very limited
recreational opportunity (usually a small playground and an open
grass area) and caters primarily to small children. They are expensive
to maintain on a per-acre basis. The issue the City must address is
whether this type of park is more suitable than no park at all.
In addition to neighborhood parks, three community parks should be
developed to provide space for sports fields and other active uses.
The Plan also suggests that neighborhood and community parks be
supplemented with other recreational resources, such as special use
sites, linear parks, and natural open space areas.
With the City mostly developed, additional population growth will
primarily come from infill and conversion to higher density housing.
The traditional neighborhood park recommended in the plan will
provide recreation resources and open space character to a population
of 5,000-10,000 people. However, if the City chooses to permit some
neighborhoods to exceed housing densities of 15 units per acre or
more, additional parkland will be needed. Under these situations, it is
recommended in the Plan that developers provide additional recreation
resources and open space for their specific projects.
One approach to acquiring parkland and open space is to permit
reduced lot sizes and compensate with additional park space. This
concept is often utilized under the provisions of a Planned Unit
Development (PUD).
The planning concept also includes a comprehensive recreation trails
system utilizing the Centennial Trail along the Spokane River as the
backbone element. A loop trail is proposed that would encircle the
outer portions of the community. In total, it represents about 21 .5
6-2 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
miles of trail including off-street trails, on-street trails, and trails
through parks and open space areas.
The planning concept is designed, in part, to provide facilities that will
accommodate new programs and services, as the City expands its role
in providing recreation programs and services to the community.
Park Layout Plan
The Park Layout Plan is a graphic representation of the proposed park
system for Spokane Valley. Figure 6.1 illustrates the conceptual
location and routing of proposed park sites and trails, along with the
location of existing facilities. The map does not pinpoint specific
locations for future parks. Exact locations will come at a later time
when actual acquisition occurs. Some important notes about the
Facility Plan include:
1 . Each site is coded with letters and numbers (such as NP-12). The
letter represents the park type such as Neighborhood Park. The
number is for site identification only and refers to a specific
discussion in the text of the report. The letter code is as follows:
NP Neighborhood Park
CP Community Park
LU Large Urban Park
RP Regional Park
SU Special Use Area
OS Natural Open Space
T Trail
2. On the Proposed Park Layout Plan map, colored asterisks indicate
proposed parks and open space areas. The symbols show a
general location for each proposed park or recreation area. The
final location of park sites will be determined later in the
development of City plans and will be influenced by land
availability, acquisition costs, and property ownership.
3. Names for proposed sites are for reference only and have not been
approved by City staff or the City Council.
Major Park Decisions
Two decisions on park location and their function will be determined by
outside conditions not directly related to the park itself. These two
parks are discussed on the next page with the options presented later
in this section.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-3
CHAPTER 6
Valley Mission Park: The swimming pool option discussed in
Chapter 7 will dictate how this park should be developed. The
two options are:
• If the Valley Mission Pool is developed into a major
outdoor aquatic center, some or all of the existing
Valley Mission Park located on the northwest side of
Mission Avenue should be developed for additional
parking. All of the ten acre site located directly
south of Mission Avenue including the existing
parking area should then be developed into a small
community park.
• If the decision is made to make only minor
improvements to Valley Mission Pool, the existing
park site located on the northwest side of Mission
Avenue should remain as it is. The undeveloped
area on the south side of Mission Avenue should be
developed into a neighborhood park.
North Green Acres Park: Recently, the School District
purchased a ten acre site for an elementary school in this
area. Approximately five additional acres are available that
could be used for park use. The Park Layout Plan has
identified a need for both a 20 acre community park and a
five acre neighborhood park in this area. Acquiring the five
acres of parkland and combining it with a portion of the
school playground would create a small community park.
While not desirable, this may be the better option than
searching for a larger community park site.
Design Guidelines
Detailed design guidelines for each park type recommended in the
Plan are found in Appendix D.
Park and Facility Recommendations
Preliminary recommendations for park land are listed by park
classification. Both existing and proposed parks are listed by park
number (e.g., NP-1 2). Table 6.1 and 6.2 are provided to quickly
locate the page number where a specific park or open space area is
discussed.
6-4 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Table 6.1
Index of Existing Park Recommendations
City of Spokane Valley
Site Number Location Park Name Page
Number
NP-14 Outside Orchard Avenue Park 6-11
NP-17 CL Edgecliff Park 6-11
NP-19 CL Park Road Pool 6-11
NP-22 CL Balfour Park 6-12
NP-25 CL Castle Park 6-12
NP-28 CL Browns Park 6-13
NP-29 CL Terrace View Park 6-14
LU-12 CL Mirabeau Point Park 6-18
CP-20 CL Valley Mission Park 6-18
RP-2 Outside Plantes Ferry Park 6-20
SU-5 CL Sullivan Park 6-20
SU-11 CL CenterPlace 6-21
SU-13 CL Myrtle Point Park 6-22
(1) CL Inside City Limits
Outside Outside the Urban Growth Boundary
Park and Recreation Plan 6-5
CHAPTER 6
Table 6.2
Index of Proposed Park Recommendations
City of Spokane Valley
Site Number Park Name Location(') Page
Number
NP-1 West Valley Park NW 6-10
NP-4 Trentwood School/Park NE 6-10
NP-6 Donwood Park NE 6-10
NP-8 North Barker Park NE 6-10
NP-14 Orchard Avenue Park NW 6-10
NP-26 Chester Creek Park SW 6-13
NP-27 Painted Hills Park SE 6-13
NP-30 Keystone School/Park SE 6-15
NP-31 Summit School/Park SE 6-15
NP-32 Progress School/Park SE 6-15
NP-33 Greenacres School/Park SE 6-15
NP-34 South Barker Park SE 6-16
NP-37 32'Avenue Park SE 6-16
CP-9 Green Acres Community Park NE 6-16
CP-16 Southwest Hills Park SW 6-18
CP-36 Shelly Lake Park SE 6-20
SU-10 Mission Avenue Trailhead NE 6-21
SU-18 Camp Caro SW 6-22
SU-21 Valley Mission South SW 6-23
SU-23 Town Center Site SW 6-24
OS-3 Progress Road Open Space NE 6-24
OS-7 Spokane River Open Space NE 6-24
OS-15 Broadway Open Space NE 6-24
OS-24 Chester Creek Open Space SW 6-24
OS-35 Shelly Lake Open Space SE 6-24
(1) Area Location divided by 184 for north-south and Pines Street for east-west
6-6 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Mini-Parks
Currently the City does not own any mini-parks. The acquisition of
mini parks requires careful consideration. These small parks typically
have a greater maintenance cost per area, and their size limits their
recreational value. Since their size limits facilities and activities that can
be offered, they usually contain only a small children's playground.
However, in the case of the City of Spokane Valley, where parkland is
needed but larger parcels will be difficult to obtain, small mini-parks
may offer the best alternative. Before embarking on this approach, the
City should seriously consider the maintenance ramifications.
This is not to say that mini-parks should not be considered in
developments where private parties build and maintain them. In
addition, where high density projects will over-impact the capacity of a
neighborhood park, developers should be required to provide their
own park and recreation facilities.
At the current time, no recommendations are made for developing
future mini parks.
Neighborhood Parks
The Neighborhood Park should be central to the City's park system. It
should provide most of the open space and passive use within local
neighborhoods. If possible,they should be located within easy walking
distance without crossing major barriers or arterial streets.
The optimum size for neighborhood parks should be about 5 acres. In
Spokane Valley, the average size is 5.5 acres. However, in cases
where the optimum size is not available because of current
development or where land costs prohibit acquisition of large sites,
smaller parcels may be considered.
The Neighborhood Park Service Area Analysis identified in Figure 5.1 in
Chapter 5 identifies current neighborhoods that are served by a
neighborhood park. This drawing illustrates the need for additional park
land. The Plan recognizes the difficulty the City will have in meeting the goal
of a park in every neighborhood of the City. As a result,the Plan proposes a
compromise between need, and the City's ability to acquire land.
6-8 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
In some cases, the best option is for the City to partner with the school
districts and upgrade school playgrounds to offer recreational facilities
that will also serve the local neighborhood. Starting below is a
discussion on neighborhood park sites
West Valley Park (Proposed) Site NP-1
This site is proposed in the northwest segment of the city in the vicinity
of Pasadena Park Elementary School. It should be designed to serve
all of the residents north of the River. A site of 3-5 acres is proposed
and should contain the facilities typical of a neighborhood park.
Trentwood School/Park (Proposed) Site NP-4
This proposed park site is located to serve central Spokane Valley north of
Trent Avenue. Because very little undeveloped and available land exists in
this area, it is proposed that additional recreation facilities be added to the
existing Trentwood Elementary School. As an alternative, a school/park
could be developed at East Valley Middle or East Valley High School.
Improvements to the school playground should include an additional
children's playground, upgrade of the play fields and addition of a
small picnic shelter and picnic area.
Donwood Park (Proposed) Site NP-6
This proposed park site is located in the small neighborhood just north of the
Spokane River in the vicinity of Donwood Road. Because it is anticipated that
this park will serve a limited population,the size could be reduced to an area
as small as three acres and contain many of the facilities of a typical
neighborhood park.
Barker Park (Proposed) Site NP-8
This site is proposed in the general vicinity of the Barker Community
Learning Center. This site should contain all of the facilities typically
found in a neighborhood park.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-9
CHAPTER 6
Orchard Avenue Park Site NP-14
Orchard Avenue Park is a County owned site located adjacent to but
outside the City's incorporated boundary. It is located north of
Orchard Center Elementary School at the intersection of Bridgeport
and Park Avenues. The site is five acres in size and contains a
children's playground and ball field. Since it is not owned or managed
by the City, no recommendations are made for the site.
Edgecliff Park Site NP-1 7
• Replace picnic
Fb 4• a.�` lz ., ` f-, tables
x
I ,F fl l_ s r • Color coat the
if�;� y^r� _ .. `; ' tennis courts
" ",x ` Add Basketball
. J ,x r, 14 E.., '...IL , court
, :I
`' l "" k ` 11c • Add pathways
- s - f.- .0- ;, • Upgrade the
�; dugouts in the
4 - baseball field
roe --4_..t.`.
• Replace tennis
court fence
• Replace playground and safety surfacing
• Upgrade or replace restroom building
• Park needs better ADA access
Park Road Pool/Park (Expansion) Site NP-1 9
A park is needed in this area
to serve the neighborhood.
While some area exists within
the site to add park facilities,
it may be possible to acquire ',,,,Jr -
nearby land for park '11 1 ,L
expansion. If this is possible,
the site should be developed -_ f..
to offer typical neighborhood __ _
park facilities. _— , ,
6-10 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Balfour Park Site NP-22
Vacant land
exists to the
west that could
be used for park
purposes. -
Should this land k.
be acquired, this , , >
site could be _, = lilf .5, 1,1
developed for -' `� i `' •1
many purposes. �`
For the
immediate
future, the `" z
following
improvements
should be made:
• Replace deteriorating edge restraint around the playground and
volleyball court
• Provide an ADA access (ramp) to the playground
• Resurface the parking lot
• Add additional recreational facilities, i.e., shelter, basketball court
and signage
• Replace picnic tables
Castle Park Site NP- 25
.4 i 1 . = a >, Castle Park is a
- '. i `"', " roc''"'' maintained open
`i
v, ' " ± s 1 ,. space area without
itt
, N, recreational facilities.
..
��a� � : �'m _.�' � To support the local
1 w„, . ,4 { _g neighborhood needs,
i - 't , z. additional
a ' 'sc recreational facilities
= 14, F' '..t'',4,•1 should be added.
:' 4 These improvements
•'� should include:
. .r ;.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-11
CHAPTER 6
• Provide typical neighborhood park facilities, i.e., children's
playground, small shelter, paved pathways, picnic sites, etc.
• Develop and formalize the parking areas.
• Address the drainage problems in portions of the park.
• Add signage.
• Replace picnic tables
Chester Creek Park (Proposed) Site NP-26
The Plan recommends an open space corridor that runs along
Dishman Road. A park site is proposed within this corridor that is
located west of the Painted Hills Golf Course. Because of the wetlands
in this area, the proposed park could be part of a larger open space
corridor and a trailhead for a proposed trail system.
Painted Hills Park (Proposed) Site NP-27
This park site should be located south or southeast of the Painted Hills
Golf Course. The hilly terrain in this area may only permit a small
portion of the site for park development. Based on site constraints, an
open grass area, playground and a small picnic area may be the only
suitable facilities.
Brown's Park Site NP-28
• Meet with ry --
representatives
of the local
Kiwanis to �
determine - N
their interest in
upgrading the d
site. Mom. _
• Replace small - ,
picnic shelter - .
with one -
suitable for "=1"-*- w ,At ,, 4
g groups
,
lar e
(150 persons
or more).
6-12 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
• Replace the playground.
• Pave area within the dugouts and replace benches.
• Upgrade volleyball court; needs edging.
• Develop large paved areas to support the picnic shelter and local
neighborhood functions.
• Replace picnic tables
Terrace View Park Site NP-29
Terrace View Park contains the typical neighborhood park facilities
including a softball field and an outdoor swimming pool. With over 100
parking spaces,there is much more parking than is needed. It is
recommended that the east bay of parking be removed and converted into
a reserved area for group picnics. Other improvements should include:
• Remove east
bay of
" t
parking and
replace with , b ` ,, /: • �
group picnic b r ,
area.
• Add a large -
4.picnic shelter #� � y
g k
to the
proposed ip` r r Ik fel
rnrrr-
7'-
group picnic — ,�' —�—
area.
• Add picnic
shelters.
• Replace
playground including safety surfacing.
• Provide ADA access to the playground.
• Add paved pathways throughout the park.
• Add a sport court for basketball and other park activities.
• Recommendations for swimming pool improvements are found in
Chapter 7.
• Consider removing some portions of the exterior fencing to provide
more direct access.
• Add park signage.
• Replace picnic tables
Park and Recreation Plan 6-13
CHAPTER 6
Keystone School/Park (Proposed) Site NP-30
This proposed school/park is intended to serve central Spokane Valley
south of Broadway Avenue. Because very little, if any undeveloped
suitable land exists in this area, it is proposed that additional recreation
facilities be added to the existing Keystone Elementary School.
Improvements to the school playground should include an additional
children's playground, upgrade of the play fields and addition of a
small picnic shelter and picnic area.
Summit School/Park (Proposed) Site NP-31
This proposed school/park is intended to serve central Spokane Valley
north of Broadway Avenue. Because very little, if any undeveloped
suitable land exists in this area, it is proposed that additional recreation
facilities be added to the existing Summit Elementary School.
Improvements to the school playground should include an additional
children's playground, upgrade of the play fields and addition of a
small picnic shelter and picnic area.
Progress School/Park (Proposed) Site NP-32
This proposed school/park is also intended to serve central Spokane
Valley south of Broadway Avenue. Because very little, if any
undeveloped suitable land exists in this area, it is proposed that
additional recreation facilities be added to the existing Progress
Elementary School. Improvements to the school playground should
include an additional children's playground, upgrade of the play fields
and addition of a small picnic shelter and picnic area.
Greenacres School/Park (Proposed) Site NP-33
This proposed school/park is intended to serve east central Spokane
Valley south of Broadway Avenue. Because very little, if any
undeveloped suitable land exists in this area, it is proposed that
additional recreation facilities be added to the existing Greenacres
Junior High School. Improvements to the school playground should
include an additional children's playground, upgrade of the play fields
and addition of a small picnic shelter and picnic area.
6-14 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
South Barker Park (Proposed) Site NP-34
This site is proposed south of Sprague Avenue in the vicinity of Barker
Road. This site should contain all of the facilities typically found in a
neighborhood park.
32nd Avenue Park (Proposed) Site NP-37
This proposed site is located in the Hills north of 32nd avenue between
Sullivan Road and the extension of Flora Road. The proposed site is
currently located outside the City Limits but within the Urban Growth
Boundary. A 40-acre parcel of Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) property exists nearby and it may be possible to locate the two
sites next to each other. This site should contain all of the facilities
typically found in a neighborhood park.
Community Parks
While the neighborhood park system is designed to provide convenient
passive recreation
areas for local
neighborhoods, : .
additional park sites `+-T T . '
are needed for the "= i #°
more structured £� 4,,ter• 4 .
activities such as
organized sports, large �` ►_ , '° : -
Ptv 'kw_ 5F 3' �d "�,--w
group gatherings, ---A-. .t t�;< �. --
outdoor concerts and s,., �'.M . 74`11;"'' ."
other facilities that draw .,�, ''", -"., a . ,k
large groups of people. 44,---v '`� ,`°`
, ,,
The proposed
community park system recommended in the Plan is designed to
provide these facilities that attract users from throughout the
community.
Recommendations for community parks include:
Park and Recreation Plan 6-15
CHAPTER 6
Green Acres Community Park (Proposed) Site CP-9
Currently no parks are located between the Spokane River and the
Freeway in the eastern part of the community. Acquiring a larger
multi-use community park in this area will be important for providing
sport fields and other structured activities. This could also be a park
where special recreation uses could be accommodated. This is one of
the few areas in Spokane Valley where land exists to acquire a suitable
site. Because of the overall community needs for this kind of park, a
site of 30 acres or more should be considered. The general
recommended location is in the vicinity of Mission Avenue between
Flora Road and Barker Road. Recently the School District purchased a
site for an elementary school in this general area. Two options exist for
developing a park in this area:
Option A
Develop a small community park in conjunction with the
elementary school. Maximum size of the park including the
school playground would be no more than 10 acres. This size is
less than recommended but may be more realistic than acquiring
a 30 acre site. Under this condition, recommended facilities
would include:
• 2-3 Sport fields
• Small group picnic area with shelters
• Typical neighborhood park facilities
• Large multi-use open play area
• Restroom
• Parking for 100 cars
Option B
Develop the site as a neighborhood park and acquire a large 30
acre community park in the vicinity. Potential facilities could
include:
• Sport field complex of 4-6 fields
• Large group picnic area with shelters
• Typical neighborhood park facilities
• BMX Track
• Large multi-use open play area for large group
gatherings and activities
• Restroom
• Parking for approximately 300 cars
• Special use facilities
6-16 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Southwest Hills Park (Proposed) Site CP-16
A community park is needed to serve the southwest portion of the
community. While flat developable land is difficult to find, suitable
sites appear in the area around 15th Avenue between the extensions of
Camahan Road and David Street. If possible a suitable site should
contain enough land to develop 2-3 sport fields.
Valley Mission Park Site CP-20
Splashdown is a rtr,
privately managed `' ;�' "
water park located in ,�� _* • ; i ,
Valley Mission Park.
Splashdown leases the r '
site from the City that is
in effect until 2012. It � ,. s Y ,
has its own entrance � _ ate£„ j,”" v
but visitors often use =
the parking lot in front 3 L }
of the Valley Mission '. } � � x
Pool. The Splashdown af E -. , , '
parking at is located `"
directly south across
Mission Avenue.
Two improvement options exist for Valley Mission Park and Valley
Mission Pool depending upon how the City's Valley Mission Pool will be
developed.
Option A
Option A assumes that Valley Mission Pool will be developed into a
small outdoor aquatic complex utilizing the majority of the $1 .6 million
County allocation. Because the Water Park is nearby, The City should
consider merging the operation of these two facilities together and
create one entrance.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-17
CHAPTER 6
One of the current problems with the Water park is parking. Visitors to
the park either use the parking lot in front of Valley Mission Pool or are
required to use the parking lot on the opposite side of Mission Avenue.
To reduce the amount of pedestrian crossings, it is recommended with
this option to expand the parking on the north side where the
recreation facilities now exist and develop a new park on the south side
of Mission Avenue. With this option, the following improvements are
recommended:
• Create a single entrance to Valley Mission Pool and the Water
Park.
• Expand parking to the west to accommodate the parking
needs of both the Water Park and Valley Mission Pool
• Remove the parking lot on the south side of Mission Park and
develop the entire 10 acre site into a park as described in SU
21 .
• Create a dog park between the arena and the senior center.
• Consider community gardens in the lower portion near the
arena.
• Develop a viewpoints and gazebo at the top of the slope
• Create some small intimate picnic areas below the senior
center
• Develop a paved trail that starts at the arena and ends on top
of the slope.
• Consider moving the radio controlled car club to the flat area
above the arena.
Option B
Option B assumes that Valley Mission Pool will remain as it now exists
with the $1 .6 million County allocation, equally divided between the
three pools. As a result, only minor improvements are needed to the
Park. These include:
• No improvements are needed to the park west of the parking
lot.
• Develop the improvements suggested above for the area
between the swimming pool and the arena.
• The parking lot on the south side of Mission Avenue would
remain to accommodate parking for Splashdown.
6-18 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Shelly Lake Park (Proposed) Site CP-36
Currently a drainage corridor exists that runs from Shelly Lake up into
the hills. An open space corridor is proposed along this drainage way
that protects the wetlands areas. On the south side of the wetlands
area in the vicinity of the extension of Flora Road is a proposed
community park. Depending upon site conditions, this proposed park
should contain 3-4 sport fields, a large group picnic area and the
normal neighborhood park facilities.
Large Urban Parks
Large urban parks are park areas designed to serve the entire
community and differ primarily from community in their size.
Mirabeau Point Park Site LU-12
Mirabeau Point
Park is a new
54 acre site that
includes The
Meadows,
which is a ten .
acre fully r �4 ` '$°''
•developed park r __
'_ � ,+ + �
l "
site; Mirabeau - -- -
Springs which is
a waterfall, r- -
pond, and
picnic area; and
CenterPlace
which is a new
event center. The entire Mirabeau complex is linked with paved trails
and includes an abundance of natural open space. Recommendations
include:
The Meadows
• Add children's playground
• Add a band shell to existing stage
• Add lighting to the stage and parking lot
• Develop a parking plan for large events Mirabeau Springs
• Renovate or replace boardwalk
• Construct universal playground
Park and Recreation Plan 6-19
CHAPTER 6
Natural Open Space Area
• Prepare an open space management plan
Regional Parks
Regional Parks are large day-use parks designed to serve the entire
region. There are no regional parks in the City, although Plante's
Ferry Park is located on the edge of the City limits.
Plantes Ferry Park Site RP-2
This park is owned and managed by Spokane County. While the park
has significant importance to the community, Spokane Valley has no
jurisdiction over its operation.
Special Use Areas
Special use areas typically are single-purpose areas or sites occupied
by specialized facilities. Because they can vary in character and use,
specific site requirements and facilities offered will vary.
Sullivan Park Site SU-5
While Sullivan Park meets
local neighborhood park
needs, its major focus is the
Dance Hall. Currently the
Dance Hall is leased to The
Western Dance Association
who pays for its use and
maintains the facility.
Under the current
agreement, the City is also
entitled to use the facility. A
portion of the Park by the River that contains the shelter is owned by
the State. A formal agreement should be made for City use of this
property.
