The URL can be used to link to this page

2007, 05-15 Study SessionAGENDA CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET STUDY SESSION Tuesday, NIuy 15, 2007 6:00 pan. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHA'.%fBERS 11707 East Spmgue Avenue, First Floor (Please Turn OR All Electronic Devices Duriug the Alecting) DISCUSSION lXkDER SUB,II VACTIVITY GOAL Employee Intrixiuctions: Sue P=mvrr, : tc!»rinistr7titi a .~.c.slstrmt, by City 1lmuger Dm- Nfercier 1. Mike Connelly (15 minutes) Steve Worley (!0 minutes) 3. Neil Kersten (30 minutes) 4. Mary Kate Manin (30 minutes) 5. Marina Sukup (45 minutes) b. Mayor Wilhite Americans Rich Disabilities Act (ADA) DiscussioNlnfotmation Sidewalk Requirements Appleway Avenue Project Update Wastewater Finsutcial Planning Policy Is;ttzs Uniform Development Code Title 24 Uniform Development Code Titles 19 sod 22 Advance Agen.in Additions 7. Infornwtion Only: ON11 not be discussed or presented) .417deway Ixte-mian, Afetropr hian Trmrsit Phvi (.lfTl') - Stern Worley 8. Mayor Wilhite Council Check in 9. Davc.4icrcier City Manager Commeno EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending Litigation; Land Acquisition ADJOURN DiscussiotOnforniation Discuss ion/] n formation Presentation Progmss and Issues Update Discussion/lnformation Discumion1informatl011 DiscussionInformation Nale: Unless otherwise noted above, there "ill be no public comments aI Council Study Sessions. tlowever, Council always reserves the right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. During meeting,-, 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 deIiberaW, discuss, review. consider, evaluate, or make a collective positive or negative decision. NOTir-7 Inditithais planning to .Rend the m--ins who mqulre rpcciai assistance to accommodstr physiW. beanie. or other impairmwft, pkwc contact tiro City Oat 31 (S(R) 92t-1000 a soon m prmible so that arrangements esay b: murk itus) Session Agctut>, N1iy 15, W fate t of I CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 15, 2007 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: ADA requirements for City sidewalks GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Americans with Disability Act of 1990, 38 CFR Part 35; RCW 49.60.215; WAC 162-26-070 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: NA BACKGROUND: The City Attorney's Office previously provided a report to Council on - 1 February 20, 2007 concerning policy issues associated with sidewalks. At that time i issues of ADA compliance were raised. The following administrative report addresses those ADA issues. OPTIONS: Schedule for further discussion if necessary. c RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Total compliance with the provisions of the act could involved substantial costs. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Connelly ATTACHMENTS Memorandum re: ADA guidelines OFFICIO OF THE CITY ATTORI EY crrv ox N11CHAEL CONNELLY, CITY ATTORNEY ~nnlz~np► CARY P. DRiSKCLL. DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY ~Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ci tyha It@s poky neva l l ey. org Memorandum To: Mayor Diana Wilhite; Members of the City Council From: Mike Connelly, City Attorney CC: Dave Mercier, City Manager; Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager; Ken Thompson; Finance Director Date: May 8, 2007 ]7e: ADA compliance issue for public facilities, including streets, sidewalks and curb ramps. Issue: What A-DA guidelines exist for public facilities, streets, sidewalks and curb cuts? Thief Answer: (1)The City is required to conduct a "self-evaluation" in order to measure the accessibility of its existing services, programs, or activities. This is a requirement that the County was charged with in 1991. We are attempting to obtain from Spokane County what "self-evaluation" materials that exist. To date we have not been provided with any of these materials. In addition to the self evaluation, the City is required to develop a transition plan to make improvements to existing facilities, including streets, sidewalks, and curb ramps, so that they are readily accessible to persons with disabilities, when viewed in their entirety. The City must also establish a "responsible employee" which has been done and create a "grievance procedure." This task is underway. (2) For all new construction or alterations of