By written agreement, the City also provides space to a radio-
controlled car club. A discussion on these leases can be found on
page 6-39.
6-20 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
This site also provides direct access to the Spokane River. The site is
connected to the City's sanitary sewer system but potable water is
provided by a well. The City should seek to connect to a more reliable
water source. Improvements to the park itself should include:
• Add trees and landscaping to the parking lot
• Resurface the parking lot
• Add paved pathways to connect the parking lot to the facilities
• Connect to a public water source
• Replace and/or upgrade the irrigation system
• Replace the children's playground
• Construct a restroom building for park users
• Add a sport court for basketball and general public use
• Provide better access and a viewpoint to the River
• Add park signage
• Replace picnic tables and benches
• Replace the two existing picnic shelters with a large one
Mission Avenue Trailhead (Proposed) Site SU-10
An informal and undeveloped trailhead now exists at the west end of
Mission Avenue near the Spokane River. It is recommended that a site
be acquired in this location and formally developed into a trailhead.
Improvements should include:
• Parking for approximately 25 cars
• Small staging area with a small shelter and grass area
• Informational kiosk
CenterPlace Site SU-1 1
Centerplace is a new regional community center opened in the Fall of
2005. Since the site has no outdoor recreation areas, no
recommendations are made for this site.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-21
CHAPTER 6
Myrtle Point Park Site SU-13
This site is located on the south side of the Spokane River and is only
accessible from the Centennial Trail. The large rocks in this portion of
the river attract swimmers and sun-bathers who prefer a more natural
setting. An uplands area along the south bank of the river in the
vicinity of these rocks could offer a pleasant area for picnicking and
general passive use. This area has the potential to flood during high
water conditions and thus improvements should recognize this
condition.
• Develop a
master plan
for this park.
• Search for an
access from
the south
• Consider a
boat launch -
on the south
side of the
river ,} "
• Clear and
grade an
open area for
..
picnicking
and general passive use
• Develop a paved trail from the Centennial Trail into the site
• Construct a small restroom building if a site can be found above the
potential flood level. Note:the design should reflect the potential for
vandalism
Camp Caro (Proposed) Site SU-18
Dishman Hills is a 518 acre park site owned and managed by the
Dishman Hills Conservancy and Spokane County. Camp Caro is a small
developed portion of the site that contains a lodge, small open grass area
and playground.
The site, and particularly the lodge, is situated in a quiet and peaceful
setting that offers a relaxing respite from the development nearby.
Currently with an agreement with the County, the City of Spokane
Valley has access to the lodge for programs.
6-22 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
In exchange, the City offers Spokane County access to its sports fields.
A City sponsored summer camp was offered in summer of 2005.
Since the site is found adjacent to the City of Spokane Valley, the City
should open talks with the County to discuss other possible
partnerships.
Valley Mission Park—South (Proposed) Site SU-21
This existing site
located across the
street from Mission
Park, has been used
as overflow parking
for the Water Park in
the past. This has •
caused safety
concerns because of
pedestrians crossing
Mission Avenue.
Development of this
site is dependent _
upon the =
development of
Valley Mission Park to the north (Site CP-20. Under Option A of Valley
Mission Park (North), the existing parking on Valley Mission Park South
would be removed. With Option B, the parking lot would remain.
Option A
• Add one softball field, 1 baseball field and 2-3 soccer fields
• Develop a group picnic area with two shelters
• Add a skate park (Note: If the Senior Center is converted to a
teen center, the skate park should be located next to it
• Construct a restroom building
• Develop a large children's playground
• Develop a small community center building
• Add parking for approximately 100 cars
Option B
• Develop a small children's playground
• Develop a multi-purpose soccer baseball field
• Create an multi-use open play area
• Develop approximately 10 picnic sites
• Construct a small picnic shelter
Park and Recreation Plan 6-23
CHAPTER 6
• Add parking for approximately 25 cars
Town Center Site (Proposed) Site SU-23
An indoor aquatic center and recreation center is recommended to be
included within the proposed Town Center site. See the discussion on
aquatic facilities (in Chapter 7) and the recreation center (page 6-26).
Natural Open Space Areas
, While natural open space
* 4. `' _ '- opportunities are somewhat
.i i t
, il .4. ', r , limited in the City, some
y, °'� i opportunities still exist. The
�► , .,+ `�._r ! Spokane River corridor offers
f' A F' the greatest opportunity
•--- u,� III iii although minor drainage
,,p .y� corridors exist.
... R Y2..,
x.. . . ; The extent of development in
--.-4.-4:. = 1 ; the open space areas should
-"r .3' - -" ' be limited to trails and
trailheads. The City should assume responsibility of these areas with
management to include reducing fire hazards, control of invasive
vegetation, and removal of safety hazards. When the City has
acquired several open space sites, an open space management plan
should be developed.
Recommended open space sites include:
Table 6.3
Recommended Open Space Sites
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Site# Name Comments
OS-3 Progress Road Open Currently a wetlands area
Space
OS-7 Spokane River Open Located on the south side of the Spokane
Space River
0S-15 Broadway Open
Space
OS-24 Chester Creek Open A small drainage corridor with several
Space small ponds
OS-35 Shelly Lake Open Located from Shelly Lake up into the hills
Space to the south
6-24 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Specialized Facilities
Aquatic Facilities
See Chapter 7 for a discussion on swimming needs and
recommendations.
Water Playgrounds
The Plan recommends the
placement of water playgrounds in —*
some or all of the existing city- �* �• : "`
owned outdoor pools. In addition,
the City should consider
developing several small self-
Ati
administered water playgrounds. ,
Suggested sites are the proposed
community park (site CP-9) located
in the North Green Acres
just south of the Spokane River; the proposed
neighborhood park (site NP-34) located in the easterly portion of the
city south of Sprague Avenue; and Balfour Park, if it can be expanded
(site NP-22)).
Youth Activity Center
The recreation survey and the workshop meeting indicated interest in
providing more services for the youth. While some youth services will
be provided in the new CenterPlace facility, MIG has found that the
youth prefer their own facility away from adults.
A potential site is the old senior center. The senior activities were
recently moved to CenterPlace. While the old building is larger than
needed for youth activities, the upper floor would be ideal for the
youth. The lower level, which shows signs of significant settling, could
then be used for storage. If youth activities can be accommodated
within this building, a skatepark on the site should be considered.
If the entire building is condemned and removed, a new youth activity
center should be built on the site.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-25
CHAPTER 6
Indoor Recreation Center
In the long term, the City should consider developing an indoor
recreation center. Currently the City does not offer indoor sport
activities such as basketball and volleyball. These sports are conducted
in the schools through the private youth sport organizations. Adult
indoor sports are offered by the City of Spokane and by a private club.
While the City does not offer sport or other indoor recreation
programs, this is an activity that the City should consider in the future.
While access to school facilities is often available, MIG has found that
City-sponsored programs are often bumped from the school's schedule
at the last minute. This tendency makes it difficult to manage a
program.
CenterPlace will provide space for meetings and large group
gatherings but is not ideally suited for the more active uses. The YMCA
is the primary facility in the community that provides space for
gymnasium activities, health and fitness programs, swimming and
other active activities. Because of the above conditions, it is
recommended the City examine the feasibility of developing a new
multi-purpose indoor recreation center. The ideal location would be
within the proposed Town Center (site SU-23). The proposed
recreation center could help support the Town Center concept and be
located within a retail and high density residential area. This location
would also provide convenient indoor recreation space in the southern
portion of the City.
Recommended spaces and facilities for a recreation center in Spokane
Valley include:
• Indoor 25 yard (American Short Course) swimming pool and water
park
• Gymnasium space for basketball, volleyball and other similar
activities and organized sports
• Fitness space (exercise/aerobics areas and weight training rooms)
• Small meeting rooms and classrooms
• Specialized activity areas
6-26 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Public Restrooms
Public restrooms in parks are expensive to construct and maintain, yet
they provide a convenience to the park user. Currently, there are no
policies in place as to where and which type of park restrooms should
be developed. Most of the larger neighborhood parks in Spokane
Valley contain restrooms, although they are old and need upgraded.
There are several options the City could take in meeting restroom
needs:
• Provide no new restrooms in any of the parks.
• Provide a full-service restroom in only the larger, heavily used
parks.
• Provide a full-service restroom in most city parks.
• Provide seasonal and portable restrooms in most of the parks.
In terms of type of restrooms, several options are available:
• The typical restroom with sk '
one gender located on `x
each side of the building. °' "
• Single occupancy unit Ap,
contained within a
building of 4-8 units.
• Porta Potties. If these
were to be provided, they i -
should be enclosed
within a permanent shell.
Based on the above options, the following policies are recommended:
• Provide permanent restrooms in all community parks.
• Provide permanent or portable restrooms in neighborhood parks of
high use.
• Provide permanent restrooms in specialized parks where high use
is expected.
• Discourage restrooms of any type in remote sites, small parks or
linear parks.
• Restrooms should be of the single occupancy unit type
Park and Recreation Plan 6-27
CHAPTER 6
Sports Fields
The need for sport fields in Spokane Valley is not great at this time
because the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and a private sports
complex is meeting the need for most types of sport fields in the
region. However, as the community grows, there will be a greater
need for additional sport fields. This is noted in Table 5.2 on page 5-
11 .
Youth sports utilize school r.EM11111
fields and private sport
groups and the YMCA
manage youth sports.
The following
recommendations and r policies are recommended for ,. l
the development and -_7 ^�
=,.,
management of sports fields: - - - - -
General Role and
Responsibilities
• The City and schools should be the provider of sport fields.
The City should develop the quality fields suitable for games
and tournaments and school fields should be primarily used
for practice.
• The City should not become involved in managing sport
programs except for the offering of sport camps and
introductory level play instruction.
• The City in conjunction with the sport groups should
schedule field use including those on school playgrounds.
Field Development
• The City should work with partner agencies, especially
schools, to help meet demand for indoor and outdoor
sports facilities. Develop and maintain inventories and
evaluations of shared sports facilities.
• The City should construct sport fields in all of the proposed
community parks. Develop fields for multi-use.
• The City should assess existing and proposed sites for the
feasibility of developing additional sports fields,
6-28 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
particularly adult softball fields, youth baseball/softball fields,
and adult and youth soccer fields.
Management and Operations
• Consider a 3-tier maintenance schedule for sport fields with
tournament fields receiving the highest level of maintenance
and practice fields receiving the lowest level of
maintenance.
• Create a field scheduling committee to maintain the most
efficient use of fields. This committee should be headed by
City staff, but include representatives of the user groups and
school officials. The procedure for scheduling should follow
the methodology created in the Needs Assessment.
• To maintain the fields for quality playing conditions, a rest
and rotation schedule should be developed and followed.
BMX Track
The Needs Assessment revealed some interest in a bicycle (BMX) track.
If an organized group expresses interest in this type of facility, the City
should provide the space but require the group to develop and
maintain it. Potential sites include any of the proposed community
parks
Valley Mission Horse Arena
The Valley Mission Horse Area consists of a riding arena and a number
of covered stalls. Currently the stalls and the arena are only in
marginal condition. Several riding groups rent the site about 11 times
a year. Currently the two primary issues with the site are: who should
pay for the repairs and how it should be managed.
The following policies are recommended for this site:
• User fees should be increased to reflect the cost of maintenance
and custodial needs. (The A-frame building and the stalls need
major improvements).
• A surcharge should be initiated with the user groups. The
funds should be dedicated to improvements to the facility.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-29
CHAPTER 6
Radio Controlled Car Track
Currently the Spokane Radio Control Car Club has a temporary
agreement with the City for a site in Sullivan Park to operate their track.
While the site is managed and maintained by the Club, its condition
and appearance is substandard. Recommended policies for this facility
are as follows:
• A formal lease should be developed with the provisions
identified below.
• Site improvements should be made based on a plan approved
by the City.
• The site should be open and made available to the general
public.
• Camping may occur for special events based on the policies
described in "Camping in Parks" on page 6-38.
Western Dance Hall
The Western Dance Hall is located in Sullivan Park and is leased to the
Western Dance Association. The Association maintains the facility.
Under the current agreement, the City is also entitled to use the facility.
It is recommended that as long as the two above conditions are met
the use should continue.
6.2 TRAILS, PATHWAYS, AND BIKEWAYS
Trail Linkage Concept
The proposed trail system described
below is primarily an off-street
recreation trails system although it
will also serve as a mode of
transportation throughout the
community and to regions beyond.
A major community system of
pathways is proposed to provide eg; �
linkages between parks, community
facilities, residential areas, schools, and open space areas. The system
utilizes the Centennial Trail as its centerpiece.
6-30 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
From this segment, a loop trail system encircles the entire community
utilizing park and open space areas, and streets where no public land
exists. Since much of the community is developed, an aggressive
approach will be needed to connect individual segments.
In the public workshop, the community expressed a preference for off-
street, paved pathways for pedestrian and bicycle use. However,
where trail segments cannot pass through public land, it may be
necessary to construct on-street bike lanes to complete specific
segments. It also will be necessary to coordinate with adjoining cities
and the County to make connections to their trail systems.
Potential Trail Types
The purpose of the proposed trails plan is to connect residential areas
with parks, open space and other recreational areas. The proposed
plan identifies conceptual routes for pathways and trails. A more
specific trails plan will be needed later to locate specific routes and
design requirements.
Paths within Public Street Rights-of-Way
These are the easiest to build because they are located within the
public street rights-of-way. These paths include three types:
• Sidewalks and on-street bicycle lanes: Pedestrian/bicycle ways
within public street rights-of-way are typically sidewalks and on-
street bicycle lanes. All new streets must have sidewalks and all
new major streets must have bicycle lanes.
• Paths within street rights-of-way but separated: Paths that are
within street rights-of-way but separated by a curb or painted line
have two major concerns: (1) the bicycle rider or pedestrian is not
safely separated from automobile traffic, and (2) these pathways
require a much wider right-of-way. The separated paths are also
undesirable because they are not perceived as a sidewalk, yet they
cross many driveway and street intersections. These paths require
very detailed design for even minimal safety. Pathways that are
along a continuous road or street can be safer since there are few
crossings. These routes are ideal within linear parkways. However,
they are unsafe for cyclists because they do not have suitable
locations to enter or exit from the street without causing the cyclist
to ride against traffic. Additional on-street bicycle lanes are
needed when a path abuts a major street to avoid conflicts between
walkers and faster cyclists. This results in the need for a very wide
right-of-way that can be nearly impossible to acquire in a
developed area. A separated path along a street,
Park and Recreation Plan 6-31
CHAPTER 6
if necessary, can be accommodated more easily in undeveloped areas
and would have to be coordinated very closely with street design
engineers.
• Accessways: Accessways are short public paths that serve as
connections for non-vehicular travel. Accessways are sometimes
used to connect a cul-de-sac with an adjoining street or where
there are overly long blocks. They are also useful to provide access
to parks and schools if they do not abut a street.
Paths Outside a Street Rights-of-Way
Rights-of-ways for paths that are not within streets are very difficult to
acquire unless done at the time of initial land planning and
development. Property owners are usually reluctant to grant or sell
easements of land and often object to the public near their property if
not on a street. These issues can be reduced if a detailed trail plan is
adopted prior to any development. Studies have shown that properties
near paths and trails have higher values. Paths should not be crossed
frequently by at-grade intersections, so the best locations are along
linear features that have few access points or crossings such as creeks,
freeways, airports, railroads, etc.
Since most of Spokane Valley is developed, obtaining significant
portions of trail segments of this type will be difficult to acquire.
Paths in Open Space Corridors
Pathways within open space corridors are ideal because in addition to
a transportation route, they provide a passive and peaceful setting. At
the same time, most of the proposed open space sites recommended
in the Plan contain wetlands or have other environmentally sensitive
conditions. Specific design approaches need to be addressed under
these conditions.
Trails Plan
Figure 6.2 illustrates the proposed Trails Plan, including existing trails
and conceptual routes for proposed multi-use pathways, planned
sidewalks, and planned bicycle lanes. Note that bike lanes not only
provide connections where off-street pathways are not possible, but
they also support commuter bicycle travel.
Table 6.4 lists the proposed trails/pathways that are noted in the Trails
Plan. Each trail should be assessed for its suitability as part of the
overall trail system.
6-32 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Table 6.4
Proposed Trail System
City of Spokane Valley
# Name Length Comments
11.2 Trail is existing and managed
T-1 Spokane River Centennial Trail miles by a consortium of public and
private organizations
This is an abandoned rail line.
T-2 Burlington Northern Trail 2.9 miles It is unclear whether this is
owned by the City or County
T-3 Spokane Loop- Eastern Segment 5.1 miles Begins at the BN Trail and
travels south to Sullivan Road
An east-west segment that
Spokane Loop—Southern starts at Sullivan Road and
T-4 Segment 3.3 miles ends at Dishman Road. Route
generally follows 32"d avenue
A northerly segment that lies
within the proposed Chester
T-5 Spokane Loop—Southwestern 3.2 miles Creek Open Space corridor;
Segment then turn westerly through
Camp Caro ending at Park
Road.
A north-south segment that lies
mostly within Park Road. Trail
eventually turns east to connect
T-6 Spokane Loop—Western Segment 3.5 miles to Argonne Road where it
crosses the River and connects
to the Spokane River
Centennial Trail
A segment connecting the
T-7 Chester Creek Connection 1.1 miles Spokane Loop at 32"d Avenue
with Chester Creek Park(Site
NP26)
A segment that begins at the
Myrtle Point Park Trailhead
T-8 Spokane River Trail Extension 1.0 mile and travels along the north
bank of the Spokane River to
Plantes Ferry Park
Park and Recreation Plan 6-33
CHAPTER 6
6.3 ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
With the City of Spokane Valley becoming an instant city of 84,000
people, the Parks and Recreation Department has been challenged to
develop policies and procedures and establish its role in providing
park and recreation services. The following recommendations are for
administering a program of leisure services.
Management and Services
• Consider the financial impact of offering park and recreation
services: The major factors that determine the efficiency of a park
and recreation program are 1 (the ability to generate revenue from
services rendered and 2) the cost to maintain facilities. While good
design can help reduce operating costs, the greater impact usually
comes from facilities and activities that generate revenue. The
chart below illustrates the potential revenue from three basic types
of leisure services:
Parks Only 5%
Programs Only 90%
Major Facilities 50%
Financial Return Ratio for Services
Figure 6.3 on the next page illustrates the overall cost impacts of
offering various levels of leisure services. Starting at the basic level
of maintaining parks only (Level 1), very little revenue, if any, is
created. At Level 5, which offers a comprehensive recreation
program, revenue is created to help offset the operating cost. As a
result, the net cost to the City is minimal. For example, the City of
Edmonds has a revenue rate for the entire Parks and Recreation
Department of 60%. This means that for every dollar budgeted, it
only costs the City approximately $0.40.
The question for Spokane Valley is: where does the City see itself in
the future in terms of offering park and recreation services?
Currently, the City is at a level 1 . While the operating budget may
be higher at Level 4 than at Level 1, the net financial cost to the
taxpayer may be nearly the same. This means that if the City were
to raise recreation services to a level 4, the net cost may not be any
more than what is now being spent. With this in mind, there are
four basic approaches Spokane Valley could take in providing a
leisure services program:
6-34 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
OPTIONS FOR A LEISURE SERVICES PROGRAM
1. Maintain the current level of park development.
2. Develop a more elaborate system of parks, trails and
other recreational facilities.
3. Downgrade the importance of parks and place the
emphasis on recreation programs.
4. Provide a balance between parks and recreation
programs.
RECREATION SERVICE COST MODEL
COST OF Cost of Service
SERVICE
4 5
3 Major and Programs Offered
Limited Recreation Programs
Expanded Park System
1
Additional Personnel
Limited Park Development
LEVEL OF
SERVICE E
Figure 6.3 Comparison of Cost of Service to Level of Service
• Recommended roles and responsibilities: Prior to incorporation,
Spokane County was the primary provider of parkland and adult
sports in the City. Youth sports were and continue to be offered and
managed by private sport groups and the YMCA. A private club in
the community provides space for additional indoor sports,
Park and Recreation Plan 6-35
CHAPTER 6
although schools continue to be the primary provider of
gymnasiums for youth sports.
Currently the City of Spokane Valley has assumed ownership and
maintenance responsibilities for most of the parks in the City. The
City now offers a limited summer program.
In the long term, the Parks and Recreation Department should
establish a more dominant role in park and recreation services in
the community. In general, the City's role should include:
• Be responsible for assessing park and recreation needs in
the community, and help coordinate service delivery efforts
with the various organizations.
• Develop a quality park system.
• Provide a level of recreation programs and services that
meets needs not filled by other leisure service providers.
• Create an identity and improve visibility: In the past, the Parks and
Recreation Department has had a very low profile because the
Department offered few programs to the public and Spokane
County maintained the parks. The Department should make an
effort to become more visible and prominent in the community.
This in turn will create a following of supporters for park and
recreation services. Some of the actions the Department should
take are:
• Offer special events that attract large numbers of
participants and promote City services.
• Offer recreation programs to both youth and adults.
• Publish articles in the City newsletter and other forums
promoting the benefits of park and recreation.
• Advertise special events and programs in the media
• Offer sustained, year round programs
• Create a Park and Recreation Advisory Committee: Currently the
City Council acts on all park and recreation issues. Over time and
as the City grows in responsibility, the Council will find it more
difficult to devote adequate time to these issues. At that time a
parks and recreation advisory board should be created to develop
advisory policies related to park and recreation services, assess
park and recreation needs, and generally provide a forum for
public input.
• Promote park and recreation services: To help promote the park
and recreation program and make the Department more visible,
6-36 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
promotional and informational brochures should be developed. In
addition, Department staff should make presentations to
neighborhood and service groups, display information at
community events, host special programs and informational events.
• Encourage volunteerism: Volunteers can not only provide much
needed assistance but involve the public in programs as well.
Potential volunteer projects could include:
• Assist in administrative duties.
• Conduct maintenance tasks.
• Assist in special events.
• Assist in recreation programs.
• Offer internships to college students
• Prepare a marketing plan: To efficiently offer services, the
Department should develop a marketing plan that describes how
services will be provided and how the services will be marketed.
• Form partnerships: The City cannot and should not provide all of
the park and recreation services needed in the community. As a
result, it should seek partnerships with other providers to help meet
the needs and distribute the responsibilities and costs.
• Offer staff training: To help manage a park and recreation
program more efficiently, staff should be encouraged to attend
special training classes, schools and other technical seminars.
• Camping in parks: When large multi-day events are held in a park
(the riding arena is an example), participants often camp on the
site. While this is a convenience to the participant, none of the
parks in Spokane Valley are designed to accommodate campers.
The problem can become acute when trash is left on the site or
campers abuse the privilege by staying extended periods of time.