sidewalks, streets, or curb ramps, the, 'City must design and build these facilities ADA accessible to the maximum extent possible, and no excuse of undue burden is al lowed. Discussion: Applicability of Americans with Disability Act of 1990 (ADA) to the City: The City must meet the following standards set forth in 28 CF1k fart 351. Subtitle A of Title fi of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities and is implemented by Title 28, Cart 35 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). A "public entity" includes any-local government-or-department, agency-or other-iastrunientaIity-of a R.5-cal- Additionally, the City is prohibited from committing any "unfair practice" in a "place of public accommodation." RCW 49.60.215. However, this section does not apply when preventing "unfair practice" requu es structural changes. RC W 49.60.215 and rVAC 162-26-070. government. 28 CFR 35.104. These regulations apply regardless of whether the public entity receives federal funds. A. The ADA regulations require the City to conduct a self evaluation of existing services, programs, and activities, as well as, provides proper notice and grievance procedures. (1) Self-Evaluation. Within one year of adoption of these regulations, a public entity must conduct a self evaluation. 28 CFR 35.105((J) 2. The regulations became effective on July 26, 1991. See 28 CFR 35.105. The self-evaluation is an analysis and inventory of all current programs, services, and activities that do not meet the requirements under these regulations. 28 CFR 35.105(x). This inventory includes both structural and non-structural changes. S'chonfeld v. City of Carlsbad 987 F. Supp. 1329, 1335 (S.D. Cal 1997). As part of the self evaluation the government entity shall provide persons with disabilities and organization that represent persons with disabilities the opportunity to submit comments during self-evaluation process; make available for public inspection: (a) a list of interested persons consulted; (b) a description of areas examined and problems identified; (c) a description of any modifications made. 28 CFR 35.105(b), (c). (2) Grievance Procedures. As part of "self evaluation" a public entity with 50 or more employees rnust establish a "responsible employee" and "grievance procedures" for any violations under 28 CFR 35. 28 CFR 35.107. (3) Notice. A public entity is required to make available to interested persons information regarding the applicability of 28. CFR Part 35 to the public entity's services, programs, and activities. 28 CFR 35.106. 13. The ADA regulations require that existing facilities of the City be readily accessible to persons with disability, when viewed in their entirety. _ (1) Generally. existing facilities. A public entity need not make every existing public facility accessible. 28 CFR 35.150(0) (1). In order for services, programs, and activities to be made accessible, the regulations require that existing facilities of a pubic entity be made so that "the service program, or activity when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities." 28 CFR 35.150(x). Services, programs, and activities include anything that is "a nonnal function of a governmental entity," which applies to streets, sidewalks, and curbs. Barden v. City of Sacromento, 292 F.3d 1073, 1075-6 (9a' Cir. App 2002); Schonfeld at 1337. The public entity has many methods available to them for improving accessibility to services which are nonstructural or structural. 28 CFR 35.150(b) (1). A public entity may refrain from making improvements when it would result in a fundamental change to the nature of the service, program, or activity, or if it would cause undue financial and administrative burdens to the entity. 28 CFR 35.150(x) (3). If the City decides that structural changes are necessary to make streets more accessible under this section, then the City may select to build curb ramps at certain existing sidewalks. Alternatively, to make an existing sidewalk more accessible, the City may decide to make structural changes and if so then curb ramps are required. However, construction of a new sidewalk or construction that results in an "alteration" (see below); is subject to the requirements for new construction. See 28 CFR 35.151. (2) If the City detennines structural changes are necessary for accessibility, then the City must develop a transition plan. In addition to a self-evaluation, when a public entity chooses to make structural change to its existing facilities in order to comply with this section, then the public entity must create a transition plan'. 