Because of these problems, it is recommended that the City initiate
the following policy related to camping in parks.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-37
CHAPTER 6
Camping will only be permitted in a City park when a special event
is being held. A camping permit will be required of the event
sponsor and can only be given under the following conditions:
• Adequate restroom facilities must be available. If it is found
that the facilities are inadequate, the event sponsor will
provide portable restroom facilities.
• The camping area will be limited to a small area so to not
disrupt other park users.
• Camping will only be permitted during the event and one
day prior to the event.
• Campers not associated with the event will not be permitted
• The Parks and Recreation Director will make final decisions
on issuing a camping permit.
• A camping fee should be imposed to cover the cost of
cleanup and other expenses.
• Park Facility leases: Currently three private user groups lease
space at city parks. This includes the radio car club and the
Western Dance Association at Sullivan Park and Splashdown at
Valley Mission Park. Leases assure access by private groups to a
specialized facility. This is particularly important if the private
group has spent substantial money to develop the facility. On the
other hand, park facilities should be made available to all
residents. Sometimes, leaseholders tend to assume that their
facility is only available to their members. Based on this
background, it is recommended that the following policy apply:
6'38 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Private user groups may lease park property under the following
conditions:
• The use will meet a recreation need that is not provided
by the City.
• The use should be a suitable recreation use.
• The use will not impact the enjoyment and use of the
park or nearby property owners,
• The user group must pay for the construction,
management and maintenance of the facility.
• The general public will have access to the facility except
when the user group is hosting a special event.
• The user group maintains the facility in a well kept
appearance comparable to the rest of the park.
• The user group will post a deposit or some other means
of assuring that the facility will be removed and
replaced to the original condition when the facility is no
longer in use.
• The City may charge a fee for the lease.
Financial Resources/Funding
• Consider Park Dedication Requirements: Conceptually dedication
can be required to meet the needs of the community that are
attributable to new development. Dedication is not limited to the
dedication of land, but may also provide for money in lieu of land
or some combination of land and money. Where private
recreational facilities are provided, a system of credits can be
considered. While popular in most Washington cities, the City of
Spokane Valley does not currently collect these fees. The issue is,
"Who should pay for park improvements; the residents who already
live in the community or the new residents moving into the
community?" The City should consider collecting this type of fee to
help pay for the cost of expanding the park system.
• Seek grants: Adoption of the Park and Recreation Plan will make
the City eligible for State and Federal park and recreation grants.
The City should actively seek grants to help leverage local
contributions.
• Create a foundation: The City should create a foundation for
donations of park and recreation facilities.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-39
CHAPTER 6
6.4 MAINTENANCE
• Maintenance Management: Until recently,
parks in Spokane Valley were maintained by , !"=
Spokane County under a contract with the
City. Recently, The City issued a contract to a Y'>+
private contractor to maintain the park system.
While contracting out park maintenance
services may be a more efficient means of
maintaining parks and eliminates the cost of -
purchasing equipment, there are other issues
that should be considered. Some of these
issues are:
• Contracting out maintenance still
requires some staff administrative time
to check on the work being performed.
• It is hard to forecast time requirements and address
emergency maintenance requirements
• Park maintenance personnel will be in more contact with
the public than anyone else in the City. Their actions and
relationships will reflect on the City.
On the positive side of contracting, it eliminates the front-end costs
of financing an extensive equipment inventory. Also, contract labor
costs are usually less than that of a city.
In the future, the Department should conduct a cost/benefit analysis
to determine the most appropriate way to maintain parks in
Spokane Valley.
• Maintenance Funding: The City should establish a maintenance-
funding goal calculated on a per-acre basis and define minimum
maintenance service levels.
Integrated Pest Management Plan: The Department should
develop an integrated pest management plan to define use of
herbicides and pesticides in parks and open space areas.
• Deferred Maintenance and Long-term Maintenance Requirements:
Deferred maintenance is a common and continual problem for
park operations. The Department should continue an assessment
of replacement and upgrade needs for all parks and facilities.
6-40 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
Once completed, an annual budget should be prepared for addressing
the deferred maintenance issue including irrigation and drainage, tree
pruning, dead tree removal, pathway repair and overlays, restroom
repairs, landscaping, and other deferred maintenance items.
6.5 RECREATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Currently, the Department offers a
limited recreation program. Many of y the special interest groups in the
' community are satisfied with
managing their own programs and
A do not want the City involved.
However, in the long term, the
saV Department should consider
..:_ `:x' ; - , expanding its range of recreation
►� programs and services. In the short
term, the Department should be conservative in its approach and build
a program based on past experiences. Some of the roles the City
should assume are:
• Program Coordination: While recreation programs and classes
should be delivered by a number of agencies in the community,
Spokane Valley should serve as the overall coordinator to assure
that community needs are met. This could be done by creating a
city-wide task force representing the various recreation providers
and interest groups. The City's role should be to help establish this
group and provide administrative support.
• Short Term Recreation Programs: The City should offer recreation
programs and classes in the following areas:
• Aquatics
• Summer playground programs
• Senior programs
• Youth programs
• Special events (limited)
• Cost Recovery: For the Recreation Program in general, the Parks
and Recreation Department should seek a 100% cost recovery
target based on direct costs only.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-41
CHAPTER 6
• Long Term Recreation Program: As the recreation program is
established, the City should consider expanding the program to
include:
• Instructional classes
• Special interest programs
• Outdoor/interpretive programs
• Special events (expanded)
• Limited indoor adult sports
• Senior Age Programs: The City of Spokane Valley is responsible
for the space used for senior programs, but the Spokane Valley
Senior Citizens Association offers specific programs from 8 AM to 4
PM Monday through Friday. The specific terms of this arrangement
are spelled out in a written agreement. With the move of the senior
program to CenterPlace, additional senior programs and services
should be considered. Some of the programs and services to
consider are:
• Additional active recreation programs and activities such as
aerobics, health and fitness and senior competitive sports.
• Intergenerational activities and programs in addition to the
more traditional age-group oriented programming.
• Provide more special interest classes.
• Youth Programs: The Plan recommends that the existing senior
center building be converted to a youth activity center. If the
building is found to be unsuitable, a new youth activity center
should be built on the site. With that move, a youth and teen
program should be initiated. Two options for managing youth
programs are possible: the first would be to partner with the Boys
and Girls Club to manage a program. This has the advantage that
this agency has the experience and would not require involvement
of the City. The second option is for the City to run a youth
program. If this were to occur, some of the programs should
include:
• Drop in program for the youth to just "hang out"
• Special interest programs and classes
• Life skill classes
• Limited recreation level sports
• Tours and field trips
• Job skill classes
6-42 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 6
The City could pattern its program after the Boys and Girls Club
model as well as other youth programs.
• Arts and culture: The survey revealed a significant latent
demand for arts, drama and dancing. The City has initiated a
step in this direction by providing a stage in the Great Room,
and an auditorium at CenterPlace. In addition, many of the
classrooms can be made available for art classes. The City has
also constructed an outdoor stage in Mirabeau Point Park. In
the future, the City's role in cultural arts could include:
• Provide space for cultural arts activities such as art in park,
theatre concerts, and art shows
• Provide small grants to cultural oriented organizations for
special events, classes and other activities.
• Assist the Arts Council in grant applications and other
administrative tasks.
• Partner with other local or regional art providers
• Compile an artist/instructor resource list
6.6 RIVERFRONT ACCESS
The Spokane River offers a unique recreation resource to the City.
While some public land exists along the River, attempts should be
made to acquire additional property as it becomes available. Barker
Bridge is an example of a potential site that could offer a boating
access point.
Park and Recreation Plan 6-43
CHAPTER 7
AQUATIC FACILITIES
CHAPTER 7
CHAPTER 7:
AQUATIC FACILITIES
This chapter analyzes the need for indoor and outdoor aquatic facilities
in Spokane Valley and addresses how these needs might be met.
Currently, the City owns and manages three American Short Course
pools (6-lane, 25-yard tank dimension). A recent evaluation of these
three pools by the ORB Organization revealed some minor .s'L*4
deficiencies. However, overall, they are in good operating condition. 4„ \i
7.1 CURRENT SWIMMING OPPORTUNITIES
Table 7.1 notes the five existing aquatic facilities in the City of Spokane
Valley:
c
r Q
Table 7.1 1
Existing Aquatic Facilities Illii\b. *� ,'I I
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Facility Notes Ownership
Park Road Pool 6-lane x 25-yard outdoor pool City of Spokane Valley
Terrace View Pool 6-lane x 25-yard outdoor pool City of Spokane Valley
Valley Mission Pool 6-lane x 25-yard outdoor pool City of Spokane Valley
Spokane Valley YMCA Leisure and lap pools YMCA
Splashdown Outdoor aquatic park Private/Leased
Within the region, but outside the City of Spokane Valley are five
outdoor pools in the City of Spokane and a number of private pools.
The Spokane River and nearby lakes also provide summer swimming
opportunities.
7.2 DEMAND FOR OUTDOOR POOLS
The following is a summary of the market demand model developed
by the ORB Organization and refined over the years by MIG. Based
on the recreation survey recently completed by MIG, the outdoor
swimming rate in Spokane Valley is 2.98 occasions per person.
However, it is estimated that only 20% of those swimming occasions
will occur in a public pool. Based on an estimated population of
84,000 people in Spokane Valley, monthly swimming needs for public
pools can be calculated as follows:
Park and Recreation Plan 7-1
CHAPTER 7
2.98 x 84,000 x 20% = 50,100 swims
It is a fact that 75% of all swims takes place in shallow water (water
less than 5 feet deep). Using this information, shallow water demand
and deep water demand can be determined:
Shallow Water Demand
Multiply 50,100 monthly swims by 75% = 37,575 shallow swims
Divide by 30 days per month = 1 2,535 daily swims
Multiply by 60%peak load factor = 752 peak swimmers
Multiply by 12 sq. ft. per swimmer = 9,024 sq. ft.water area demand
Deep Water Demand
Multiply 50,100 monthly swims by 25% = 12,525 deep water swims
Divide by 30 days per month = 418 daily swimmers
Multiply by 60%peak load factor = 251 peak swimmers
Multiply by 27 sq. ft. per swimmer = 6,777 sq. ft water area
demand
Total Pool Area Demand: 15,301 sq. ft.water area
Less Credit for Existing Facilities: 13,900 sq.ft. water area'
Net Outdoor Pool Demand: 1,901 sq.ft. water areal
There is currently not enough demand to warrant the development of
an additional outdoor pool.
7.3 THE LEISURE POOL CONCEPT
The difference between a Family Leisure Pool and a Conventional
Swimming Pool is presented in the following definitions:
• A Family Leisure Pool is generally free-form in shape and often
varies from 0 to 5 or 6 feet in depth. These pools often include
moving water that may be in the form of waves or a current. They
usually contain a shallow area for small children, along with free
play area and special effects facilities, such as water slides, bubble
pool, rapids channel, swirl pool, or water playground. The family
leisure pool, as the name implies, is a place for fun and water play
rather than competitive swimming.
' Credit for existing facilities included 9,900 sq. ft. for the three City pools;
2,000 sq. ft. credit for the YMCA pool; and, 2,000 sq. ft. for Splashdown.
7-2 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 7
2 A standard 6-lane, 25-yard pool has 3,300 sq. ft. of water area.
• The Conventional Swimming Pool is usually rectangular in shape
(although it may be "T" or "L"-shaped) and usually constructed in
lengths appropriate for competitive swimming. These pools range
in depth from 3.5-12 feet and often have a diving board. The true
competitive pool, such as the 50-meter pool, may have a shallow
depth of five feet.
The two types of pools attract different interest groups and age profiles.
As a result, they have different operating requirements and user
capacities. For a conventional swimming pool, use is divided between
competitive swimming, lap swimming, and general recreation
swimming. The maximum capacity is about 30-40 annual swimmers
per square foot of surface water area.
A family leisure pool stresses the recreational swimming element and
has a majority of its pool area with depths of four feet or less. The
shallow water permits more people in the pool at one time and is more
conducive to play and general recreation swimming, rather than lap or
competitive swimming. Due to its shallow depth, this type of pool can
accommodate as much as 45-60 swimmers per square foot of surface
water area over the course of a day.
Surveys by the ORB Organization and MIG have shown that family
leisure pools draw from 2-3 times more annual swimmers than the
conventional pool. According to one of their recent surveys, the
average annual swims per capita was 2.5 for the indoor conventional
swimming pool. For the family leisure pool, this number increases to
about 6.5 swims per capita.
7.4 DEMAND FOR AN INDOOR FAMILY LEISURE POOL
The primary market area for a swimming pool is the area generating
most of the paid admissions. For this analysis, the primary market
area is assumed to be the same, regardless of the specific design ; `
selected. The exception is a 50-meter competitive pool that would A
attract competitive swimmers from the entire region.
The primary market area includes all those residents living within an
approximate five-mile radius or 15 minutes driving time. Using the f'
proposed Town Center as the center point of a radius, the primary
market area includes all of the City of Spokane Valley. The capture
rate is the expression of the market support generated by the
population within that area. Within the primary market area, the
Park and Recreation Plan 7-3
CHAPTER 7
capture rate will vary, because some portions of the primary market
area will be closer to a facility.
The secondary market area was considered to be all areas within a 20-
minute driving time of a pool facility. This included some portions to
the west of the City and the community of Liberty Lake to the east.
Attendance Potential
Comparisons made by ORB for family leisure pools in British Columbia
and the Northwest revealed an annual per capita usage ranging from
a high of 5.5 to a low of 3.2. Assuming some competition from the
YMCA family leisure pool, a factor of 3.7 occasions was used for the
primary market area and 1 .0 occasions for the secondary market area.
From the assumptions, the following usage is calculated:
25-yard pool configuration
Primary Market Area (67,000 population)x 2.7 = 247,900 occasions
Secondary Market Area (33,000 population)x 1.0 = 33,000 occasions
Total = 280,900 occasions
50-meter pool configuration
Primary Market Area (67,000 population)x 2.7 = 247,900 occasions
Secondary Market Area (33,000 population)x 2.0 = 66,000 occasions
Total = 313,900 occasions
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
An analysis of potential operating costs and revenues has been
prepared for a family indoor leisure pool with two configurations: 1) a
standard 8-lane, 25-yard main tank; and 2) a 8-lane, 50-meter main
tank. History has shown that a family leisure pool tends to have a high
initial level of participation but then decreases somewhat after the
unique qualities wear off. Therefore, the cost/revenue analysis
described below is for the third year of operation. Excluded from the
cost is a building reserve fund, start-up costs, or any city overhead
applications. The intent of this financial analysis is to provide
parameter-based estimates from which a more detailed projection can
be made as the concept details become more final. The cost-revenue
assumptions are based on today's conditions, recognizing that a facility
will be developed at an undetermined point in the future.
Most of the cost and revenue data reflect operating characteristics of
similar projects. Most are located in the general Denver area and
include Brighton Recreation Center, Breckenridge Recreation Center,
East Boulder Community Center, Golden Community Center, Bob
Burger Recreation Center, Parker Recreation Center, and the
Westminister City Park Center.
7-4 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 7
Design Program
Two design programs are presented in the cost/revenue analysis.
These are:
Alternative A (25-yard pool configuration):
• 25-yard, 8-lane pool
• Leisure/wave pool '� 4
• Warm water pool (15'x30')
• Lazy River
• Water slide
• Spa/Swirl pool
• Large multi-use deck
• Steam room
• Sauna
• Multi-purpose room
• Two meeting rooms
• Dressing rooms
• Administrative space
• Total floor area: 38,800 square feet
Alternative B (8 lane, 50-meter pool configuration)
• Same configuration except for the 50-meter main pool
• Total floor area: 48,400 square feet
Operating Income
Operating income includes the following:
• Paid Admissions: For this study, a per capita expenditure rate was
based on the population of the market area. For the standard 25-
yard tank configuration, the 334,500 annual occasions noted
above was used. For the 50-meter tank configuration, total annual
occasions in the secondary market area was increased to reflect
added usage by competitive swimmers. Total annual occasions for
this configuration was set at 367,500. The assumed average paid
admission based on individual gate passes and annual
memberships is $3.5 per visit. This is based on 75%youth @
$3.00 and 25% adult @ $5.00.
Park and Recreation Plan 7-5
CHAPTER 7
• Concessions: Revenue from concessions typically ranges from as
small as $8,000 to as high as $90,000 annually. The North
Clackamas Wave Pool in Portland collects nearly $200,000
annually. Ultimately the three factors that will determine gross
concessions revenue for the proposed project are the total number
of visitors, size of the concession area, and the hours of operation.
Total visitation includes aquatic and general recreation program
use.
• Swim Lessons: The City currently derives a significant portion of its
outdoor pool revenue from swim lessons. Revenue for swim
lessons at a traditional indoor pool in a large urban area ranges
from a low of $40,000 to as much as $100,000 annually.
Because of the existence of the YMCA pool and the three existing
outdoor pools, it is assumed that revenue from lessons for the
proposed family leisure pool would be approximately $40,000.
• Recreation Classes: This would include revenue from room rentals,
exercise classes, and general recreation classes.
• School District Use: This assumes that the three school districts in
the City would pay a flat fee for swim team use, intramural
swimming, and other uses. A flat fee of $10,000 for each district
was used.
• Swim Team Rentals: This revenue includes fees paid by private
swim clubs. For the 25-yard pool configuration, the amount is
based on a flat fee of $10,000 annually. For the 50-meter pool
configuration, that amount has been raised to $20,000 annually.
• Warm Water Pool Rentals: It is assumed that in addition to general
public use, the facility will also be available for rental use by local
hospitals and physical therapists. Assumed use is an average of 8
hours per week at a rate of $120 per hour.
• Miscellaneous Income: This revenue is from rental of meeting
rooms, aquatic facilities, and other spaces.
Operating Expenses
Pool operating expenses include:
• Salaries and benefits
• Swim instructors
• Insurance (may be included under a city blanket policy)
• Professional services and training
• Maintenance and repairs
7-6 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 7
• Supplies and chemicals
• Concessions (includes non-food items)
• Utilities
• Miscellaneous items
• Building Reserve Fund (not included as a cost)
• City overhead cost (Not included as a cost but would include
charges applied to the facility from other departments)
Tables 7.2 and 7.3 present the estimated revenue and costs for 25-
yard and 50-meter pool configurations.
Table 7.2
Cost/Revenue Statement
25-Yard Pool Configuration
(3rd year of Operation)
Income and Expenses Cost
Operating Income
Paid Admissions (Aquatics) @ $3.50 per user $980,000
Concessions (280,900 annual visits) @ $0.10 per visit $28,100
Swim Lessons $20,000
Recreation Classes $5,000
School District Use $30,000
Swim Team Rentals (allowance) $10,000
Warm Water Pool Rental $50,000
Miscellaneous Income $5,000
TOTAL $1,128,100
Expenses
Salaries and Benefits @$2.75 per visit $772,500
Instructors @ 70%of swim lesson income $14,000
Insurance (allowance) $50,000
Professional Services @$0.43 per sq. ft. floor area (1) $16,700
Maintenance and Repairs @ $1.70 per sq. ft. floor area $66,000
Supplies and Chemicals @$1.00 per sq. ft. floor area $38,800
Concession @ 50%of concession income $14,050
Utilities @ $15.30 per sq. ft.water area (2) $149,300
Miscellaneous costs @$0.45 per sq. ft. floor area $1 7,500
Building Reserve Fund NIC
City Overhead Cost NIC
Start-up Costs NIC
TOTAL $1,138,850
OPERATING DEFICIT $10,750
(1) Assumes a building size of 38,800 sq. ft. of floor area
Park and Recreation Plan 7-7
CHAPTER 7
(2) Assumes water area of 9,760 sq. ft.
Table 7.3
Cost/Revenue Statement
50-Meter Pool Configuration
(3rd year of Operation)
Income and Expenses Cost
Operating Income
Paid Admissions (Aquatics) @ $3.50 per user $1,098,600
Concessions (31 3,900 annual visits @ $0.10 per visit $31,400
Swim Lessons $20,000
Recreation Classes $5,000
School District Use $30,000
Swim Team Rentals (allowance) $20,000
Warm Water Pool Rental $50,000
Miscellaneous Income $5,000
TOTAL $1,260,000
Expenses
Salaries and Benefits @$2.75 per visit $863,200
Instructors @ 70%of swim lesson income $14,000
Insurance (allowance) $50,000
Professional Services @$0.43 per sq. ft. floor area (1) $20,800
Maintenance and Repairs @ $1.70 per sq. ft. floor area $82,300
Supplies and Chemicals @$1.00 per sq. ft. floor area $48,400
Concession @ 50%of concession income $15,700
Utilities @ $15.30 per sq. ft.water area (2) $230,100
Miscellaneous costs @$0.45 per sq. ft. floor area $21,800
Building Reserve Fund NIC
City Overhead Cost NIC
Start-up Costs NIC
TOTAL $1,346,300
OPERATING DEFICIT $86,300
(1) Assumes a building size of 48,400 sq. ft. of floor area
(2) Assumes water area of 15,040 sq. ft.
7-8 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 7
7.5 AQUATIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Currently the City has $1 .6 million to spend on aquatic improvements.
This money is to be transferred to the City from Spokane County.
Originally intended to be used to fund an indoor pool, the amount was r
found to be inadequate for that purpose. It is assumed that the money
could also be used for improvements to the existing outdoor pools.
However, additional research is needed to confirm this assumption.
For this study, outdoor and indoor concepts to meeting aquatic needs x
were studied. Three concepts are depicted on the following pages.
The first two concepts are provided as short-term options and the third
concept is a long-term solution for development of an indoor aquatic
complex.
• Concept #11: Upgrade and add leisure co ponent to three
existing outdoor pools
• Concept #2: Add large water play component to one
existing outdoor pool and perform basic upgrades to two
existing outdoor pools
• Concept #3: Indoor aquatic co plex
Concept #1 : Outdoor Pool Upgrades and Small Leisure Component
For a short-term solution, several alternatives were studied. One
option was to develop a new fourth pool in the eastern quadrant of the
city. It was found that the available money for construction was not
adequate. In addition, the needs assessment did not reveal enough
demand to warrant another outdoor pool. For this reason, Concept
#1 was developed to divide the available $1 .6 million between the
three pools and use it to upgrade the facilities and add a small leisure
component (such as a waterslide) to each (see illustration of Concept
#1 on the following page).
Improvements to each of the three outdoor pools would be:
• Upgrade of existing facilities
• Add Lazy River
• Add large sun deck
Estimated Cost of Improvements: $1,574,000
Park and Recreation Plan 7-9
CHAPTER 7
L,t e
' 411P4O Em ltr. ,411‘mis
rk1 l lr 7 -- .--(1, :''' ,(:<'N.-'• -Ikkl'
. . 41 . c tr
_______2\idir---) -.. , . ), .-. : ,:, i- i''''.." /
b i Z itiv LA 4,,. . ..Li____! I
irigft. a
a. s
-rte r
700 L I +
•
LINE_ o F
•
F�.T1�4 tfous
I
!o xD ka
ADD SEVERAL AQUATIC mss,
FEATURES TO EACH _; .
EXISTING OUTDOOR POOL ow=�� •
COST- $1,574,000 . ! �' - .
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY -
Concept ##1
7-10 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 7
Concept #2: Outdoor Pool Upgrades and Large Water
Play Component
Concept #2 has a higher cost than Concept #1 . In this concept, the
City would upgrade two of the existing outdoor pools as shown in
Concept #1, but use the majority of the $1 .6 million for a large water
play component at Valley Mission Pool. The improvements would be
located north of the bathhouse and require removal of the tennis
courts. Because the new revised Valley Mission Pool may compete with
the existing Splashdown, the City should consider a partnership with
the manager of that facility.
Specific facilities and improvements recommended for the Valley
Mission Pool include (see illustration of Concept #2 on following
page):
• Upgrade existing facilities
• Add Lazy River
• Add zero depth entry pool
• Add spray park
• Add large sun deck
Cost of Improvements: $2,630,000
Park and Recreation Plan 7-11
CHAPTER 7
1
CE) E,_„.. ` i., ,...5.,__
. -
. - - ',....1,4 p � '► � � '
cxzx,�I .'IA'
�fr <
•
v�—.
76r 5 t
• - 0) ' 61-rklq•c
M : 2,. ._ .Wier
ri
•
\. , SA'i3t KouyE. +. .
ELv& _.
t,„n Ha
NEW OUTDOOR ZERO-DEPTH POOL AT VALLEY MISSION POOL
COST-$2,630,000
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Concept #2
7-12 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 7
Concept #3: Indoor Aquatic Complex
In the long term, the Plan recommends the development of an indoor
aquatic complex to be located within the proposed City Center. A
specific site within this area has yet to be determined, and the
recommended design program will determine if the main pool will be
a 50-meter competitive pool or a 25-yard competitive/multi-use pool
(American Short Course Pool).
The recommended activity spaces for this facility should contain the
following components:
• 25-yard, 8-lane pool (or 50-meter, 8-lane pool)
• Wave pool
• Water slide
• Steam room and sauna
• Spa or water swirl
• Lazy river
• Warm water pool
• Multi-purpose room and two meeting rooms
• Dressing rooms
• Administration space
Total Floor Area: 38,800 sq. ft. (25-yard pool component)
Total Floor Area: 48,400 sq. ft. (50-meter component)
Cost of Improvements: $9,900,000 (25-yard pool)
Cost of Improvements: $12,400,000 (50-meter pool)
According to the demand analysis conducted in Section 8.4, the City
could expect annual visitation to a 25-yard configured leisure pool to
be about 280,000 occasions. This is compared to about 100,000 to
140,000 visits for a standard 25-yard pool.
Park and Recreation Plan 7-13
CHAPTER 7
4
!II
1�
s, �K tax fah
W.
7 . Vil BO
� , 111111
vW1L. � -N\-- ,F . a111111�
f �� , ` , �, _,1 i
= 1!1
-__- ='f -yam
1.
4 -
z ` s �
th (266 AR POOL)', . .l
st WA"
/ �
`ICtVtR{
: - . + , Vi • ,1 .•' �cM
„).Algit* -T,
0* "\ y - ,,,,,Y CNAHd4 G
/ "
M. f!= • C
*MUFTI- Yu YC?&S I I AM ct4M n;u �� �Aq.T
t}■IMM■l� 1,...L.
..EM044.- CMh+61146 -
f'.■"1 NEW INDOOR AQUATIC c
FACILITY AT CITY CENTER
25 YARD POOL COST-$9,900,000
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY *DOES NOT INCLUDE LAND
Concept #3
7-14 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 8
IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER 8
CHAPTER 8:
IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter discusses an implementation strategy for funding the
improvements recommended in the Park and Recreation Plan. It
includes a capital facilities plan, which identifies costs and revenue
sources for the next six years.
8.1 FUNDING SOURCES
The following are possible funding sources for acquiring, developing
and maintaining parks and other recreational areas in the City of
Spokane Valley.
1. General Fund: This is the City's primary source for operating
revenue. Most of this revenue comes from taxes levied on
property and the sale of merchandise within the City's
boundary.
2. Municipal Capital Improvement Program Funding: This is a six
year financing program for major capital expenditures funded
from the General Fund. The current CIP amounts to
approximately $28.4 million for the period 2006 to 2012. Of
this amount, $5.7 million is allocated to parks.
3. General Obligation Bond: These are voter-approved bonds
with the assessment placed on real property. The money may
only be used for capital improvements. This property tax is
levied for a specified period of time (usually 15-20 years).
Passage requires a two-third's majority approval with 50% of
the voters voting. Major disadvantages of this funding option
are the high approval requirement and the interest costs.
4. Special Serial Levy: This is a property tax assessed for the
construction and/or operation of park facilities. This type of
levy is established at a given rate for 3-5 years and requires a
simple majority for voter approval. The advantage of this type
of levy is that there are no interest charges.
5. Revenue Bonds: These bonds are sold and paid for from the
revenue produced from the operation of a facility. The City
does not have any recreational facilities funded in this manner.
Park and Recreation Plan 8-1
CHAPTER 8
6. Donations: The donation of labor, land, or cash by service
agencies, private groups or individuals is a popular way to
raise small amounts of money for specific projects. Service
agencies, such as Kiwanis, Lions and Rotary Clubs, often fund
small projects, such as playground improvements.
7. Exchange of Property: If the City has an excess parcel of land
with some development value, it could be traded for private
land more suitable for park use.
8. Joint Public/Private Partnership: This concept has become
increasingly popular for park and recreation agencies. The
basic approach is for a public agency to enter into a working
agreement with a private corporation to help fund, build,
and/or operate a public facility. Generally, the three primary
incentives a public agency can offer are free land to place a
facility (usually a park or other parcel of public land), certain
tax advantages and access to the facility. While the public
agency may have to give up certain responsibilities or control, it
is one way of obtaining public facilities at a lower cost.
9. Lifetime Estates: This is an agreement between the City and a
land owner, where the City gives the owner the right to live on
the site after it is sold.
10. Park Impact Fees: Park Impact Fees are fees imposed on new
development because of the impacts the projects have on the
City's infrastructure. While common in most Washington cities,
Spokane Valley has not imposed this fee yet.
11. Certificates of Participation: This is a lease-purchase approach
where the City sells Certificates of Participation (COPs) to a
lending institution. The City then pays the loan off from
revenue produced by the facility or from its general operating
budget. The lending institution holds title to the property until
the COPs are repaid. This procedure does not require a vote
of the public.
Public/Government Grant Programs:
12. HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): These
grants from the Federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development are available for a wide variety of projects. Most
are distributed in the lower income areas of the community.
Grants can cover up to 100% of project costs.
13. Land and Water Conservation Fund: This is a federal grant
program that receives its money from offshore oil leases. The
8-2 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 8
money is distributed through the National Park Service and is
administered locally by the Washington State Interagency
Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC). In the past, this was
one of the major sources of grant money for local agencies. In
the 1990s, funding at the federal level was severely cut, but in
recent times more money has become available. In the current
proposed federal budget, a small amount of money has been
allocated to this program. The funds can be used for
acquisition and development of outdoor facilities and requires
a 50% match.
14. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA):
Through the years, Washington has received considerable
revenue for trail-related projects. Originally called The
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), this
program funded a wide variety of transportation related
projects. In 1998, it was modified and is now referred to as
TEA21 . These funds can generally be used for landscape and
amenity improvements related to trail and transportation
projects.
15. Youth Athletic Fund: The Youth Athletic Fund is a grant
program designed to provide funding for new, improved, and
better maintained outdoor athletic facilities serving youth and
communities. This program was established by State Statute
(RCW 79A.25.800-830) as part of the State Referendum 48,
which provided funding for the Seattle Seahawks Stadium.
Applicants must provide matching funds of at least 50 percent.
16. Boating Facilities Program: This is a grant program funded
through the IAC. Projects eligible under this program include
acquisition, development, planning, and renovation projects
associated with launching ramps, transient moorage, and
upland support facilities. Grants are distributed on an annual
basis and require a 25 percent match.
1 7. Aquatic Land Enhancement Account: This program is
administered by the IAC and is intended to provide support for
the purchase, improvement, or protection of aquatic lands for
public purposes and access to these resources. Applicants must
provide a minimum of a 50 percent match.
18. Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program: This program is
administered by the IAC. There are two accounts under this
program: 1) Habitat Conservation; and 2) Outdoor Recreation.
Projects eligible under this program include acquisition and
development of parks, water access sites, trails, critical wildlife
Park and Recreation Plan 8-3
CHAPTER 8
habitat, natural areas, and urban wildlife habitat. Applicants
must provide a minimum of a 50 percent non-IAC match.
19. Exactions: Costs of necessary public improvements are passed
onto the adjacent landowners.
20. Public Land Trusts: Private land trusts, such as the Trust for
Public Land, Inc. and the Nature Conservancy will acquire and
hold land for eventual acquisition by a public agency.
21. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW): USFW may provide
technical assistance and administer funding for projects related
to water quality improvement through debris and
habitat/vegetation management, watershed management and
stream bank erosion, and sediment deposition projects.
Other Potential Sources:
22. Partnerships: The City is in a unique position to develop
additional partnerships with other jurisdictions or agencies to
implement projects identified in the plan. Some potential
partners include the YMCA, Boys and Girls Club, private sport
groups, neighborhood organizations, Spokane County, and the
City of Spokane.
23 .Private Grants and Foundations: Private grants and
foundations provide money for a wide range of projects. They
are sometimes difficult to find and equally difficult to secure
because of the open competition. They usually fund unique
projects or ones of extreme need.
8-4 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 8
8.2 CAPITAL PROJECTS
Table 8.1 lists all projects identified in the Plan along with their
potential development costs.
Table 8.1
Estimate Costs for Capital Projects (All Projects)
Map Key Size Parr, Opinion
(acres) Probable
No Action
NP-14 5.0 Orchard Avenue Park 0
CP-12 17.3 Mirabeau Park 0
SU-18 518.0 Camp Caro 0
SU-23 Town Center Site 0
SU-11 13.6 CenterPlace 0
Park and Facility Upgrade
NP-4 2.0 Trentwood School/Park $125,000
NP-19 2.0 Park Road Pool Park $375,000
NP-17 4.8 Edgecliff Park $374,000
NP-22 2.8 Balfour Park $88,000
NP-29 9.0 Terrace View Park $516,000
NP-28 8.2 Brown's Park $353,000
CP20 17.0 Valley Mission Park 190,000
SU-5 10.0 Sullivan Park $520,000
$2,541,000
Park Development
NP-1 4.0 West Valley Park $750,000
NP-6 4.0 Donwoodl Park $750,000
NP-8 4.0 North Barker Road Park $750,000
NP-25 2.7 Castle Park $506,000
NP-26 4.0 Chester Creek Park $750,000
NP-27 4.0 Painted Hills Park $750,000
NP-31 2.0 Summit School Park $100,000
NP-30 2.0 Keystone School Park $100,000
NP-32 2.0 Progress School Park $100,000
NP-33 2.0 Greenacres School Park $100,000
NP-34 4.0 South Barker Park $750,000
NP-35 4.0 32'Avenue Park $750„000
Park and Recreation Plan 8-5
CHAPTER 8
Table 8.1 (continued)
Park Development(con't)
CP-9 10.0 Green Acres Park $1,875,000
CP-16 20.0 Southwest Hills Park $3,750,000
CP-36 20.0 Shelly Lake Park $3,750,000
SU-10 2.0 Mission Ave. Trailhead $375,000
SU-13 31.0 Myrtle Point Park $469,000
SU-21 10.0 Valley Mission South $1,805,000
$18,180,000
Acquisition
NP-1 4.0 West Valley Park $250,000
NP-6 4.0 Donwood Park $250,000
NP-8 4.0 North Barker Park $250,000
NP-26 4.0 Chester Creek Park $75,000
NP-27 4.0 Painted Hills Park $250,000
NP-34 4.0 South Barker Park $250,000
NP-35 4.0 32'Avenue Park $250,000
CP-9 10.0 Green Acres Park $625,000
CP-16 20.0 Southwest Hills Park $1,250,000
CP-36 20.0 Shelly Lake Park $875,000
SU-10 2.0 Mission Avenue Trailhead $125,000
OS-3 65.0 Progress Road O.S. $65,000
OS-7 27.0 Spokane River O.S. $27,000
0S-15 104.0 Broadway O.S. $104,000
OS-24 194.0 Chester Creek O.S. $194,000
OS-35 164.0 Shaney Lake O.S. $164,000
$5,004,000.00
Total $25,725,000
8.3 PRELIMINARY PROJECT PRIORITIES
The total cost for all the improvements identified in Table 8.1 is nearly
$26 million. This is more than the City can, or will, finance in the near
term. To be able to direct funding toward the most significant projects
in terms of meeting community needs, all projects recommended in the
Plan were prioritized. The recommended actions listed in priority order
are:
• Upgrade existing park facilities: The City should show some
action. Since all of the parks need some improvements, this is a
place where immediate action could occur. Upgrading of park
sites should be a six year program.
8-6 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 8
• Make aquatic improvements: Since the money is available, these
improvements could occur immediately.
• Acquire park land: It is important to acquire park land while it is
available. The highest acquisition should be the proposed
community park site in Green Acres.
• Upgrade school/park sites: This should be an on-going action.
• Acquire natural open space sites: Most or all of the land
designated in the Plan are environmentally sensitive parcels that
will probably not be developed in the near future. As a result,
these properties may be given to the City as dedications from
adjoining land development.
8.4 BASIS FOR ESTIMATING COSTS
Development costs can vary widely depending on the location, facility
type, construction method, off-site costs, quality of development, and
other constraints on the project. For purposes of estimating cost, the
following assumptions were made:
• Land Acquisition: For development, land prices were estimated at
$50,000 per acre. In some areas of the City, land acquisition
could well exceed this amount. For open space acquisition, costs
were placed at $1,000 per acre. This assumes that most of the
land acquired will be undevelopable because of environmental
constraints.
• Development: Potential costs were established for each element of
park development for each park site. These costs excluded street
improvements and any other off-site costs. For typical
neighborhood and community parks, an assumption of $150,000
per acre was used.
• School Park Improvements: An estimated cost of $100,000 per site
was used.
• Park Upgrade: Each site was estimated individually. A separate
spreadsheet is available.
• Design: The figures assume a project designed by a professional
design firm and bid through a competitive public bidding process.
Design costs were estimated at 10% of construction cost.
• Contingency: A contingency of 15% was utilized.
Park and Recreation Plan 8-7
CHAPTER 8
8.5 CAPITAL COSTS
Table 8.2 summarizes probable construction costs of all the projects
listed in the Plan.
Table 8.2
MEN
Summary of Probable Cost for Recommended Improvements
l k, Spokane Valley Park and Recreation Plan
Item Cost
Land Acquisition $5,004,000
Park and Facility Upgrade $1,916,000
School Park Upgrade $625,000
Park Development $18,180,000
TOTAL $25,725,000.00
8.6 CURRENT FUNDING AVAILABILITY
The City has an adopted Capital Improvement Program that will be
primarily funded through the General Fund. For parks, the funding
allocation is as follows:
Table 8.3
Funding Allocation for Parks, Year 2006-2012
Spokane Valley Park and Recreation Plan
Year Allocation
Year 2006 $1,300,000
Year 2007 $2,550,000
Year 2008 $500,000
Year 2009 $500,000
Year 2010 $580,000
Year 2011 $100,000
Year 2012 $200,000
Total $5,730,000
Even with this level of funding ($5,730,000), the City has a significant
deficit of financial resources to implement the improvements
recommended in the Plan.
8-8 Park and Recreation Plan
CHAPTER 8
8.7 FINANCING STRATEGY
It is recommended that the City embark on a conservative park capital
development plan. While community needs exist to warrant a more
aggressive financing strategy, the City should first demonstrate the ability
to develop several smaller park projects before embarking on a much
larger one.
The short-term capital improvement plan presented below represents the
current City CIP plus some additional outside sources. However,
recognizing the magnitude of need, a more aggressive funding plan,
including a tax-supported measure, should be considered in approximately
year 4. This larger funding package would be used to acquire land and
develop several of the large community parks.
Capital Improvement Plan
Table 8.4 summarizes the recommended projects and funding sources for
the first phase.
Table 8.4
Summary of Funding and Expenditures (First Phase of Seven Years)
Spokane Valley Park and Recreation Plan
Project i 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total
Expenditures
Park Land Acquisition $1,000 $1,000
Park Improvements $300 $950 $500 $500 $580 $100 $200 $3,130
Swimming Pool $1,600 $1,600
Improvements
Total $1,300 $2,550 $500 $500 $580 $100 $200 $5,370
Revenue Sources
General Fund $1,300 $300 $1,600
REET#1 $450 $400 $400 $400 $100 $200 $1,950
Grants $200 $100 $100 $180 $580
Spokane County $1,600 $1,600
Total $1,300 $2,550 $500 $500 $580 $100 $200 $5,730
Note: Amounts are in 000's.
Park and Recreation Plan 8-9
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director
Karen Parson, Senior Center Coordinator
Carol Carter, Administrative Assistant
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
Diana Wilhite, Mayor
Rich Munson, Deputy Mayor
Dick Denenny
Michael DeVleming
Bill Gothmann
Gary Schimmels
Steve Taylor
David Mercier, City Manager
Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
PREPARED BY:
M I G
Moore lacofano Goltsman, Inc.
815 SW 2nd Avenue, Suite 200
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 297-1005
www.migcom.com
Jerry Draggoo
Cindy Mendoza
Robert Litt
Andrea Goldsberry
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A:
CITY PARK AND RECREATION AREAS
Beginning on the following page is a summary and site image of each
existing park and recreation area under the jurisdiction of the City of —
Spokane Valley.
The summary descriptions contain the following information for each --lt
park: -- ---
• Address
• Size (in acres)
• Ownership
• Status (developed, undeveloped, partially developed)
• Existing Facilities (based on a 2004 inventory)
• Condition
• Deficiencies/problems
• Planned Improvements
• Comments
Park and Recreation Plan A-1
APPENDIX A
BALFOUR PARK
Address: 105 N. Balfour Road
Size: 2.8 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (35 spaces, 1 of which is accessible),
restroom building, playground area, sand volleyball court, open turf area,
site amenities (park sign, drinking fountain, 14 trash receptacles, 13 picnic
tables)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along Main and Balfour Streets; deteriorating edge
restraint around playground and volleyball courts; no permanently affixed
picnic tables; no ADA access (ramp) to the playground area; parking
surfacing is showing signs of age; perimeter fencing limits access to site;
absence of typical neighborhood park facilities (e.g., internal pathways,
shelter, permanent picnic tables and sport courts for basketball) and
absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: Water playground area, new park signage
Comments: Park lies adjacent to Fire Station. Some consideration should
be given to expanding the site to the west on currently vacant land.
11 li I��
�{._e. gyp_ �r,d
I�it J
mar,
1 ud
i9:. X 7 Nf 1M4i�W rit H S 4, -
A-2 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX A
BROWNS PARK
Address: 3019 S. Pines Road
Size: 8.2 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (83 spaces),softball field,restroom building,
shelter building,playground area,sand volleyball courts(4),open turf area,site
amenities(park sign,drinking fountain,7 trash receptacles, 15 picnic tables-6 of
which are permanent on concrete pad,2 barbeques)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g. curbs, sidewalks,
street trees) along Cherry Street;traffic and congestion associated with
parking along adjacent residential neighborhood streets; parking surfacing
is showing signs of age; picnic shelter is old and showing signs of age;
playground area is old; playground safety material is gravel; no accessible
routes to the playground area, picnic areas or restrooms; property damage
from fly balls associated with softball play; poor ball field drainage;
deteriorating edge restraint around playground and volleyball courts;
picnic tables are old and showing signs of wear; perimeter fencing limits
access to site; absence of typical neighborhood park facilities (e.g., internal
pathways and sport courts for basketball) and absence of park signage
(rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: The site is located across 32nd Avenue from University High School„ ,
^ y K
� _ 'Wd�` r3 S' ""i J b a 4
t 'tr ti
Park and Recreation Plan A-3
APPENDIX A
CASTLE PARK
Address: 3415 S. University Road
Size: 2.7 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed (minimally)
Existing Facilities: Parking area (undetermined size), open turf area,
storage building, site amenities (3 picnic tables, 2 trash receptacles)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: General absence of neighborhood park facilities
(playground, picnic shelters, sports courts, pathways, etc.), drainage
problems, no permanently affixed picnic tables, parking is not clearly
defined or improved and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: This site provides a nice setting.
S 1p �p t i
-,'y r 1 p °' to t iY
y t ' a ,� �Y ' .7 ik T ck'� f a .0
#{
4 T lift
. ...... ..�
lo-
A-4 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX A
CENTERPLACE
Address: 2426 N Discovery Place
Size: 13.6 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Under Development (Anticipated completion date July 2005)
Existing Facilities: None
Condition: Not applicable
Deficiencies/Problems: Not applicable
Planned Improvements: 54,000 square foot building (includes senior
center, meeting space, classrooms, auditorium, great hall, student lounge)
Comments: This site lies adjacent to Mirabeau Park, close to the
Centennial Trail and the Spokane River.
ci
v &, oM �"" s '
' - 1 ,,.114:''.1 / / ..p d C-.. 4 a'l•
" \ �'� J r/ i ''';':'..t' i -- y•,4- lei �kr;ANA
\ ° „k C1d°- �
4
ice",, , \\, \,` , r i�'�... 44 -1':, -' `W
Park and Recreation Plan A-5
APPENDIX A
EDGECLIFF PARK
Address: 800 S. Park Road
Size: 4.8 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (35 spaces), softball field, restroom
building,tennis courts (2), basketball court on tennis court, shelter building,
playground area, open turf area, storage building, site amenities (park
sign, 2 drinking fountains, 13 trash receptacles, 25 picnic tables—9 which
are on a permanent concrete pad)
Condition: Overall, the site is in good condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along 6'"Street, Park Avenue and 8'" Street; parking
surfacing areas showing signs of age; concrete area behind softball field is
deteriorated; restroom is old and is showing signs of age; playground
safety material is gravel; picnic shelter is old; picnic tables are showing
signs of wear;tennis courts surfacing is completely worn; fencing around
tennis courts is too low and damaged; playground area is old; no
accessible routes to the playground area; restroom building; softball fields
and tennis courts; perimeter fencing limits access to site; absence of typical
neighborhood park facilities (e.g., internal pathways and sport courts for
basketball) and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: This site provides a nice setting.