28 CFR 35.150(4). The transition plan must be implemented as "expeditiously as possible." 28 CFR 35.150(c).The transition plan sets out what current obstacles limit accessibility to the 2 if the public entity has already met requirements of Rehabilitation Act of 1973, then the requirements under this section shall only apply to those policies and practices not included in previous self evaluation. 28 CFR 35.105(d). 3 if the public entity has already met requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, then the requirements under this section shall only apply to those policies and practices not included in previous transition plan. 18 CFR 35.150(d) (4). 2 existing facility, how the facility will be made accessible, how long it will take, and who will be responsible for implementing the plan. 28 CFR 35.150(d) (3). Notably, the transition plan must also include a schedule for providing accessible curb ramps for streets or walkways that a public entity has authority over. 28 Cl~R 35.150(d) (2). Certain locations should be given a higher priority. Id. Any new construction or repairs that become an "alteration" are subject to the requirements set forth below. 28 CFR 35.151. C. The ADA requires that new construction or alteration of a facility must be constructed to be readily accessible to the maximum extent feasible. If the maintenance, repair or construction to an existing facility is so extensive that it "affects or could affect the usability of the facility or part of the facility," then it becomes an "alteration" and is subject to the requirements under section 151. Barden at 1075-6. Thus, for alterations to existing facilities or new construction, " [e]ach facility or part of a facility altered shall, to the maxirrnum extent feasible, be altered in such a manner that the altered portion of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities." 28 CFR 35.151(b). The standards for accessibility are set forth in Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) or in Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (A1DAt\G). 28 CFR 35.151(c). In addition, newly constructed or altered streets, sidewalks, or walkways must be installed with curb ramps at intersections. 28 C'FR 35.151(e). No requirement under this section is limited because of undue burden. S ol&ne Vallev~ OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY MICHAEL CONNELLY, CITY ATTORNEY C.ARY P. DRISKELL, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNF-Y 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.92 1. 1000 + Fax: 509.921.1008 cityhallespokanevalley. org Memorandum To: Mayor Diana Wilhite, Members of the City Council From: Mike Connelly, City Attorney CC: Dave Mercier, City Manager; Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: 2/20/07 Re: Sidewalks A number of questions have been raised as to the removal of snow and ice from sidewalks and maintenance of the same. The existing code requirements, legal guidelines and practical concerns are identified below. Your options are to make no change, impose additional requirements on the adjacent property owners and/or develop a program to remove snow and maintain sidewalks. Current Code Provisions: The provisions of SVMC 7.05.040(C) Sidewalks establish the following as nuisances: 1. Any protrusion, awning, or overhang that inbibits or obstructs use of a public walkway or sidewalk. 2." Any object, construction, or ddaiage that inhibits or obstructs the surface use ofa public walkway or sidewalk; 3. Show or ice not removed from a public sidewalk within a reasonable time.. 4. Accumulations of dirt or debris not removed from a.publrc sidewalk Our current enforcement practice is to respond to complaints and follow an enforcement process that begins with written notice and escalates to the imposition of fines and/or court action if necessary. This process does not leild itself to the immediate removal of snow from sidewalks by adjacent property owners. NVe have not used this code provision to require any improvements to existing sidewalks that are in disrepair. The City has repaired sidewalks that have severe cracks or failures and are found to be unsafe. We have had only a few of these over the last few