A y �TN
0 4s.;,, :,-A'r- '.:.---',.,-WI.v4V, ' i,.; i,.`ii 4 4-11'
I•rtt fi�-
- .,yg,
0.^'i" V.•.4 '�.
q n
a°.,, S? ak.:P r •
A-6 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX A
MIRABEAU POINT PARK
Address: 13500 E. Mirabeau Parkway
Size: 17.3 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (81 spaces), restroom building, shelter
building (2), stage, site amenities (park sign, 15 trash receptacles, 18
picnic tables —3 which are on a permanent concrete pad; 5 benches, bike
rack)
Mirabeau Meadows: Large shelter with utilities
Mirabeau Springs: Small shelter, viewing platform, boardwalk, pond,
waterfall, Centennial Trailhead
Condition: Overall, the site is in excellent condition
Deficiencies/Problems: None
Planned Improvements: Playground area
Comments: This is the newest the park facility developed in the City of
Spokane Valley.
'�... I _ "12 +gyp" ,.� ti
�,.a'e.c+. ..._..,;r .,;,.......::._ ..,.,.we1re..",,..,.c�.� _._..�._.,........_.:_.,"_.�:............_._..�,=«.tea
kit
• R f 5 ! m �' •
Park and Recreation Plan A-7
APPENDIX A
MYRTLE POINT PARK
Address: 12300 E. Upriver Drive
Size: 31.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Undeveloped
Existing Facilities: None
Condition: Not applicable
Deficiencies/Problems: No vehicular access
Planned Improvements: None at this time
Comments: This site is only accessible from the Centennial Trail. It is
bordered by the Spokane River on one side and undeveloped land on the
other. The adjacent property presents an excellent opportunity to develop
a greenbelt along the Spokane River.
-
o
A-8 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX A
PARK ROAD POOL
Address: 906 N. Park Road
Size: 2.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (50 spaces), restroom building, swimming
pool (25 yard x 6 lane), bathhouse, site amenities (park sign, 2 picnic
tables,trash receptacles, drinking fountain)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Parking surfacing is old and showing signs of
repair; fencing and decking is showing sign of age
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: Site lies adjacent to Centennial Middle School and offers
some opportunity for expansion.
•
Park and Recreation Plan A-9
APPENDIX A
SULLIVAN PARK
Address: 1901 N. Sullivan Road
Size: 10.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley(portion leased to private concessionaire)
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (37 spaces, of which 2 are ADA
accessible), restroom building, shelter building (3), gazebo (2), playground
area, open turf area, Western Dance Hall, caretaker, radio control car
course, site amenities (park sign, 9 trash receptacles, 12 picnic tables, 3
drinking fountains, barbeque)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along Sullivan Road; lack of parking area
improvements (tree, landscaped areas, etc.); parking surfacing is showing
signs of age; site is not current connected to the city's infrastructure (e.g.,
sewer, water); no accessible routes to connect park facilities; shelters are
old and deteriorating; irrigation system is antiquated; playground is old
and lacks diversity; absence of external restroom building, internal
pathways and sport courts for basketball; lack of access to the river front;
and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage.
Comments: This site offer river access to the Spokane River
•
"f,- #4441.t.kdt , y•
,", s .,a °.c3rNayet.•s y .r. •� ,.
A-10 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX A
TERRACE VIEW PARK
Address: 13525 E. 24'Avenue
Size: 9.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (100 spaces), softball field, restroom
building, playground area, open turf area, basketball court in parking lot,
horseshoe pits, swimming pool (25 yard x 6 lane), bathhouse, site
amenities (park sign, 10 trash receptacles, 31 picnic tables - 8 of which are
permanent on concrete pad, 3 drinking fountains, 3 barbeques)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along 24th and Blake Streets; parking surfacing is
showing signs of age; shelters are old and deteriorating; playground area
is old; playground safety material is gravel; no accessible routes to the
playground area, restroom, softball field; deteriorating edge restraint
around playground; absence of typical neighborhood park facilities (e.g.,
internal pathways; shelters and sport courts for basketball); pool fencing
and decking is showing sign of age;, perimeter fencing limits access to site;
and absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: None
y s uv ,
li .r / RS,..`jprif;- 4 e ,z, . .,
"i.`,''''io. ° * '..ate` 4-4'4' .y-ts2 r
04.. . :,,,,,,,,,11,,,pkir ,,, .„ ., ,,:.: ,,,,,e,1, .. .,,or,,,,,„: .•.,.0..,*,
��., errs
Park and Recreation Plan A-11
APPENDIX A
VALLEY MISSION PARK
Address: 11123 E. Mission Avenue
Size: 17.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley(portion leased to private concessionaire)
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (225 spaces), softball field, restroom
building (2),tennis courts (2), basketball court, shelter building,
playground area, open turf area, swimming pool (25 yard x 6 lane),
bathhouse, riding arena,waterslide, site amenities (park sign, 17 trash
receptacles, 38 picnic tables - 10 of which are permanent on concrete pad,
2 drinking fountains)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Lack of street improvements (e.g., curbs,
sidewalks, street trees) along Mission Avenue and Bowdish Street, lack of
parking area improvements (tree, landscaped areas, etc.), parking
surfacing areas showing signs of age, restroom is old and is showing signs
of age, playground area is old, no accessible routes to park facilities (e.g.,
playground area, shelters, restrooms); playground safety material is gravel;
picnic shelter is old and showing signs of age; picnic tables are showing
signs of wear;, tennis courts and basketball court surfacing is completely
worn; irrigation system is antiquated, absence of internal pathways and
absence of park signage (rules and regulations).
Planned Improvements: New park signage
Comments: A new master plan should be prepared prior to any additional
public investment in this site. As part of this study,some consideration should be
given to removing the horse arena and converting it to another recreational use.
Splashdown,a private water park,is located within this park.
J..
„,440,,
L Ali�Il, ��z a
i w t'=T7"b..°=:r :L,,. r ; ,„.-4,.:41,9
h fit W
A-12 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX A
VALLEY MISSION PARK (SOUTH)
Address: E. Mission Avenue
Size: 10.0 Acres
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Undeveloped
Existing Facilities: None
Condition: Not applicable
Deficiencies/Problems: Not applicable
Planned Improvements: None at this time
Comments: This site lies across Mission Avenue from Valley Mission Park.
Due to its size it offers a number of opportunities for future development
•
Park and Recreation Plan A-13
APPENDIX A
VALLEY SENIOR CENTER
Address:: 1423 E Mission Avenue
Size: Unknown
Ownership: City of Spokane Valley
Status: Developed
Existing Facilities: Parking area (75 spaces), restrooms, reception hall, site
amenities (drinking fountain)
Condition: Overall, the site is in fair condition
Deficiencies/Problems: Parking lot remains unpaved, no accessible routes
Planned Improvements: Senior center will be moving to a new facility as
part of the Centerplace project
Comments: With relocation of the senior center,there are several
opportunities for the redevelopment of this site. Due to its location
adjacent to Valley Mission Park, this site could conceivable support uses or
function in this site.
+� I L
I ;n I =
Miliftaeln-
RPM 11111111111111111111111F _AMP 111
A-14 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B:
PARK LAND AND RECREATION
FACILITY INVENTORY
Appendix B presents the inventory of park land and
recreation facilities in the Spokane Valley Planning �` .
Area The City of Spokane Valley, the State of
Washington, and School Districts are major providers
of parks, open space, recreation areas, and recreation
facilities. See Chapter 3 for a summary of parkland by
classification and recreation facilities by type.
B.1 Park Land in Spokane Valley 4; ;fi;
The following public and private entities provide park .-- � �
land within the Spokane Valley Planning Area: f'k
• City of Spokane Valley: Table B.1 summarizes the � 'l��
park land provided by the City of Spokane Valley
by site, including the facilities provided at those
locations. Table B.2 summarizes the acreage provided within each
park classification.
• Spokane County: Table B.3 summarizes the park land provided by
the Spokane County.
• State of Washington: Table B.4 summarizes the park land provided
by the State of Washington.
• School Districts: Schools are an important resource for recreation
facilities, such as sport fields, playgrounds, and gymnasiums.
Access to these facilities is limited, however, when school is in
session. Table B.5 summarizes the park land provided by public
schools within the Spokane Valley Planning Area. The sites
represent 3 school districts: West Valley, Central Valley, and East
Valley.
• Private Providers: Table B.6 summarizes private park and
recreational facilities in the Spokane Valley Planning Area.
Park and Recreation Plan B-1
APPENDIX B
Table B.1
Summary of City Parks, Open Space, and Recreation Areas
Spokane Valley Planning Area
-0 H = . O w
Park Area i o LL 43 2 ' 1 c o y " o w N
Services Matrix LL — LL T t .2 U a -a o Q I Q
.0
s m o o c Q o w A LL
o m
' a , _ n u c V . D t 2
00 O N a - O) d p O 12 5� � a c a a 0 ' m° s (
Neighborhood Park --- --
Balfour Park(2.86 acres) --- 1 1 1 35 --
Browns Park(8.03 acres) -- M– IMMIIMMM
Park(2.71 acres) --- -- Storage building
Edgecliff Park(4.74 ■■ ■■■ Storage building
acres
Terrace View Park(9.24 ll . . 1 1 1 100 ll Pool,bathhouse,
acres)
horseshoe pit
Community Parls ----_- =M===
Valley Mission Park .. . WOMEN Pool,g bathhouse,
(21.91 acres)
ridin arena
Large Urban Parks —_—__- —_
Mirabeau Point Park 1111 I II Stage,viewing
(41.91 acres)
platform,
trailhead
Specia0 Use Areas _____-_-- ==
Park Road Pool (2.00 ■■■■■■■■ ■■ Pool,bathhouse
acres
Sullivan Park(16.07 1111 III Dance hall,
acres)
gazebos,radio
control car area
Valley Senior Center ■■■■■■■■■ ■
2.09 acres Reception hall
Linear Park Areas —____-_-- --_
None -------== ---
Natura0 Open Space Areas --___-_--- --_
None =====M=MM ===
Undevekoped Lands --___---- --_
Centerplace(13.60 ■■■■■■■■■■■..■■■
acres
Myrtle Point Park(31.07 ■..■■■■■■■■..■ ■
acres
Valley Mission Park ............■■■■
South 7.22 acres
8-2 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
Table B.2
Summary of Parks by Type (City Only)
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Park Site Acreage Status
Neighborhood Parks
Balfour Park 2.86 Developed
Browns Park 8.03 Developed
Castle Park 2.71 Minimally Developed
Edgecliff Park 4.74 Developed
Terrace View Park 9.24 Developed
Subtotal 27.58
Community Parks
Valley Mission Park 21.91 Developed
Subtotal 21.91
Large Urban Parks
Mirabeau Point Park 41.91 Developed
Subtotal 41.91
Special Use Areas
Park Road Pool 2.00 Developed
Sullivan Park 16.07 Developed
Valley Senior Center 2.09 Developed
Subtotal 20.16
Natural Open Space Areas 0.0
None
Subtotal 0.0
Linear Parks 0.0
None
Subtotal 0.0
Undeveloped Park Land
Centerplace (future Special Use 13.60 Undeveloped
Area/Facility)
Myrtle Point Park 31.07 Undeveloped
Valley Mission Park(South) 7.22 Undeveloped
Subtotal 51.89
Total 163.45
Park and Recreation Plan 8-3
APPENDIX B
Table B.3
Summary of Sites Owned by Spokane County
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Park Site Acreage Facilities
Linear Parks
Centennial Trail (See State 0.0 Management Only
Lands)
Total 0.0
Table B.4
Summary State Owned Sites
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Park Site Acreage Facilities
Linear Parks
Centennial Trail 113.48 Trailheads, pathway,viewpoints
Natural Open Space
DNR- Green Acres Site 120.76 Open Space
DNR- Mirabeau Site 1 00.26 Open Space
DNR- Pasadena Park Site 39.92 Open Space
Undeveloped Land (Undesignated)
Plantes Ferry Park South 5.13 Open Space
Total 379.55
8-4 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
Table B.5
Summary of Public School Facilities
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Location Acres Facilities
High Schools
Central Valley School District
Central Valley High Baseball field (2),softball field, multi-use
field,soccer field,football field (stadium
lighted),football/soccer field,track,tennis
courts (10, all lighted), gym
University Center Baseball field,softball field, multi-use field,
football field (stadium lighted),
football/soccer field,track(cinder),tennis
courts (5), basketball court (2 on tennis
courts, gym
University High Baseball field (2),softball field (2),soccer
fields (2),football field (stadium lighted),
track,tennis courts (10, all lighted), gym
East Valley School District
East Valley High Baseball field,soccer fields (2),football
field (lighted),track,tennis courts (12),
basketball courts (2, 2-1 courts), gym
West Valley School District
West Valley High Baseball field,youth baseball field,soccer
field,football field (stadium lighted),track,
tennis courts (8), gym
Spokane Valley High Basketball courts (1, 1- 1/2 court)
Middle Schools
Central Valley School District
Bowdish Middle Baseball field, multi-use field,
football/soccer field,tennis courts (4),
basketball courts (3 - '/z courts), gym
Evergreen Middle Multi-use fields (2),football/soccer field,
track(cinder),tennis courts (4), gym
Greenacres Middle Baseball field,softball field,multi-use fields
(2),soccer field,football/soccer field,tennis
courts(6),basketball court(1 - 1/2 court),gym
Horizon Middle Baseball field,softball field (2),
football/soccer field,tennis courts (5), gym
North Pines Middle Multi-use fields (3),football/soccer field,
tennis courts (4), gym
Park and Recreation Plan 8-5
APPENDIX B
Table B.5 (continued)
Location Acres ties
East Valley School District
East Valley Middle Baseball field,softball fields (5), multi-use
fields (2), football/soccer fields (2),
basketball courts (4,4-1/2 courts), gym
West Valley School District
Centennial Middle Baseball field,youth softball fields (2),
soccer/football field,tennis courts (4),
basketball courts (3, 3-1 courts), gym
West Valley City Middle Multi-use field, basketball courts (5, 5-1/2
courts), gym
Elementary Schools
Central Valley School District
Adams Elementary Multi-use fields (2), soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (5, 2 full &3- 1/2 courts),
gym
Broadway Elementary Multi-use fields (4),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (5, 5- 1 courts), gym
Chester Elementary Multi-use fields (3), basketball courts (5 , 2
full &3 - 1 courts), gym
Greenacres Elementary Multi-use fields (2), basketball courts (2, 1
full & 1 -' court), gym
Keystone Elementary Multi-use fields (2),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (3, 3- '/z courts), gym
McDonald Elementary Multi-use field, basketball courts (4, 1 full
&3-1 courts), gym
Opportunity Elementary Multi-use fields (2),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (5, 5-1/2 courts), gym
Ponderosa Elementary Youth baseball field, multi-use field,soccer
field (overlay), basketball courts (3, 1 full &
2- 1/2 courts), gym
Progress Elementary Multi-use fields (3),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (1, 1 full), gym
South Pines Elementary Multi-use fields (3),soccer field (3, all
overlays), basketball courts (3, 1 full &2-
1/2 courts), gym
Summit Elementary Multi-use fields (2),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (2, 2- 1 court), gym
Sunrise Elementary Multi-use fields(2),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts(2, 1 full& 1- 1/2 court),
gym
University Elementary Multi-use fields(2),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts(4,2 full&2- 1/2 courts),
gym
8-6 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
Table B.5 (continued)
Location Acres Facilities
East Valley School District
Skyview Elementary Softball field, multi-use field, basketball
courts (4,4-1 courts), gym
Trent Elementary Multi-use fields (2), soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (4, 1 full &3-1/2 courts),
gym
Trentwood Elementary Multi-use fields (3),soccer field (overlay),
football/soccer field, basketball courts (3,
3-1 courts), gym
West Valley School District
Seth Woodard Elementary Softball field,soccer field (2, both
overlays), basketball courts (5, 1 full &4-
1 court), gym
Pasadena Park Elementary Youth baseball field, basketball court (2, 2
full)
Orchard Center Elementary Youth baseball field, multi-use field,soccer
field (overlay), basketball court (1, 1 full
court)
Arthur B. Ness Elementary Softball fields (2),soccer field (overlay),
basketball courts (1 , 1 full), gym
Millwood Kindergarten Softball fields (3), multi-use field,soccer
field (overlay), gym
Park and Recreation Plan 8-7
APPENDIX B
Table B.6
Summary of Private Facilities
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Acrid AMedlities_
7th Day Adventist Church/School NA Multi-purpose field,youth soccer fields (2)
Curves NA Fitness
Fitness Surround for Her NA Fitness
Giorgio's NA Fitness
Jazzercise NA Fitness
Knox&Sargent Site NA Open turf area
Painted Hills Golf Course NA Golf Course
Pasadena Park Church of the NA Multi-purpose field, basketball court (1, 1
Nazarene full)
Players and Spectators NA Bowling
Sit and Be Fit NA Fitness
Splashdown NA Waterslides
Spokane Soccer Center NA Indoor soccer field
Sports USA NA Gymnasiums (5),weight room,fitness area
St Paschal Church NA Multi-purpose field, soccer field (overlay),
basketball court(1, 1 full),playground area
Stroh's NA Fitness
Valley Bowl NA Bowling
Valley Christian Church/School NA Multi-purpose field, soccer field, basketball
court (4, 2 full courts & 2-1/2 courts on
parking area, gym
Valley Fitness Center+ NA Fitness
Vertcleer&29th Site NA Open turf area
YMCA NA Indoor (6 lane) pool, recreation pool with
slide; gymnasium, outdoor basketball
court, climbing wall, meeting space
8-8 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
B.2 Nearby Parks and Facilities
Table B.7 summarizes the significant parks and recreation facilities
near Spokane Valley, which help meet community recreation needs. In
parentheses next to each site is the location of the recreation facility.
Table B.7
Summary of Nearby Facilities
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Park Site Acreage Facilities
24-Hour Fitness (Spokane)
AM Cannon Park(Spokane) Swimming pool,tennis courts
Antler Springs Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Camp Caro (Spokane Co.) 7.23 Camp
Chester Creek Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Chewelah Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Comstock Park(Spokane) Swimming pool,tennis courts
Deer Meadows Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Deer Park Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Dishman Hills Conservancy(Spokane Co.) 521.41 Open Space
Dominion Meadows Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Downriver Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Dwight Merkel Sports Complex(Spokane) Sports complex
Eagle Ridge Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
East Central Community Center(Spokane) Community center
Esmeralda Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Fairways at West Terrace (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Franklin Sports Complex(Spokane) Sports complex
Global Fitness (Spokane) Fitness center
Gold's Gym (Spokane) Fitness center
Hangman Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Harrington Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Hillyard Park(Spokane) Swimming pool,community center
Holmburg Park(Spokane) Swimming pool
Iller Conservancy(Spokane Co.) 807.76 Open space
Indian Canyon Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
It Figures (Spokane) Fitness center
JJ's Greater Functions (Deer Park) Fitness center
Ladies Fitness Center(Spokane) Fitness center
Liberty Lake Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Liberty Lake Pool (Liberty Lake) Swimming pool
Liberty Park(Spokane) Swimming pool
Marrow Conservancy(Spokane Co.) 39.85 Open space
Park and Recreation Plan 8-9
APPENDIX B
Table B.7 (continued)
Park Site Facilities
Meadowwood Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Montego Bay Training Company(Spokane) Fitness center
Neighborhood Fitness for Women (Spokane) Fitness center
Orchard Avenue Park(Spokane Co.) 3.83
Peaceful Valley Community Center (Spokane) Community center
Phytt Plus Health and Fitness (Spokane) Fitness center
Pine Acres Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Plantes Ferry Park(Spokane Co.) 93.78 5 softball fields, 13 soccer fields,
restroom/concession/storage building
Qualcahn Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Renaissance Fitness for Women's (Spokane) Fitness center
Salvation Army Community Center(Spokane) Swimming pool, community center
Serendipity Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Shadle Park(Spokane) Swimming pool
Shields Park(Spokane Co.) 12.64
Sinto Senior Center(Spokane) Senior center
Southside Sports Complex(Spokane) Sports complex
Southside Community Center(Spokane.) Community center
Spokane Swim Pool (Spokane) Swimming pool
St.John Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Sun Dance Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Touchet Valley Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Trailhead Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Veteran's Memorial Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
Wandermere Golf Course (Spokane Co.) Golf course
West Central Community Center(Spokane)
Whititer Park(Spokane) Swimming pool
Wild Waters (Post Falls) Water park
Total
B-10 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
B.3 Recreation Facilities in Spokane Valley
Table B.8 list the sports facilities provided in Spokane Valley Planning
Area by category. Facility categories include:
• Regulation baseball fields
• Youth baseball fields
• Adult softball fields
• Youth softball fields
• Multi-use fields
• Soccer fields
• Football fields
• Tennis courts
• Gymnasiums (indoor courts)
• Swimming pools
Table B.8
Summary of Recreation Facilities by Type
Spokane Valley Planning Area
Regulation Baseball Fields
Number Location Comments
1 Bowdish Middle School
1 Centennial Middle School
2 Central Valley High School
1 East Valley High School
1 East Valley Middle School
1 Greenacres Middle School
1 Horizon Middle School
1 University Center
2 University High School
1 West Valley High School
12 Total
Park and Recreation Plan B-11
APPENDIX B
Youth Baseball Fields
umber Location Comments
1 Orchard Center Elementary
1 Pasadena Elementary School
1 Ponderosa Elementary
School
1 West Valley High School
4 Total
Adult Softball Fields
umber Location Comments
2 Arthur B.Ness Elementary School
1 Browns Park
1 Central Valley High School
5 East Valley Middle School
1 Edgecliff Park
1 Greenacres Middle School
2 Horizon Middle School
1 Skyview Elementary School
1 Terrace View Park
1 University Center
2 University High School
1 Valley Mission Park
2 West Valley High School
21 Total
Youth Softball Fields
Number Location Comments
3 Millwood Kindergarten
2 Centennial Middle School
5 Total
B-12 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
Multi-Use Fields
Number Location Comments
2 Adams Elementary School
1 Bowdish Middle School
4 Broadway Elementary School
1 Central Valley High School
3 Chester Elementary School
2 East Valley Middle School
2 Evergreen Middle School
2 Greenacres Elementary School
2 Greenacres Middle School
2 Keystone Elementary School
1 McDonald Elementary
1 Millwood Kindergarten
3 North Pines Middle School
2 Opportunity Elementary School
1 Orchard Center Elementary
School
1 Pasadena Park Church of
Nazarene
1 Ponderosa Elementary School
3 Progress Elementary School
1 Skyview Elementary School
3 South Pines Elementary School
1 St. Paschal Church
2 Summit Elementary School
2 Sunrise Elementary School
2 Trent Elementary School
3 Trentwood Elementary School
1 University Center
2 University Elementary School
1 Valley Christian Church/School
1 West Valley City Middle School
1 7'h Day Adventist Church
54 Total
Park and Recreation Plan B-13
APPENDIX B
Soccer Fields
umber Nation Comments
1 Adams Elementary School Overlay
1 Arthur B. Ness Elementary School Overlay
1 Broadway Elementary School Overlay
1 Central Valley High School
2 East Valley High School
1 Keystone Elementary School Overlay
1 Millwood Kindergarten Overlay
1 Opportunity Elementary School Overlay
1 Orchard Center Elementary School Overlay
1 Ponderosa Elementary School Overlay
1 Progress Elementary School Overlay
2 Seth Woodward Elementary School Overlay;small
3 South Pines Elementary School Overlay
1 St. Paschal Church Overlay
1 Summit Elementary School Overlay
1 Sunrise Elementary School Overlay
1 Trent Elementary School Overlay
1 Trentwood Elementary School Overlay
1 West Valley High School
1 University Elementary School Overlay
2 University High School
1 Valley Christian Church/School
2 7'" Day Adventist Church
29 Total
B-14 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
Football Fields
Number Location Comments
1 Bowdish Middle School Football/soccer
1 Centennial Middle School Football/soccer
2 Central Valley High School Lighted stadium, practice
1 East Valley High School Lighted stadium
2 East Valley Middle School Football/soccer
1 Evergreen Middle Scholl Football/soccer
1 Greenacres Middle School Football/soccer
1 Horizon Middle School Football/soccer
1 North Pines Middle School Football/soccer
1 Trentwood Elementary Football/soccer
School
2 University Center Lighted stadium;
football/soccer
1 University High School Lighted stadium
1 West Valley High School Lighted stadium
16 Total
Tennis Courts
Number Location Comments
4 Bowdish Middle School
4 Centennial Middle School
10 Central Valley High School Lighted
12 East Valley High School
2 Edgecliff Park
4 Evergreen Middle Scholl
6 Greenacres Middle School
5 Horizon Middle School
4 North Pines Middle School
5 University Center No standards
10 University High School Lighted
2 Valley Mission Park
8 West Valley High School
76 Total
Park and Recreation Plan B-15
APPENDIX B
Gymnasiums
Location omments
1 Adams Elementary
1 Arthur B. Ness Elementary
2 Bowdish Middle
1 Broadway Elementary
2 Centennial Middle
2 Central Valley High
1 Chester Elementary
2 East Valley High
2 East Valley Middle
2 Evergreen Middle
1 Greenacres Elementary
2 Greenacres Middle
2 Horizon Middle
1 Keystone Elementary
1 McDonald Elementary
1 Millwood Kindergarten
2 North Pines Middle
1 Opportunity Elementary
1 Orchard Center Elementary
1 Pasadena Park Elementary
1 Ponderosa Elementary
1 Progress Elementary
1 Seth Woodard Elementary
1 Skyview Elementary
1 South Pines Elementary
1 Summit Elementary
1 Sunrise Elementary
1 Trent Elementary
1 Trentwood Elementary
2 University Center
1 University Elementary
2 University High
5 USA Sports
2 West Valley City Middle
2 West Valley High
47 Total
B-16 Park and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX B
Swimming Pools
Sq. Ft. Location Comments
3,300 Park Road Pool Outdoor
3,300 Terrace View Park Outdoor
3,300 Valley Mission Park Outdoor
3,300 Spokane Valley YMCA Indoor(6 lane), recreation pool
with slide
NA Splashdown Private
13,200 Total
Park and Recreation Plan B-17
City of Spokane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX C:
RECREATION DEMAND ANALYSIS
Contents:
Part A—Household Recreation
Survey Results
• Sample Design and Selection - d
• Demographic Results
• Opinion Results(all ages)
• Opinion Results(age 50
and over) x.