years. Legal Guidelines: I. A City may require an adjacent property owner to remove snow or ice from a sidewalk adjacent to their property by ordinance. The ordinance can require performance within a reasonable time and impose pcnalties°if°the-sno`tiri no - removed-Specific areas where an ordinance would be effective could be identified as long as there is a reasonable basis for that identification, i.e. requiring the removal of snow in areas where high foot traffic is expected, commercial districts, school routes, etc. 2. The City cannot require the property owner to indemnify the City for any liability flowing from the owner's failure to comply with the ordinance. A property owner's culpability will be determined by the general rules of negligence. 3. The City has a general duty to keep its public ways in a reasonably safe condition for persons using them in a proper manner. Generally, the City will not be responsible for the natural accumulation of snow _ or ice on the sidewalks. 'T'here may be potential liability if the snow has accumulated to the point that a dangerous condition is created and the City has notice of the same. Liability could also exist where the dangerous condition is created by the City's own actions. 4. The same general rules apply to other dangerous conditions that may exist due to disrepair er damage to the sidewalks themselves. A municipality may require that sidewalks be repaired, fix sidewalks itself or create a fund from which property owners could borrow to repair sidewalks. Washington statutes, however, mandate that costs of repair imposed upon a property owner may not exceed 50% of the valuation of the land without improvements, and that no financial burden may be imposed upon a property owner if the damage or deterioration is, "the direct result of the failure of the City to enforce its ordinances." See RCW 35.69.020. 5. A comprehensive ordinance, enforcement program and City assistance plan that would be followed in a reasonable and consistent manner is always the best protection against liability. The first step would be to identify the areas and types of walkways that should be regulated. 6. ADA issues are not addressed in this memorandum but will be included in a future ADA presentation. Enforcement Considerations: Enforcement of the existing nuisance provisions has proved problematical for a number of reasons: • The normal enforcement procedures take too long to correct the problem. • A "reasonable" time for snow removal is vague. r • How do we reconcile the problem of clew- walks covered as a result of snow plowing? l • Should property owners be responsible for all sidewalks, even those to which they have no direct access? • Does "damage" of broken or heaving sidewalks require the property owners to repair or replace the sidewalk? • The City does not have staffing to eliminate the nuisance directly. Some possibilities include: • Updating the ordinance to establish a specific threshold and specific period of time for compliance for snow removal such as 24 hours following a snow event. • Limiting property owner responsibility to front and flanking streets, or along streets from which they take access or by designating specific areas as is discussed above; • Establishing a program wherein the City would remove snow from sidewalks in certain specified circumstances. • Updating the ordinance and clarifying the actions that property owners need to take to correct damaged sidewalks. • Establishing a fund that property owners could borrow from for sidewalk repair. • Establishing an expedited citation process. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 15, 2007 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ] old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Appleway Avenue Reconstruction Project- Project Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Informational Memorandum included in April 10, 2007 Council Packets (V4 touch). BACKGROUND: The Appleway Avenue Reconstruction Project is funded by Federal STP(U) funds, STA, and City local match. The overall project budget is approximately $6.1 million with a current construction contract estimate of approximately $4.3 million. Based on current expenditures and estimates the project will be completed under budget. Budget PE Phase R/W Phase CN Phase Totals Original S 193,000 $ 416,000 X2.588.000 $3,197,000 Current Funding Source Funding