• Current Recreation Y
Participation
• Preferred Recreation u - , t '( Yr~ '�a
Participation
,il‘7 t� 4 at
Part B—Public Visioning Workshop NAL E►��
Part C—Focus Group Meetings '•••1 '
Part D—City Wide Telephone
Survey
Part€—Organized Sports Questionnaire
Introduction
This report summarizes the results of the demand analysis (which includes, household survey and public workshop).
Each of these is discussed in detail on the following pages:
Key Findings
Household Recreation Survey:
• Overall, school recreation areas receive the most usage by Spokane Valley residents with Centennial
Trail receiving the second most use.
• When asked by residents who do not use Spokane Valley parks, 31%stated that they had no desire to
use the facilities. "Don't have facilities I'm interested in" was the second rated reason.
• The most common reason residents traveled outside the City of Spokane Valley to participate in a
recreation activity was for organized sports.
• Residents indicated that acquiring additional land along the Spokane River was very important.
• When asked what projects "type of trails" should have the highest priority, off-street trails were cited
most often.
• When asked what projects should have the highest priority, an indoor swimming pool, the development
of a city-wide trail system and acquisition of riverfront property were cited most often.
Park and Recreation Plan C-1
City of Spthane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
• Over 37% cited a multi-tank, indoor swimming pool as the preferred option for meeting future
swimming needs.
• When asked what programs should be offered, "after-school activities for youth", and "summer youth
activities" received the most support.
• Over 81% of the respondents indicated there are not adequate programs for the teenage youth in
Spokane Valley.
• Roughly 78%of the residents indicated there is a need for before and after school programs.
• When asked what cultural arts programs are most needed, "performances or concerts in the parks" and
"community art festivals and special events" received the most support.
• When asked where the City should place is emphasis in park services,the most frequently cited
response was "upgrading existing park facilities". "Acquire new parks sites and open space areas" also
received strong support.
• 72% of the respondents indicated they would support some type of tax measure for additional park and
recreation facilities. However,this support would depend on the amount and type of projects.
• Participation in the 40 identified recreation activities by Spokane Valley residents is roughly 58% higher
than the MIG average.
• The activities with the highest latent demand (defined as activities they would like to participate in if the
facilities were more available) included:
* Arts
* Drama (attending)
* Dancing (social)
* Arts (Painting/Sketching)
* Crafts (Pottery/Ceramics)
* Basketball
* Tennis
* Concerts (attend)
* Museums/Galleries
* Swimming in a lake or river
* Tennis
Public Visioning Workshop:
• Vision for City: Provide a balanced and dispersed network of parks (large and small) and trails.
Integrate with other public facilities and systems
• Most Needed Facilities: Indoor (recreation center, aquatic space) and outdoor facilities (trails, gardens,
skate parks, sport fields and river frontage)
• Improvements to Existing Parks: Improvements to existing facilities (restroom, horse arena) and more
park amenities (restrooms,trees, parking)
• Emphasis on Park and Recreation Services: Acquisition of land,trail development, park improvements
and develop programs.
• Role of City in Programs/Services: Coordination and support of existing service providers and provide
some programs and services.
Park and Recreation Plan C-2
City of Spokxane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Focus Group Meetings:
• Vision for City: Wide range of programs and services. Shift responsibility away from school districts to
Parks and Recreation Department.
• Role of City in Programs/Services: Provide parks and facilities; and coordination of programs and
services.
• Issues: Priority of park and recreation services relative to other City services; partnerships;funding for
park and recreation services; land acquisition; and impact fees.
• Needs: Indoor (community center space, day care space) and outdoor areas (local parks, sport fields,
trails/bike lanes, pool, gardens, garden plots, equestrian facilities, etc).
Citywide Telephone Survey:
• New Parks: Only 14%of the respondents indicated building of new parks was a high priority.
• Quality of Recreation Facilities: 71% of the respondents indicated the parks were good or better.
• Proximity to Recreation Facilities: Only 59% of the respondents indicated there were park/recreation
facilities in close proximity to their neighborhood.
Organized Sports Questionnaire:
• Overall, a majority of the sport groups indicated there are sufficient fields to meet the demand of their
leagues.
Park and Recreation Plan C-3
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
PART A. HOUSEHOLD RECREATION SURVEY
Sample Design and Selection
A survey of public altitudes, recreation interests and recreation participation characteristics was made in the City of
Spokane Valley during November of 2004. Questionnaires were distributed to selected households in the City limits
of Spokane Valley. Each member of the household aged 10 and over was asked to fill out a separate questionnaire.
Based on the random sample method used, community-wide results are statistically accurate within an expected
maximum error range of approximately five-percent (95%confidence interval). In other words, if the sample were
randomly selected 100 times, it would be expected that for 95 times,the results would vary no more than 5 percent
from the results if everyone in the City were surveyed. For this survey a total of 398 questionnaires were returned
which exceeded the minimum amount to achieve the above desired results.
Household Survey Results by Area
City of Spokane Valley
Area Number of Percent
(N=275) Returns
West Valley 27 6.8%
Millwood 28 7.0%
Green Acres—North 43 10.8
Trentwood 21 5.3%
Dishman 23 5.8%
Veradale—North 39 9.8%
Opportunity-North 1 0.1%
Veradale—South 95 23.9%
Green Acres—South 14 3.5%
Opportunity-South 39 9.8%
South Hills (Ponderosa) 56 4.1%
Unknown Origin 12 3.0%
ii i°.
Demographic Results (General Population)
Park and Recreation Plan C-4
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
QUESTION 1. AGE OF RESPONDS iT: I _
This question is used primarily as a means to cross-tab responses to other questions by age category or age group.
Table C-1
Age Distribution with Census Data
City of Spokane Valley
Response Number Of Returns Percent of Returns 2000 US Census
(N=274)
10-14 27 6.8% 8.2%
15-17 17 4.3% 5.1%
18-24 20 5.0% 12.2%
25-34 58 14.6% 15.7%
35-44 79 19.8% 17.7%
45-54 78 19.6% 16.0%
55-64 57 14.3% 9.3%
65+ 62 15.6% 15.8%
398 100.0% ®r...®.i
Spokane CCD; Excludes ages 9 and Under
Observations of Table C-1:
• The highest percentage of responses was obtained from the "35-44" and "45-54" age groups. The results
closely follow the Census information.
QUESTION . LENGTH OF RESIDENCY.
Typically, new residents bring new values and recreation interests into a community. The intent of this question is to
use it as a cross-tab to measure responses to other questions related to length of residency.
Table C-2
Length of Residency
City of Spokane Valley
Response Number of Percent
(N=275) Returns
3 years or less 52 13.1%
4-6 Years 41 10.3%
7-10 Years 46 11.6%
1 1+Years 258 65.0%
+0.0%
Park and Recreation Plan C-5
City of Spokane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-2:
• 65%of the respondents have lived in Spokane Valley "11 + years". This indicates a fairly stable population
base of long-term residents.
QUESTION 3. GENDER OF RESIDENT:
The intent of this question is to use it as a cross-tab to measure responses to other questions related to gender.
Table C-3
Gender of Respondent
City of Spokane Valley
Response Number Of Percent ' 2000 US
L (N=275) Returns IL Census
Male 180 45.2% 48.4%
Female 218 54.8% 51.6%
Total 398 100.0% 100.0%
Spokane CCD
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-3:
• About 55% of the responses originated from female respondents. This ratio of returns by gender closely follows
other MIG surveys.
• The sample closely follows census data, the sampling achieved a slightly higher response rate for female
respondents and a lower response rate for male respondents.
Park and Recreation Plan C-6
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Opinion Resu'ts (Genera' Popu'ation)
QUESTION 4. HOW OFTEN DID YOU VISIT THE FOLLOWING PARKS OR FACILITIES WITHIN THE PAST 12 MONTHS?
Table C-4
Visitation Rates
City of Spokane Valley
Response Mean Visits(1) Median Visits(2)
(N=Varies)
School recreation areas(play fields, 21.4 9.0
playgrounds,gyms,etc.)
A park near my home 1 1.8 4.6
Centennial Trail 13.5 3.5
Valley Mission Horse Arena 10.9 2.4
Splashdown 2.27 1.5
Western Dance Hall 40.2 2.0
(1)Average number of visits
(2)Median midpoint of all responses. This is a more reliable number because the mean number reflected some
extreme high numbers of visitations.
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-4:
• Based on the results, "school recreation areas" receive the most usage. With a median of 9.0 visits per year.1
annual per capita visits,we would expect this facility to receive roughly 1,083,795 visits annually.
• "Centennial Trail" also received a fair amount of usage. Four respondents indicated they used the trail more
than 100 times a year.
Park and Recreation Plan C-7
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
QUESTION 5. IF YOU SELDOM OR DO NOT USE THE PARKS IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WHAT ARE YOUR MAIN
REASONS?
Table C-5
Reasons for Not or Seldom Using Parks
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=178)
No desire to use 31.0%
Don't have facilities I'm interested in 16.3%
Don't know where the parks are located 14.7%
Not conveniently located 12.1%
Facilities are old and uninteresting 10.8%
Poorly maintained 5.8%
Feels unsafe 5.5%
Too crowded 3.9%
1 00.0%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-5:
• About 31%of the respondents indicated they have no desire to use parks in the City Spokane Valley.
• "Don't have facilities I'm interested in", "not conveniently located", and "don't know where the parks are
located"were all cited as reasons for not using the City's parks.
• The "feel unsafe" reason is fairly low when compared to other MIG surveys.
QUESTION 6. WHAT SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS, IF ANY,ARE NEEDED IN THE SPOKANE VALLEY PARK YOU USE MOST
FREQUENTLY?
Table C-6
Improvements to Specific Parks
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N= )
Balfour Park
None
Browns Park
swings 4
toys for kids 3
better lighting 2
enclosed places 2
water fountain&volleyball courts
Bathrooms
closely watched (kids smoke pot here)
more trees&flowers
Park and Recreation Plan C-8
City of Spolsane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
better maintenance
Castle Park
shelter
Centennial Trail
Keep trail free of debris
Better maintenance in front of restrooms
More and better trails to the River
Need drinking fountains
Concern for personal safety
Need vehicle security
Edgecliff Park
community center
swings 2
more lights
more tables
needs water activities
Mirabeau Point Park
playground
more parking
drinking fountains
Myrtle Point Park
None
Park Road Pool
need shade&benches
Sullivan Park
more secure
needs water activities
graffiti removal
Terrace View Park
flowers
sprinkler for kids
more swings&seating
sliding hill/mound
different ground cover(gravel)
updated play equipment
open restrooms
playground for under 3
Valley Mission Park
better restrooms 2
Better pool maintenance 2
update pool (make bigger)
safer crosswalks
fence for softballs training
toddler area
play equipment for older children
playground for under 3
more tables
more swings
more toys
Valley Senior Center
None
Western Dance Hall
Park and Recreation Plan C-9
City of Spoksane Valley Paris and Recreation Plan
Use for dancing only;it is NOT a gym
Was built for dancers by dancers
QUESTION 7. HOW OFTEN IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS DID YOU LEAVE THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY TO VISIT OTHER
PARKS OR PARTICIPATE IN RECREATION PROGRAM?
Table C-7
Frequency of Visiting or Participating in Program outside the City of Spokane
City of Spokane Valley
Response Mean Visits(1) Median Visits(2)
(N=Varies)
Gymnasiums;basketball/volleyball 14.5 7.8
programs
Sports fields,sports programs 14.4 7.0
Swimming in a river or lake 10.0 5.1
Open Space Areas 8.73 4.7
General recreation programs or classes 9.1 4.5
Swimming pools,swimming programs 5.9 4.1
Parks 9.4 3.3
Trails 6.6 3.1
Cultural activities 4.5 2.4
(1)Average number of visits
(2)Median midpoint of all responses. This is a more reliable number because the mean number reflected some
extreme high numbers of visitations.
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-7:
• Based on the results, organized sports (sports programs, gymnasium activities) were the most frequently cited
facilities people traveled outside the City to participate in.
• Open space areas and park were also cited as a facility residents travel outside the City to utilize. Trail and
cultural activities were the least respondents.
Park and Recreation Plan C-10
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
QUESTION 8. Ir i YOUR OPINION, .1'E MORE P "KS NEEDED IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY?
Table C-8
Need for More Parks
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=255)
Yes 46.1%
No 53.9%
Total
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-8:
• The greatest "Yes" response came from Green Acres North (69.0%) and Green Acres South (75.0%).
• The areas showing the least support were Millwood (71.4%) and opportunity (68.6%).
• Areas suggested needing more parks were:
o Greenacres (7)
o Ponderosa area south of the Freeway (4)
o Dishman Hills area (4)
o Northeast Valley (3)
o South area (3)
o Sprague/Pines and south (3)
o Between Baker and Sullivan (3)
o Between Havana and Carnahan (2)
o Chester (2)
o Spokane River area (2)
QUESTION 9. HOW WOULD YOU RATE(ON A SCALE OF 1-5) THE SERVICES OF THE PARK AND RECREATION
DEPARTMENT IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS?
Table C-9
Rating of Services
City of Spokane Valley
Response Rating(Percent)
(N=Varies)
AVG. I #of 5 #of 4 #of 3 #of 2 #of 1 Ratings
Ratings Ratings Ratings Ratings
Park Facilities
Condition of park grass and plantings 3.8 68 144 99 14 7
Removal of graffiti 3.7 82 116 73 26 13
Keeping parks clean of paper and trash 3.7 58 144 103 20 8
Maintaining play equipment and picnic 3.5 47 114 118 29 14
areas
Cleanliness of restrooms 3.0 23 79 1 1 7 54 29
Park and Recreation Plan C-11
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
Response Rating(Percent)
(N=Varies)
___________________________________________
4 #of 3 #of 2 #of 1 Ratings
Ratings Ratings Ratings
Aquatic Facility Operation
Cleanliness of facility 3.6 33 77 55 15 10
Availability/quality of lessons 3.4 30 52 40 22 12
Proximity of facilities 3.3 31 61 41 30 19
Hours of operation 3.2 30 54 48 34 18
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-9:
• As a group, Park facilities received a slightly better rating than average.
• They were most satisfied with the "condition of park grass" and "keeping parks clean of paper and trash".
• For park facilities, cleanliness of restrooms received the lowest rating although it was still at average.
• There appears to be a slightly higher response to "dissatisfied" when it comes to restroom cleanliness.
• Aquatic facility operations also received an above average rating.
QUESTION1 0. ONA SCALE OF 1-5, WITH 1 BEING NOT IMPORTANT AND 5 BEING VERY IMPORTA iT, HOW
IMPORTANT IS IT TO YOU FO ": iTE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY TO PRESERVE LAND ALONG THE SPOKANE RIVER
FOR PULIC USE?
Table C-10
Importance of Acquiring Additional Land Along The Spokane River
City of Spokane Valley
Response Average
(N=266) Rating
Preservation of land along Spokane River 4.4
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-10:
• Based on the information above, respondents indicated acquisition of additional land on Spokane River had a
high level of importance. The average rating was 4.4 on a scale of 5.
Park and Recreation Plan C-12
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
QUESTION 1 1. WHAT TYPE OF PATHWAY OR TRAIL IS MOST NEEDED li;THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY?
Table C-11
Type of Trail Most Needed
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=254)
Off-street paved trails for bicycling,walking,in-lin. 31.0%
skating,etc.
On Street bike trails or bike lanes 24.9%
Unpaved trails for walking and hiking 16.3%
Do not believe more trails are needed 15.6%
Designated off-street trails for mountain biking 7.9%
Unpaved trails for equestrian use 4.2%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-1 1:
• About 31%of the respondents indicated "off-street trails for bicycling,walking, in-line skating, etc." were the
most needed type of pathway or trail.
• This was followed by"on-street bike trails or bike lanes".
• 15.6% indicated unpaved trails for equestrian use were the most needed.
• About 15.6%of the respondents did not feel that additional trails were needed.
QUESTION 12. OF ALL YOUR RECREATION NEEDS AND DESIRES, PLEASE PRIORITIZE YOUR TOP 3 NEEDS FROM THE
LISTE:ELOW BY WRITING A#1 r 1EXT TO YOUR FIRST CHOICE, A#2 NEXT TO YOUR SECOND CHOICE,A#3
NEXT TO YOUR THIRD CHOICE.)
Respondents to this question were asked to prioritize a list of projects. Listed below is a table showing the number of
times an action was picked as the number one response.
Park and Recreation Plan C-13
City of Spolsane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Table C-12
Most Needed Projects (1st Choice)
City of Spokane Valley
Response Number of 1 n Percent of 1 s'
(N=Varies) Choices Choices
An indoor swimming pool 106 56.4%
Development of a city-wide trail
51 38.1%
network
Acquisition of riverfront property 38 28.1%
Golf course 29 45.3%
New park development 28 26.2%
Other(please list) 25 46.3%
Acquisition of land for future parks 21 19.1%
Acquisition of open space 20 23.3%
Another outdoor swimming pool 15 1 7.9%
Total ■
Responses under the Other category include: Equestrian trails, area for horseback riding (4), basketball courts (3),
dog park (3), community center, multi-purpose, like Sports USA (2), park improvement 2),volleyball 2), baseball,
little league park, bike park, currently go outside the city for recreation, Dishman Hills, more Fishing in river,football
field, Land acquisition for bike park, Library, keep open, safer walking trails, shooting rang, public, skate park
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-12:
• Based on this method of analysis, "an indoor swimming pool"was the number one choice.
• Another outdoor swimming pool received the least support.
A debate often occurs over the appropriate method of analysis for questions that prioritize. Another analysis method
is to weigh the answers by giving more value to a #1 response and less value to the last response.
The following table shows the total score of each response after giving the responses a weighted value. Responses
were ranked according to priority,with a first choice response assigned a score of"9," a second choice assigned a
score of"8," and third choice assigned a score of"7".
Park and Recreation Plan C-14
City of Spolsane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Table C-13
Most Needed Projects (Weighted)
City of Spokane Valley
Response Weighted Choices
(N=Varies)
An indoor swimming pool 1537
Development of a city-wide trail network 1082
Acquisition of riverfront property 1065
Acquisition of land for future parks 849
New park development 822
Acquisition of open space 676
Another outdoor swimming pool 762
Golf course 504
Other(please list) 436
■
Responses under the Other category include: No Comments
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-13:
• Priority of projects appear similar when using the weighted approach.
QUESTION 13. HOW SHOULD THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY MEET FUTURE SWIMMING NEEDS?
Table C-14
Meting Aquatic Needs
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=241)
Construct a family aquatic center featuring a multi-tank indoor swimming 37.4%
pool complex for recreation swimming,lessons,etc.
Develop several small water playgrounds with spray equipment in 1 to 2 26.3%
parks
Develop a family aquatic center featuring a multi-tank outdoor swimming 19.4%
pool complex for recreation swimming,lessons,etc.
Develop a large Olympic-sized pool primarily for competitive swimming 8.5%
More swimming facilities are not needed 8.3%
Park and Recreation Plan C-15
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-14:
• A family indoor aquatic center received the most support with over one third of the responses.