Amount $235,000 STP(U) $5,075,000 $226,050 City $ 717,000 55.634,825 STA $ 304.000 $6,095,875 $6,096,000 The plans and specifications are 95% complete: We were originally pursuing the purchase of right-of-way from five parcels. However, in an effort to not delay the project any more than it already is, we have decided to redesign the Appleway/Barker intersection to avoid the need for additional right-of-way from two parcels. Two of the remaining three right-of-way acquisitions have been completed. The remaining parcel owner has verbally accepted the City's offer putting us in a position to move forward with the project. Work to be completed and schedule are as follows: Certify right of way May 25 Advertise for bids June 22 Open bids July 13 Award bid July 24 Because we are getting a late start on the project the contractor will likely not be able to complete the project in 2007 and will require a winter shutdown. Construction will be completed in the spring of 2008. Staff will work out details of the winter shutdown with the contractor to minimize disruption to the traveling public through the winter. RCA Meeting Date: May 15, 2007 Appleway Avenue Reconstruction Project - project Update Page 2 There are two Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) required for the project. An MOU with Liberty Lake is required to complete approximately 400 feet of roadway on the east end of the % project within Liberty Lake. It is currently under review at the City of Liberty Lake. An MOU with Spokane County is required to complete the sanitary sewer improvements within the project limits. It is currently under review at the County. OPTIONS: Discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Based on current project estimates and expenditures there will be adequate budget within the project to cover expenditures. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Steve M. Worley, Senior Engineer- Capital Projects ATTACHMENTS 1) Sample Contract Plan, 2) Typical Roadway Section 3) Barker/Appleway Intersection Detail J I win STf'J.-38-2=2j ii a Ji -W Nall ran g a l ~Y' f 1=Q e S of , MACCANATO, e, 304CEWJMM -ic - - ~frwaea A=Mkla r V r j J _..a rl y N,!/« i A AM f r - n "l 1 r :t7 ! i J { B r r 111 ~ - ~ d : + I _ - _ 4 _ - _ .~i _ _ _ _ ~ tJ _ ~ ~ r ~ r n• _ ;I A, IhA a~,''; 54+M 50 6;2ae _ x•ro 51+ _ _ 1401 - - - u l .-r = 7 7 76- - d h1 1~ -YT- T a- n--» T' c-,s~► ws~~_,? -.may; ------t~-r~-- - - i= - q I a n m In asaaN 1u mna _Qu i t .55' Go' to - - -~T_ ~I ► , I oar ~ ~ ~ I .~1 ~ I ► , _ 'Orr MM cwtnct can ~ tiµrl• Gatiq t4.r w• (Ly onw) ~ Ma ev.+ ~ s.w w.ma Lou" TWA Mw ! ' r c•ruln+tt int0o fia+l reWh Cx" "w* br ahn) (S•• D•bt SIyU that. E.hny Twakwo Wc4h (s•. D" um ,_j yp l Irl AW fbm 1 Q Mat an hiu Tn. 1 ,,,p ry, lyarn to R,m•1t w. awri W~A•nw" ftw - - - - - - - -L-~ r Gnwt%cl sku - - TMlk 10-1 rwN m• I 8 ~1 ara;~ ;sr tf~j Euc.7y 4 q Idraq rv (a1 s.. Ewdai s;:% .Mrw.+ /pM 1{Ah . --==-s`a..~.~:.~_ - - ' f. ~ iz1 ecrE-.ad st.+aV kaa.rP. M,,,,r E~lr~ rn• 0 fSr srw0 QQQ ti (sr SlanVrJ YrhO A-7) /p y to ,u"Gw c. 111 d 4 4.11.0 -7R700A own*" Emhnq UK C4 ow fr1*) 7) V V y~__ 4 / J I~ TI ~ (3r Elsndstl iM1aB MJed. EialYq YoiBw la• 9`ul) 1 I I 1 I ~,tiw 1~'ruw atY Eu'rn E,4C1q Cut hruA cmr rM A tw.•w two pp / svna.. IMah r rp• e 7010 WCH KMT EUV . 7045 - s4 - LOW POW a.EV w . 57 4N at, . .al f) I UN IONT STA . U. L4! W 0,*Ev • 2N13 4 R rv s, r 47+eL/ Vin.. 1J0 ,a-- --.R MOD 12 ocr YC I - afy ` a ~ _ E a i. o d tW OI NO i C 4 d 4 ~t W~H EAAPE~.7 CL i 7477 . _ 4!•00 14.m 44+00 4640D 47 00 40.00 4i.c0 b.00 SI.00 SI+~9 13+03 34400 71+00 31 00 57 W0 Da., F o.+. SCALE City of Spokane Valley SR4tfANE VALLEY PROJECT No. 05-0016 Department of PuElic Works me ' sar 70{ A 1 t S a 1 ~iIll' APPLEWAY AVENUE 1 Li proga. vaw•, 9u,E• ,e Naecaru: w new er SPOKANE VALLEY. WA. P9206 1 "a STA. 42+00 TO STA. 581.00 N. 2.f" I rt*ftcAL. - (5K7V)w-wo - - n4 I Asp -1 _ 11- ll y FED, AID PROJECT NO. SrplJL-1842(002 SHEET J10f-. omm " LNE IltA1W~ r WAR" r-r r IM"A 11 mw.E tr n T31 R~ 9% ~E\i tx4EiE t,MJi CaMM RWa FMC-OF-4M YX%E3 1d - 3S ,r ,r Inma Q 154L'Q] MA14~-rAY V mna nm ule iAG A d37A/13 "LNZ ,r ,r en lA~ ttr ww" BIVXM 1w COAM TYPICAL SECLON APPLEWAY AVE. CDM=E CJ@ AW P(-E Ir ASVO040 RAi ROW NOW-,V-WY %WM 7W -W pm3w- = Ml : Ryveo A3ei,aRa OAas m*+7 a/ aY >r m s! r Y4' ]r 4EFD .F7 MR ►.?UK U}R FAR =0993M EX51L47 "Lbe i~®F7 71M101Unn" EAMDUM 3r r. +1r ,A A K I ICI L