• The "development of several small water playgrounds with spray equipment in the parks" also received strong
support as a means of meeting the future swimming needs.
• Only 8.8%of the respondents indicated additional swimming facilities were not needed.
QUESTION 14. IN GENERAL,ARE ADDITIONAL RECREATION AND SPORT PROGRAMS NEEDED IN THE CITY OF
SPOKANE VALLEY?
Table C-15
Need for Additional Recreation Program
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=254)
Yes 60.8%
No 32.9%
MEP 100.0%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-15:
• 57.9%of the respondents indicated recreation and sport programs are needed in the City of Spokane Valley.
• While there did not appear to be strong support for Park land,there does appear to be support for more
recreation and sport programs.
QUESTION 15. IF YOU ANSWERED "YES" TO THEA:OVE QUWHO SHOULD C1E RESPONSItLE FOR OFFERING THESE
PROGRAMS AND SERVICES?
Table C-16
Responsibility for Offering Recreation Programs and Services
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=153)
The City of Spokane Valley 27.7%
A partnership with the school districts 1 7.8%
Spokane Count 1 7.5%
Community volunteers 12.2%
Private sports groups 9.9%
A partnership with other cities 8.9%
A commercial,for-profit organization 5.9%
■
Park and Recreation Plan C-16
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-16:
• Based on the responses, nearly a third of the respondents indicated the City of Spokane Valley should be the
preferred agency to provide recreation and sport programs.
• "Spokane County" and "a partnership with school district (and the City)" were also cited as agencies that could
provide these services.
QUESTION 16. IF YOU FEEL T E CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SHOULD :'E RESPONSI:LE FOR OFFERING A FULL SERVICE
RECREATION PROGRAM, WHAT TYPE OF ACTIVITIES SHOULD :E OFFERED?
Table C-17
Type of Programs and Activities Offered
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=209)
After-school activities for the youth 15.9%
Summer youth activities 15.3%
Youth organized sports 13.8%
Recreational and instructional swimming 10.9%
Adult organized sports 10.1%
Education and special interest classes 9.1%
Outdoor education and nature programs 8.5%
Performing and cultural arts programs 8.4%
Outdoor adventure/extreme sporh programs 8.0%
Tota I 100%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-17:
• The top three preferred programs and activities are youth oriented.
• By contrast, there was very little support for"outdoor education and nature programs" and "outdoor adventure
and extreme sports programs".
QUESTION 17. IN YOUR OPINIO ,,ARE THERE ADEQUATE PROGRAMS FOR TEENAGE YOUTHS IN THE CITY OF
SPOKANE VALLEY
Table C-18
Adequate Programs for the Teenage Youth
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=236)
Yes 18.8%
No 81.3%
Total 100.0%
Park and Recreation Plan C-17
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-18:
• Respondents overwhelming indicated there are not enough programs for teenage youth.
QUESTION 18. IF NOT, WHAT TYPES OF TEEN PROGRAMS OR FACILITIES ARE MOSTE NEEDED?
Table C-19
Needed Teen Programs or Facilities
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=201)
A place for teens to gather or hang out 20.0%
Job training/Career placement 14.4%
Organized sports/leagues 14.3%
Special interest classes 13.3%
Dances,social activities,special events 11.9%
Drop-in sport activities 11.9%
Outdoor education 7.5%
Health education programs 6.7%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-19:
• The most frequently cited response was "a space for teens to gather or hangout". This was followed by"job
training" and "dances, social activities and special events".
• By comparison,there was very little support for"outdoor education".
QUESTION 19. IS THERE A NEED FOR :EFORE-SCHOOL AND AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN AND TEENS
IN TI iE CITY FO SPOKAi 1E VALLEY?
Table C-20
Need for Before and After School Program
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=243)
Yes 77.8%
No 22.2%
100.0%
Park and Recreation Plan C-18
City of Spokane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-20:
• Respondents overwhelming (78.0%) indicated there is a need for before and after school programs for children
and teens in the City of Spokane Valley.
QUESTION 20. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH ORGANIZED SPORTS (SOCCER, SOFT:+r LL, ETC.) IN THE CITY OF
SPOKANE VALLEY IN TERM SOF THE QUALITY AND RANGE OF OFFERINGS?
Table C-21
Satisfaction with the Organized Sports Program
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=253)
No opinion 28.0%
Neutral 27.2%
Somewhat Satisfied 20.9%
Very Satisfied 12.8%
Somewhat Dissatisfied 6.8%
Dissatisfied 4.3%
Total 100.0%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-21:
• Over a third of the responses are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with organized sports offerings in Spokane
Valley.
• Slightly over 11%were somewhat or dissatisfied with organized sports.
QUESTION 21. WHAT DO YOU FEEL ARE THE THREE(3) MOST NEEDED RECREATION FACILITIES OR ACTIVITIES IN
SPOKANE VALLEY?
This was an open-ended question where respondents were asked to form their own list of facilities or
activities.
Park and Recreation Plan C-19
City of Spolsane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Table C-22
Most Needed Recreation Facilities or Activities
(Open-ended Question)
Number Response
100 Pool,indoors;swimming,swimming areas;
aquatic center
58 Teen center/club,a free place
20 Bike park for racing and trail
20 Trails and pathways
17 Soccer field
14 Skate park
12 Basketball courts
11 Recreation center
10 Baseball fields
10 Senior center
10 Softball fields
8 Volleyball courts
7 More youth sports
7 Youth programs
6 Arts
6 Golf course
6 Equestrian trails
6 More parks
6 On-street bike lanes
5 Water park
4 Health&education programs
4 Adult sports programs
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-22:
• By far,the most listed facility related to swimming. A place for the youth to hang out was second.
Park and Recreation Plan C-20
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
QUESTION 22. WHAT TYPES OF LOCAL CULTU"' L "T PROGRAMS ARE OF MOST INTEREST TO YOU?
Table C-23
Types of Cultural Arts Programs
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=241)
Performances or concerts in the park 24.1%
Community art festivals and special events 18.1%
Cultural activities for children 13.0%
Performing arts classes(Music drama,dance) 12.0%
Visual arts class or instruction 11.5%
Art in public places,such as murals,sculpture,statues,etc. 11.0%
Literary arts programs 5.0%
Cultural art programs are not of interest to me 3.6%
Other(please list) 1.7%
100.0%
Responses under the Other category include: Computer centers,flea markets, Libraries
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-23:
• The most frequently cited response was "performances or concerts in the parks". This was followed by
"community art festivals and special events".
• Only 1.7%of the respondents indicated that"cultural art programs are not of interest to me".
QUESTION 23. WHERE S OULD THE CITY PLACE IT EMPHASIS IN PARK SERVICES?
Respondents to this question were asked to prioritize a list of projects. Listed below is a table showing the
number of times an action was picked as their number one response.
Table C-24
Emphasis of Park Services
City of Spokane Valley
Response 1` Choice Percentage of 1
(N=Varies) Responses
Upgrade existing park facilities 152 53.1%
Acquire new park sites and open space areas 105 42.3%
Develop new park sites and facilities 43 18.2%
Emphasis park maintenance only 34 21.0%
Total
Park and Recreation Plan C-21
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-24:
• Based on the count of 1"choices, "upgrade existing park facilities"was the number one choice. This choice
was far ahead of the 2' choice which was to acquire new park and open space sites.
Another analysis method is using the weighted method as described in Table 4-14
Table C-25
Most Needed Projects (Weighted)
City of Spokane Valley
Response Weighted C "
(N=Varies)
Upgrade existing park facilities 940
Acquire new park sites and open space areas 736
Develop new park sites and facilities 656
Emphasis park maintenance only 390
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-25:
• Using either method of analysis, "upgrade existing park facilities" was the number one response.
QUESTION 24. PLEASE INDICATE WHAT PERCEI 1TAGE OF THE TOTAL P'FKAND RECREATION UDGET SHOLD GO TO
THE FOLLOWING SERVICES?
Table C-26
Desired Percentage of Budget
City of Spokane Valley
Response Medium
(N=Varies) Percent age c%
Budget
Park maintenance 19.8%
Youth services 1 5.4%
Park and facility development 15.2%
Recreation programs 15.0%
Land acquisition 13.0%
Aquatics 12.2%
Senior services 10.3%
Park and Recreation Plan C-22
City of Spoksane Valley Paris and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-26:
• Of all the services, respondents indicated "park maintenance" should receive the highest percentage of the
budget with 19.8%. Aquatics received the least amount of the budget.
QUESTION 25. WOULD YOU SUPPORT SOME TYPE OF TAX MEASURE TO PAY FOB'ADDITIONAL PARK AND
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES?
Table C-27
Support for Tax Measure to Pay for Park and Recreational Facilities
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=243)
Yes 11.3%
Yes,depending upon the projects 32.2%
Yes,depending upon the amount 28.5%
No 28.0%
EEL S 0.0%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-27:
• With 28.0%stating the would not support a tax measure, it means that up to 72% could vote favorably if the
amount and list of projects were suitable.
QUESTION 26. IF YOU A WSERED "YES" TO THE MOVE QUESTIOi , WHAT IS THE MOST YOU WOULD BE WILL! JG
TO PAY?
Table C-28
Amount of Support
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=184)
$25 per year per household 52.2%
$50 per year per household 28.4%
$100 per year per household 10.8%
$200 per year per household 3.4%
Other(please list) 5.2%
100.0%
Comments under the"other" category include: No Comments
Park and Recreation Plan C-23
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-28:
• The majority of respondents favored a cap of $25 per year.
• In order to solicit a voter-approved bond measure, the amount willing to pay would need to be between $25
and $50.
QUESTION 27. RECOGNIZING IT MAY INCREASE THE COST OF NEW HOUSING, SHOULD THE CITY CHARGE
DEVELOPERS A FEE TO PAY FOR NEW PAR AND RECREATION FACILITIES?
Table C-29
Charge Developers a Fee to Pay for Park and Recreation Facilities
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=253)
Yes 71.2%
No 28.8%
Total 100.0%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-29:
• It appears that the public supports the concept.
Opinion Results (Population 50 Years and Older)
QUESTION 28. IN YOUR OPINION,ARE THE RECREATION NEEDS OF THE SENIORS IN SPOKANE VALLEY ADEQUATELY
SE"VED?
Table C-30:Recreation Service Adequacy for Seniors
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=117)
Yes 40.8%
No 59.2%
Total 100.0%
Park and Recreation Plan C-24
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-30:
• Opinion on whether Seniors are adequately served is mixed.
QUESTION 29. HOW SHOULD SENIOR SERVICES IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BE OFFERED?
Table C-31
Provision of Senior Services
City of Spokane Valley
Response Percent
(N=115)
The City should manage the program at the Senior Center 35.8%
The City should finance the program but leave the management to a 36.4%
private group
The City should not be involved in a senior program 19.1%
Other(please list) 8.6%
Comments under the "other" category include: City should provide income for Sr. Services, but let them run it,
community center, City should support, but not take full responsibility for program, county should manage
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-31:
• Opinions are evenly split between the city and a private group managing the program.
QUESTION 30. IF YOU ATTEND THE SENIOR CENTER, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU P "TICIPATED IN THE FOLLOWING
ACTIVITIES IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS?
Table C-32
Participation in Activities at the Senior Center
City of Spokane Valley
Activity Total Respondents Average Participation
Dance lessons/Events 4 7.8
Cards and games 9 5.0
Pool table 5 13.0
Bingo 8 12.3
Exercise classes 4 16.8
Educational classes 5 5.0
Health services 8 7.9
Driving classes 3 5.0
Special events 9 14.7
Utilizes Base of 145 Senior Respondents
Park and Recreation Plan C-25
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-32:
• While approximately 169 survey respondents were age 50 and older, only 14 responded to this question.
QUESTION 31. IF YOU DO NOT USE THE SPOKANE VALLEY SENIOR CENTER, WHAT "E YOUR REASONS?
Table C-33
Reasons for Not Using Senior Center
City of Spokane Valley
Reason Percent
I do not consider myself a senior citizen 33.9%
Too busy with other activities 26.3%
Not familiar with programs offered 14.3%
Center is not conveniently located 8.4%
They don't offer activities I am interested in 4.0%
Use programs offered by the other service providers 2.8%
Don't have transportation 1.2%
Do not feel welcome 1.6%
Other(please list) 7.6%
Total 1 00.0%
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-33:
• While over the age of 50, a third of the respondents do not consider themselves a senior citizen.
• The other major reason for not using the Senior Center is "Too busy with other activities" (26.3%).
QUESTION 32. PLEASE NAME THREE NEW ACTIVITIES Ti rT MIGHT ATTRACT YOU TO THE SENIOR CENTER.
This was an open-ended question where respondents were asked to form their own list of facilities or
activities.
Park and Recreation Plan C-26
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Table C-34
Activities that Attract Users at the Senior Center
City of Spokane Valley
Number Response
(N=Varies)
5 Art or craft lessons
Day outing in or out of town;excursions;
5 outside activities
5 Exercise class
4 Dance&stretch
3 Music(training)
2 Hiking
2 Potlucks
2 Social events
2 Swimming;indoors
Activities
Aerobics
Bible study classes
Bingo
Bonsai program
Computer classes
Drawing
Education classes offered thru community
college
Friendlier place-don't feel welcome
Fun runs 50+
Games played sifting down
Health services
Horseshoes
Job fairs
Live music
Miscellaneous presentations
Newsletter
Performing arts
Photography club
Pinochle
Pottery class
Sewing
Sports,more active
Tennis,indoors
Things you can get involved in
Weekly social events
Park and Recreation Plan C-27
City of Spokane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
Current Recreation Participation
One element of measuring recreation demand is to identify current recreation participation patterns. To
help track this type of information, MIG began tracking participation levels in communities throughout the
western United States. An average level of participation for any one recreation activity is called the MIG
AVERAGE. This information gives us an idea of whether the level of that activity is above or below the
norm. However, keep in mind that many factors influence participation levels. These include:
• Population profile
• Lack or condition of facilities
• Climate
• Current recreation trends
• Fad or trend activities
• Cost of using facilities and programs
• Present economic conditions
• Level of recreation programs and services offered
Starting below are participation rates for a variety of recreation activities now occurring in Spokane Valley.
The per capita occasion for a 30-day period refers to the average amount of participation per person in
30 days, when the activity is in season. These activities are ranked so the most popular activities in the
City of Spokane Valley appear first. The survey questionnaire listed 40 activities.
Table C-35
Existing Recreation Participation Activities
Cit of S•okane Valle
Rank Activity Spokane NW
Valley AVERAGE
1 Computers(Personal) 12.69 6.69
2 Walking for Pleasure 7.52 5.39
3 Exercising/Aerobics 6.62 3.94
4 Gardening 5.70 3.75
5 Bicycling for pleasure 4.87 2.81
6 Swimming(lake or river) 4.57 3.74
7 Wildlife Watching 3.97 2.39
8 Playground(visit/play) 3.93 2.63
9 Camping 3.91 2.58
10 Sports Events(attend) 3.62 3.07
11 Boating(power) 3.48 2.13
12 Jogging/Running 3.29 2.43
13 Swimming(indoors) 3.20 2.07
14 Nature Walks 3.14 2.04
15 Swimming(outdoors) 2.98 2.55
16 Picnicking 2.92 1.96
17 Fishing(freshwater) 2.88 1.78
18 Photography 2.75 1.96
19 Concerts(Attend) 2.35 1.94
20 Musical Instruments(play) 2.35 1.80
Park and Recreation Plan C-28
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
Rank Activity Spokane NW
Valley AVERAGE
21 Bicycling(unpaved) 2.33 1.35
22 Golf(play) 2.24 1.55
23 Baseball 2.17 1.70
24 Hiking/Backpacking 2.16 2.10
25 Football 2.14 1.67
26 Basketball 2.07 1.96
27 Soccer 1.88 1.56
28 Softball 1.88 1.40
29 Cultural Arts(attend) 1.76 1.51
30 Crafts(Pottery,Ceramics) 1.70 1.29
31 Arts and crafts 1.66 1.56
32 Golf(driving range) 1.58 1.35
33 Museums/Galleries 1.49 1.53
34 Water skiing 1.38 1.38
35 Dancing(Social) 1.28 1.01
36 Hunting 1.28 1.62
37 Roller Skating/In-Line Skate 1.28 1.09
38 Drama(attend) 1.24 1.09
39 Tennis 1.20 1.11
40 Group day trips 1.00 0.88
41 Dirt Bike/ATV Riding 0.99 0.99
42 River Rafting 0.93 0.92
43 Horseback Riding 0.86 0.71
44 Volleyball(outdoor/sand) 0.86 0.91
45 Volleyball(indoor) 0.83 0.86
46 Horseshoes 0.75 0.58
47 Rock Climbing 0.64 0.79
48 Handball/Racquetball 0.53 0.44
49 Skateboarding 0.48 0.87
50 Drama(Participate) 0.30 .69
OBSERVATIONS OF TABLE C-35:
• Participation in Spokane Valley is higher (58%) than the MIG average. 33 of the activities listed had a higher
participation average than the MIG Average.
• With the exception of soccer, all of the competitive sports (e.g., baseball, basketball, softball and football) have
a higher average participation.
Preferred Recreation Activities
Respondents were also asked to rank their top 10 preferred recreation activities, if facilities were available.
The activity rankings were then scored with a weighted value, by giving a first choice a value of ten, a
second choice a value of nine, etc. The total weighted score was then added up for each activity. The 20
Park and Recreation Plan C-29
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
highest-ranking activities are shown below in Table C-36. The weighted score is shown only for ranking
purposes.
The last column lists the current participation ranking from Table 4-38. While not directly comparable to
the ranking of preferred activities, it does help to give an idea of activities showing strong differences
between desired participation and current participation. This difference between what people are
currently doing and what they would like to be doing is called latent demand. The activities with the
highest latent demand are screened.
Table C-36
Top 20 Preferred Recreation Activities All Age Groups
Cit of S•okane Valle
Weighted Participation
Ranking Activity Score Ranking
1. Arts(Painting/Sketching) 106 28.
2. Camping 57 8.
3. Crafts (Pottery/Ceramics) 53 30.
4. Dancing(social) 53 35.
5. Concerts(attend) 48 22.
6. Computers(Personal) 42 1.
7. Photography 36 16.t
8. Drama (attending) = 291.11 40.
9. Exercising/Aerobics 26 3.
10. Gardening 24 4.
1 1. Walking for pleasure 23 2.
12. Basketball 22 23.
13. Drama(parhicipate) 21 --
14. Swimming, Indoor 21 15.
15. Museums/Galleries 19 32.
16. Swimming,Outdoor 16 16.
17. Swimming,Lake or River 16 5.
18. Tennis 16 38.
19. Bicycling for Pleasure 15 6.
20. Cultural events(attend.) 15 29.
Screened activities are those with a latent demand (difference of 1 to 9)
Screened activities are those with a latent demand (difference of 10 or more)
PART B. PUBLIC VISIONING WORKSHOP
On November 4th, 2004, the City of Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department held a Public
Visioning meeting. Approximately 33 residents actively participated in the meeting, which was held from
7:00 pm to 9:00 pm at the Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene.
The objectives of the meeting were to:
Park and Recreation Plan C-30
City of Spthane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
• Begin to develop a framework for the City's Parks and Recreation and Plan, using feedback from community
members.
• Gather resident opinions on the current state of Spokane Valley's Parks and Recreation,where
improvements are needed, and what services and programs should be emphasized or prioritized.
After a brief introduction and discussion, residents were broken up into separate groups for small group
discussions. Each group had a facilitator and a recorder comprised of Park and Recreation
Commissioners and the consultant team.
The purpose of the discussions was to gather information and feedback from the community on a series of
questions that will help formalize recommendations for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Each group
had approximately 70 minutes to discuss seven key questions. After the discussion, the facilitator of each
group reported back to the attendees the general comments for each question to the large group.
Following is a detailed account of the responses given by all groups to the discussion questions.
Workshop Results
QUESTION 1. What vision do you see for park and recreation services in the City?
Following is a complete list of ideas generated by residents.
Table C-37
Vision for Park and Recreation Services
City of Spokane Valley
Comments
Balance of large and smaller parks
Dispersed network of parks and trails
Equitable distribution of facilities city-wide
Focus on developing neighborhood facilities,parhicularly in new areas
Integrate with other public facilities
Maintain and fully utilize existing facilities
Provide a balanced program
Treat other interest as well as golf is treated...l st class
Park and Recreation Plan C-31
City of Spoksane Valley Paris and Recreation Plan
QUESTION 2: What park and recreation facilities are most needed in the Spokane Valley area?
Table C-38
Most Needed Park and Recreation Facilities
City of Spokane Valley
Comments
Aquatic facilities(50 meter pool,etc.)
Community center
Commuter and bicycle trails,particularly existing recreational facilities
Dirt bike tracks
Equine facilities
Formal gardens
Indoor equestrian facilities
Indoor sports facilities
Purchase(land bank) properties for future parks
Reserve old RR ROW for trails
River access
Satellite senior centers
Skate park(e.g.,south side)
Sports fields(e.g.,football,baseball,softball,soccer,etc.)
Swimming pools in close proximity to residential areas(e.g.,Green Acres)
Trail development
QUESTION 3. What improvements are most needed in the existing parks?
Table C-39
Needed Park Improvements
City of Spokane Valley
Comments
Cleaner restrooms
Develop"adopt a park"program
Improve Mission Park horse arena
Maintain and groom horse arena
More horse trails
More playground areas and sports equipment
More restrooms
More trees
Park security(e.g.,lighting,etc.)
Parking
Use volunteers for assistance
QUESTION 4. Where should the City emphasize its park and recreation services?
Park and Recreation Plan C-32
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Table C-40
Emphasize Park Services
City of Spokane Valley
Comments
Acquisition of land for future
Develop sports and recreation programs
Emphasize developer fees
Maintenance
Recreation center and programs
Trail development
Upgrade and/or renovation
QUESTION 5. How should local parks be developed in the City of Spokane Valley?
Table C-41
Approach to Local Park Development
City of Spokane Valley
Comments
Acquire 5-10 acres parks'/z to 1 mile apart
Develop existing park property and pursue other available lands
Develop neighborhood parks with some natural areas
Joint use in coordination with school districts
Purchase land while it is still available
Park and Recreation Plan C-33
City of Spoksane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
QUESTION 6. Should the City actively pursue the acquisition of land along the Spokane River?
Table C-42
Acquisition of the Land Along Spokane River
City of Spokane Valley
Comments
Acquire land and develop trailheads
City should pursue
Investigate land availability
Need more trailheads
Not at this time
Other priorities currently
River should be a center piece of the City's park system
QUESTION 7. What should the City's role be in recreation and sport programs?
Table C-43
City Role in Recreation and Sports Programs
City of Spokane Valley
Continue to solicit input from the local residents
Coordinate and support existing service providers
Coordinate with other program providers
Disperse information only
Offer wide range of recreation and sporhs programs
Strong recreation and sporhs program (wide offering of programs and
services)
Utilize existing program providers
Parks and Recreation Priorities
In order to assess which Parks and Recreation services Spokane Valley residents would like to see
prioritized, residents at the meeting were asked to examine a list of facilities on a large chart and place a
dot next to the recreation area or facility they felt the City should develop. Residents were given four dots
and instructed to place their dots on one facility or a combination of facilities.
The tally from residents' votes, as well as their comments are listed on the next page.
Park and Recreation Plan C-34
City of Spokane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Table C-44
Types of Facilities Desired
City of Spokane Valley
MIFF Park&Recreation Facilities Number of dots Specific Comments
Mission Arena 30 Improvements to Mission Arena
Additional local parks (neighborhood parks) 19 Green acres area
General Recreation Programs 17
Indoor aquatic center(leisure pool,water play area,etc.) 14
City-wide trail system 13 North south connectors
Another outdoor swimming pool 12
Open Space 12
Other(please specify) 8
Sport field complex(baseball,softball and soccer) 7
PART C. FOCUS GROUP MEETINGS
Introduction
Several focus group meetings were held to obtain additional input for special interest groups. Specific groups
included youth sports, adult sports, cultural arts, SCOPE,trails/open space, seniors, Green Acres Neighborhood,
Ponderosa Neighborhood and planning representatives (Planning Department and Planning Commission).
Comments received include the following:
1. VISION FOR SERVICES:
• Sports oriented (youth, adult, etc.)
• Shift of responsibilities from School District to Parks Departments to provide sport programs and
facilities.
• Lack of programs for families and the 5-12 age group
• Wide range of cultural art offerings
2. ROLE: Alm
• City to provide facilities and parks
• Provide a range of facilities to accommodate practice, league and tournaments
• Coordination programs and services (sports council)
• Raise awareness for parks and recreation
• Meet community needs for programs and services
• Be receptive to good ideas!
• City support cultural arts programs
• Coordination with school districts
Park and Recreation Plan C-35
City of Spthane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
3. ISSUES:
• Priority of park and recreation services relative to other services
• Awareness for park and recreation services
• Build community support/marketing and advertisement
• Economic benefits of park and recreation
• Consider charging impact fees
• Develop partnerships
• Lack of funding for park and recreation services
• Transportation to/from facilities and/or program locations
• Space for cultural arts programs and storage of materials
• Lack of public support
• City support of senior center (advertising, promotion, etc)
• City's endorsement of neighborhood plans
• Land acquisition
• Land dedication requirements subdivision and multi-family developments
• Impact fees
• Urban forestry
4. NEEDS: '
• Local parks
• Sport fields/athletic facilities
• Indoor facilities
• Open space (general purpose)
• Summer programs
• Daycare
• "Entry"feeder programs for various sports
• Space for programs (e.g., Centerplace opportunities)
• Picnic area close to senior center
• Trail connections
• Senior programs
• Picnic pavilion
• Community center in Edgecliff area
• Bridal trails
• Bike lanes
• Dog or"bark" park
• 50-meter pool
• Formal gardens (rose, botanical, etc.)
• Garden plots
• Signage program
PART D. CITYWIDE TELEPHONE SURVEY
Introduction
A City-wide telephone survey was conducted in the Spring of 2004. All totaled, 409 responses were received 3,775
attempts. While this survey addressed many City services, a few dealt with the delivery of park and recreation
services.
Park and Recreation Plan C-36
City of Spoksane Valley Paris and Recreation Plan
1. PRIORITY LEVEL: BUILDING MORE PARKS:
Response Percent
(N=400)
Low 44%
Medium 42%
High 14%
Total
OBSERVATIONS:
• Only 14%of the respondents indicated building more parks was a high priority.
2. QUALITY OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES Iii SPOKANE VALLEY:
Response Percent
(N=371)
Excellent 6%
Very Good 21%
Good 44%
Fair 24%
Poor 5%
Tot.I
• 71%of the respondents indicated the parks were good to excellent quality..
• Only 5%of the respondent indicated the parks had poor quality
3. RECREATION FACILITIES IN OR CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD:
Response Percent
(N=384)
Yes 59%
No 41%
111"
Park and Recreation Plan C-37
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
OBSERVATIONS:
• Only 59%of the respondents indicated there were parks in close proximity to their neighborhood.
4. PRIORITY LEVEL: BUILDING MORE RECREATIO FACILITIES:
Response Percent
(N=396)
Low 44%
Medium 43%
High 12%
Total 100.0%
OBSERVATIONS:
• Only 12%of the respondents indicated building more parks was a high priority.
PART E. ORGANIZED SPORT QUESTIONNAIRES
Introduction
During the Fall of 2004, organized sport questionnaires were sent to all organized sport groups providing
services within the Spokane Valley area.
Listed below is a summary of their comments.
Baseball: Inland Men's Baseball has 20 teams and plays at high schools and college fields throughout the
Spokane area. Currently, only one field in Spokane Valley is used to facilitate this program. They have
indicated there is a need for a new regulation field not affiliated with the high school programs or American
Legion. No comments have been received from Spokane Valley Youth Baseball.
Softball: Spokane County offers the adult softball program. Currently, there area 296 adult (men's, women's
and coed) softball teams originating from all over Spokane County. Currently, the league utilizes four fields in
Spokane Valley. The county has indicated there are an adequate number of fields for this league and the fields
are in good condition. No comments have been received from the Spokane's Girls Softball organizations.
Soccer: No comments have been received for any adult league in the Spokane Valley area. The Spokane
Valley Junior Soccer association has 188 boys and girls teams. 90%of these teams originate from with in the
valley area. The league utilizes 16 fields in the Central Valley School District, 5 fields in the West Valley School
District and 5 fields within the East Valley School District. The league has indicated there are an adequate
number of fields.
Football: No comments have been received for any football teams.
Park and Recreation Plan C-38
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
Basketball: Spokane County offers the adult basketball program. Currently, there are 112 men's teams
originating from all over Spokane County. Currently, the league utilizes gyms in Spokane Valley. The county
has indicated there are an adequate number of courts for this league. No comments have been received from
organizations providing youth basketball.
Volleyball: Similar to basketball, Spokane County offers the adult coed volleyball program. Currently, there
area 160 teams originating from all over Spokane County. Currently, the league utilizes gyms in Spokane
Valley. No comments have been received from organizations providing youth volleyball.
In general, it appears existing fields are sufficient to meet the demand for field space within the City.
Park and Recreation Plan C-39
City of Spokane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
APPENDIX D:
DESIGN GUILDELINES
Contents: 4 '
Design Guidelines for parks,open space 4
and trails k
-i-- .,..,-,,,,,„ ......4,,. ,,
ll ii � 4.. ... , c - `�� ��
i � � .
t ��
L1 i91 ,i�1 � �i _ _ �-� _ lit
,, i rte. ,,
The following design guidelines apply to the acquisition and/or development of parks within each park
classification. Each park classification includes a description of the park type, site selection and
development guidelines, features to consider, and features to avoid. Mini parks, while not part of the
City's existing park classification system, are included to provide options in the event that
recommendations for neighborhood parks cannot be met.
Mini Parks
Description:
• Mini parks are small one-lot parcels that provide a limited amount of open space and
recreation opportunity. Because of their cost to maintain, they are usually discouraged unless
developed and maintained by a private organization.
In Spokane Valley, where most of the community is developed, providing parks in some areas
will be difficult. While it is recommended that neighborhood parks be combined with a school
playground, in some instances this will not be possible. Because of the high cost of acquiring
developed land for a typical neighborhood park of three acres or more, the choices are to
either not develop a park or build a small park on the scale of a mini-park.
Park and Recreation Plan D-1
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
Development Recommendations
• Where adequate land is not available, and development on a school playground is not an
option, the City may consider the development of a mini-park.
• Mini-parks are appropriate in private developments where homeowner associations or others
are responsible for their maintenance.
User Characteristics
• The typical mini park user:
o Usually consists of small children and a mother.
o Comes from within a quarter mile to half mile of the park.
o Arrives on foot or by bicycle.
o Visits the park on a short time basis.
Site Selection and Development Guidelines:
• Typical size is 1 to 2 acres.
• Access to the site should be provided via a local street with sidewalks. Mini parks fronting on
arterial streets should be discouraged.
• The site should have a minimum of 100-150 feet of street frontage.
• Parking Requirements: On-street parking should be provided as street frontage allows.
Features and Amenities to Consider:
• Open turf area for unstructured play
• General landscape improvements (including tree planting)
• Children's playground or tot-lot
• Pathway connecting park elements
• Picnic tables
Features to Avoid:
• Permanent restrooms
• Horticultural or annual plantings, unless sponsored and maintained by a neighborhood or
community group
• Indoor recreation facilities
• Basketball courts or other activities that create noise
• Wading pools and similar types of amenities that require staff supervision or highly specialized
maintenance
Park and Recreation Plan D-2
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
Neighborhood Parks
Description:
• Neighborhood parks provide nearby residents with
access to basic recreation opportunities. These parks
should be designed to enhance neighborhood identity, •
preserve or provide neighborhood open space, and
improve the quality of life of nearby residents. They are
designed for passive and unstructured activities. °-
Development Recommendatons:
• Neighborhood parks should be located within easy walking distance of most residents (usually
a half mile) without crossing major streets or other barriers.
• Where neighborhood parks are needed and land is not available, the City should partner with
the school district to develop recreation areas on school playgrounds.
User Characteristics
• The typical neighborhood park user:
o Comes from within one-half mile of the park.
o Arrives on foot or by bicycle.
o Visits the park on a short time basis.
Site Selection and Development Guidelines:
• Optimum size is 3 to 7 acres, but can vary depending upon the availability of land.
• At least 50% of site should be relatively level and usable, providing space for both active and
passive uses.
• The site should have at least 200 feet of street frontage.
• Access to the site should be provided via a local street with sidewalks. Neighborhood parks
fronting on arterial streets should be discouraged.
• Parking Requirements: A minimum of three spaces per acre of usable active park area.
Generally, if on-street parking is available in front of the park, this guideline can be reduced
by one car per 25 feet of street frontage.
• Active and noise producing facilities, such as tennis and basketball courts, should be located
at least 100 feet from nearby homes or property zoned for a residential use.
Features and Amenities to Consider:
• Open turf area for unstructured play
• General landscape improvements (including tree planting)
• Children's playground
• Basketball (full or half) court
• Pathway connecting park elements
• Picnic tables
• Small picnic shelter
Park and Recreation Plan D-3
City of Spthane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
• Volleyball court
• Multi-use fields for practice
• Interpretive signage
• Natural area/greenspace
• Restrooms (only for the larger parks or parks that contain community-wide facilities)
Features to Avoid:
• Horticultural or annual plantings, unless sponsored and maintained by a neighborhood or
community group
• Indoor recreation facilities
• Wading pools and similar types of amenities that require staff supervision or highly specialized
maintenance
• Sports fields for league play
Community Parks
Description:
• Community parks provide visitors with active and passive
recreation opportunities. These parks often accommodate
large group activities and include major recreation facilities,
such as sports fields. Community parks should be designed to
enhance neighborhood and community identity, preserve open
space, and enhance the quality of life of community residents.
Development Recommendatons:
• Community parks will be the most difficult to acquire in
Spokane Valley because of their size requirements. As a result,
few community parks are recommended and only in the more undeveloped portions of the
community.
User Characteristics
• The typical community park user:
o Come from within one to two miles of the park.
o Arrive by auto, bus, bicycle or foot.
o Visit the park for 1 to 3 hours.
Site Selection and Development Guidelines:
• Minimum site size should be 15 acres with the optimum at 20-30 acres.
• Whenever possible community parks should be located adjacent to middle or high schools.
• At least two-thirds of the site should be available for active recreation use. Adequate buffers
or natural open space areas should separate active recreation areas from nearby homes.
• The site should be visible from adjoining streets and have a minimum of 400 feet of street
frontage.
• Parking Requirements: Dependent upon facilities provided. Generally, 50 off-street spaces
per ball field are required, plus 5 spaces per acre of active use areas.
Park and Recreation Plan D-4
City of Spohane Valley Park/and Recreation Plan
• Access to the site should be provided via a collector or arterial street with sidewalks and
bicycle lanes.
Facilities and Amenities to Consider:
• Tot and youth playground
• Designated sports fields for baseball, softball, and soccer. Fields may be in a complex within
the park
• Open turf area for unstructured play
• General landscape improvements
• Looped pathway system
• Picnic shelters, including one for small groups (25-50 people) and a large group picnic site
capable of accommodating groups of 250 to 300 people
• Permanent restrooms
• Volleyball courts
• Tennis courts
• Basketball courts
• Horseshoe pits
• Other sporting facilities (lawn bowling, croquet, bocce court)
• Field lighting
• Community scale skate park
• Water playground
• Off-leash dog area or designated dog park
• Community gardens
• Concessions or vendor space
• Interpretive signage
• Natural area/greenspace
• Indoor recreation center or other indoor recreation space
Special Use Areas
Description:
• Special use areas are unique sites often occupied by a
specialized facility. Some uses that fall into this category �.
include riverfront parks, boat ramps, botanical gardens, 't
memorials, community gardens, single purpose sites used
for a particular field sport, or sites occupied by buildings.
Development Recommendatons: _ — --
• Requirements for special use parks vary considerably because
each have a unique set of conditions and facilities. Because of
their unique character, an impact analysis should be made for
each park prior to its development.
User Characteristics
• The typical special use park user:
o May come from throughout the city or beyond (depends on site).
o Arrives by auto, bus, bicycle or foot.
Park and Recreation Plan D-5
City of Spthane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
o Depend on site: May visit the park for one hour to more than three hours.
Site Selection and Development Guidelines:
• Site criteria depend on the types of facilities proposed.
• Size will depend upon the facilities provided.
• Site should front on a public street.
• Parking Requirements: Depends on facilities provided.
Facilities and Amenities to Consider:
• Facilities and amenities will depend on the proposed activities and site use.
Natural Open Space
Description:
• Natural open space is publicly owned or controlled natural `-
resources that are managed for conservation,
environmental education, and passive recreational use,
such as walking and nature viewing. This type of land may
include wetlands, steep hillsides, or other similar spaces. I ;t °
Environmentally sensitive areas are considered open space as
and can include wildlife habitats, stream and creek
corridors, or areas with unique and/or endangered plant
species.
Development Recommendatons:
• Natural open space opportunities are limited in Spokane Valley. There are a number of
wetlands and environmentally sensitive lands that have been identified. When available, the
City should assume management of these areas if they are considered significant and of
suitable size. Acquisition of open space should not be considered for individual lots or small
areas where the primary objective is to prevent urban development.
User Characteristics
• The typical user of natural open space areas:
o Comes from throughout the city.
o Arrives by auto, bus, bicycle or foot.
o Enjoys the area for its vistas and open space characteristics.
o Visits the site to observe the wildlife and flora.
o Uses a trail within the open space corridor.
o Visits the area for an extended time.
Site Selection and Development Guidelines:
• Site size should be based on natural resource needs. Acreage should be sufficient to preserve
or protect the resource. No site designated as public open space to be managed by the City
should be less than five acres.
Park and Recreation Plan D-6
City of Spthane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
• The City should consider alternative ways of preserving natural open space besides outright
purchase, such as acquiring conservation easements, encouraging donations of land, land
trades, etc.
• Emphasis for acquisition should be on lands offering unique features that have the potential to
be lost to development.
• Areas difficult or impossible to develop should have a lower priority for acquisition.
• An analysis should be made to determine if unique qualities and conditions exist to warrant
acquisition.
• Development and site improvements should be kept to a minimum, with the natural
environment, interpretive and educational features emphasized.
• Natural open space areas should be managed and maintained for a sense of solitude,
separation, or environmental protection.
• Parking and site use should be limited to the numbers and types of visitors the area can
accommodate while still retaining its natural character and the intended level of solitude.
• Where feasible, public access and use of these areas should be encouraged, but
environmentally sensitive areas should be protected from overuse.
Facilities and Amenities to Consider:
• Interpretive signage
• Off-street parking if a trail is located within the site
• Small picnic shelter
• Limited picnic areas
• Trail and pathway system
• Trailhead or entry/ kiosk
• Viewpoints or viewing blinds
• Interpretive or educational facilities
Facilities and Amenities to Avoid:
• Turf areas
• Ornamental plantings
• Active use areas
Recreation Pathways and Trails
Description:
• Recreation pathways and trails, as described here, provide
off-street bicycle and pedestrian links to parks, with
recreation emphasized. These include paths within natural Y;
open space areas. Guidelines are not presented for on-
street bikeways or trails intended mainly for transportation. _...
Park and Recreation Plan D-7
City of Spthane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
Development Recommendatons:
• Development of a trails system in Spokane Valley will require the placement of trails within
street right-of-ways in order to complete major segments.
User Characteristics
• The typical user of trails:
o Are local residents.
o Use the trail as a means of transportation from one part of the community to the
other.
o Enjoy the outdoors, wildlife and views.
o Enjoy walking and its health benefits.
o Desire the peaceful setting and solitude that open space can offer.
Site Selection:
• The primary purpose of recreation pathways and trails is to provide a recreation experience.
However, pathways many also provide important transportation links for bicyclists.
• Trails should be developed to provide linkages to parks, schools, and other destination points.
• Whenever possible, recreation pathways and trails should be located outside street rights-of-
ways.
• Paths that are within street rights-of-way but separated should be designed, when possible,
along continuous features, so that they do not pose hazards when crossing driveways and
intersections.
• Pathways and trails may need to utilize street rights-of-way in order to complete a segment
link.
• Since trails are so difficult to provide after an area has been developed, advanced detailed
trail planning for developing areas is essential.
Facilities and Amenities to Consider:
• Staging areas for trail access
• Picnic sites
• Seating areas
• Trailhead or entry/ kiosk
• Interpretive signage
• Orientation and information signage
• Amenities should be site specific
Additional Trail Guidelines:
• Trail alignments should take into account soil conditions, steep slopes, surface drainage and
other physical limitations that could increase construction and/or maintenance costs.
• Trail alignments should avoid sensitive environmental areas such as wetlands, riparian
vegetation, large trees, etc.
• Trails should be planned, sized, and designed for non-motorized multiple uses, except for
dedicated nature trails, and/or areas that cannot be developed to the standard necessary to
minimize potential user conflicts.
Park and Recreation Plan D-8
City of Spokxane Valley Parka and Recreation Plan
• Centralized and effective staging areas should be provided for trail access. Trailheads should
include parking, orientation and information, and any necessary specialized unloading
features.
• Trails should be looped and interconnected to provide a variety of trail lengths and
destinations. They should link various parts of the community, as well as existing park sites.
• Trails should be located and designed to provide a diversity of challenges. Enhance
accessibility wherever possible.
• Linkages and trail location and orientation should encourage users to walk or bicycle to the
trail, depending upon the expected and desired level of use.
• If possible, recreation pathways should be separated from the street right-of-way. Where
routes use street rights-of-way, the street should be designed to minimize potential conflicts
between motorists and pedestrians and bicyclists. If possible, trail crossings by streets should
occur at signalized intersections.
• Developers should be encouraged to provide public pathways through their development to
connect to the main trail system.
Park and Recreation Plan D-9
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
For Planning Discussion Purposes Only
as of November 14,2013; 11:30 a.m.
Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative
To: Council & Staff
From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager
Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings
Nov 26 2013,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Nov 18]
Oath of Office to Councilmember Position #1 (completing term vacated by B.Grassel) (5 minutes)
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
2. Second Reading Ordinance 13-017 Street Vacation(STV 2013-0001 Alki)-Marty Palaniuk (10 minutes)
3. Second Reading Ordinance 13-018 Unlawful Public Exposure—Cary Driskell (10 minutes)
4.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 13-019 Amending Towing Regulations—Erik Lamb (10 minutes)
5.Motion Consideration: Approval of Legislative Agenda—Mike Jackson (15 minutes)
6. Information Only: Dept Reports; Street& Stormwater Maint Cont; Sweeping Contract;
Planning Commission Minutes Oct 10 and 30 [*estimated meeting: 55 minutes]
Dec 3,2013, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Nov 25)
1. Historic Preservation& Special Evaluations—Mike Basinger (25 minutes)
2. Contract Updates: Sweeping Contract; Street& Stormwater Maintenance Contract—Eric Guth (20 minutes)
3. Pavement Management Plan Update—Eric Guth (30 minutes)
4.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 80 minutes]
Dec 10,2013,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 2]
Dec Community Recognition, Presentation of Key and Certificate—Mayor Towey (5 minutes)
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 13-019 Amending Towing Regulations—Erik Lamb (10 minutes)
3. Proposed Resolution 13-012 Amending Fee Resolution for 2014—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes)
4. Proposed Resolution 13-013 Adopting Amended Parks and Rec Master Plan—Mike Stone (10 minutes)
5.Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Allocations for 2014—Mark Calhoun (25 minutes)
6.Motion Consideration: Pavement Management Plan Update—Eric Guth (10 minutes)
7.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 80 minutes]
Dec 17,2013, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 9]
ACTION ITEMS:
1.Motion Consideration: Sweeping Contract—Eric Guth (10 minutes)
2.Motion Consideration: Street Maintenance Contract—Eric Guth (10 minutes)
3.Mayoral Appointments to Planning Commission(2 positions set to expire 12-31-2013) (5 minutes)
4.Mayoral Appointments to LTAC (2 positions set to expire 12-31-2013) (5 minutes)
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
5.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 35 minutes]
Dec 24,2013 no meetin2—Christmas Eve
Dec 31,2013 no meetin2—New Year's Eve
Draft Advance Agenda 11/15/2013 9:47:27 AM Page 1 of 2
Jan 7,2014,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 30]
1. Council Officer Elections (select Mayor and Deputy Mayor)—Chris Bainbridge (10 minutes)
Jan 14,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 6]
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
Jan 21,2014, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 13]]
January 28,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Jan 21]
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
2. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
Feb 4,2014,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 27]
Feb 11,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Feb 3]
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
Feb 18,2014,Winter Workshop Special Meeting: 8:30 a.m.—4:30 p.m. [due Mon,Feb 10]
Meeting will be held in Council Chambers. Tentative agenda items include: council goals/work plan; business
plan; solid waste; economic development, city hall
February 18,2014,No Evening Meeting
OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
Appointments,Mayoral committee appt's for 2014
ADA Transition Plan
Avista Electrical Franchise
Coal Train EIS
Future Acquisition Areas
Oath of Office to Councilmembers (Positions 1, 4, 5, 7)
Public Safety Contract,Proposed Amendment
Townhouses in Garden Office
*time for public or Council comments not included
Draft Advance Agenda 11/15/2013 9:47:27 AM Page 2 of 2