I-~ b N IF--' d- Nt 55184 fop01 + ~Q 00 Q 24 i ~ I 48+00 PY9Pt,~A-%f Av e-" v EE; a 49+00 Cf 41 3~ /c CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 15, 2007 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ® old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Wastewater Financial Planning Policy Issues GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Discuss wastewater policy issues as outlined by the County during the joint Council/Commissioners meeting on May1, 2007 OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten ATTACHMENTS County Presentation SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF UTILITIES Wastewater Financial Plan and Rate Study Preliminary Results Joint Meeting Spokane County Board of County Commissioners & City of Spokane Valley City Council May 1, 2007 Why a Rate Study Now? ■ Last comprehensive rate study in 2001 Faced with significant capital costs related to: • Septic elimination system • Water quality improvements at RPWRF • Constructing treatment plant capacity for county • Regulatory dissolved oxygen TMOL costs • Replacement of collection system ■ Rate study will evaluate sufficiency of funding required to meet wastewater financial obligations 1 How are Wastewater Costs Funded? Capital Program Operation 8 Debt Capital Y,astauatar , Main%nanoe Repayment Replacement ` PA'TP• Colloctian, Pnx~ram Canstruction Program CC6t5 _ _ _ _._._._._._._._._.a_ _ Furd:~3 Bonds, Loam, Grants, FGe ralFac~ty Charge Sevw Service Charge AquSfer Prot1 coon Area ital Facilities Rate • , laste%vater Treatment Fee (APA) Plant Charge Finding Existing Ratepayer I Source Outside Source New Customer Overview of Financial Plan/ Rate Study Process • Develop multi-year financial plan that evaluates sufficiency of current rates - Operating costs - Capital costs - Alternative funding methods - Rate implementation strategy • Cost of Service - Equitable allocation of costs based on customer demands placed on the system - Cost based user rates 2 Financial Planning Assumptions • Growth: - STEP Program: Additional 9,700 ERUs (2007 - 2011) - New development ERUs assumed at 1.1% per year over 20 years • Inflation 3% per year • City treatment costs account for adjustment of excise (utility) tax • County treatment costs begin in 2012 • GFC Increases to full cost in 2008, held until 2012, annual inflation added thereafter • CFR held at existing level + annual inflation Operating and Maintenance Supported by ongoing monthly sewer service charge - currently $21.00/month Supports - On-going operations & maintenance of the collection system - Treatment capacity payments to the city - O&M of county treatment facility in 2012 - TMDL oversight committee participation - Replacement projects - collection system - Water conservation/bio-solids mgmt plan/water reclamation study - Operating reserve = 10% of annual operating expenses 3 Projected Operating Fund Capital Program - Revenue Sources • WWTP monthly charge - Currently $6.68 • State Grant of $3.75 million per year, ending in 2014 • APA funding ending in 2025 - assumed at $2.5 million 2008-2011 (reserves spend down) and reduced to $1 million thereafter • Bond/loan proceeds • GFC revenue (new development) • CFR revenue (septic elimination program) Rovanuer. operating Revenues (current rates) Intorost 8 I lisoellenous Rc%-cnuc Total Operating Revenues Expenses City Treatment Cost County Troatmcnt Costs Opcralions d idnintenance Ttd D1.,B loso6tl sfCon sen4Reciamation Replacement Reserve Total Operating Expenses shortfall Required Rate Adlustrnenl Fund Balance to Lovoliro Rate Incr, Re%dsed Shortrull Reoutred Rate Ad"Unent Hato xeiusrrnents Rates`, 2007 2008 2009 20901 2012} MV 510,726,380 511,110,689 $11,561,342 $11,993,389 312,888,574,.5 13,851 2=; 951,100 1,048,873 1,039,070 1,043,982 1,068;785; 1,01 $11,677,480 $12.168,562 $72,1500,4112 513,037,371 i S13,057,350~ $14$80) i I - . $4,947,923 $5,271,622 $5.649,432 56,032,093 S1,665,5301 2,533,175 0 0 0 0 , , 5,759,917!'- .6,294,01-, 6,550,968 7,183,847 7,707,865 8,237,620 9,375,2D5f' 1.1,12(+.76( 600,000 1,325,000 1,450,000 1,250,000 150,000° ' ' 154,00( , 0 0 0 3DD,000 1;100;6131)) ` 1,750,00( $12,098,891 $13,780,469 514,803,327 $15,819,713 S16.050.742; $21,863,8M ($421,411) ($1,611,007} (52,202,915) ($2,782,342) ($4.03.383), 00,87.3,841' 3.93% 14.50% 19.054% 23.20% 31,7856, 19.5:05? $0 $700,000 $225,000 so 50. 11+3 (11421,411) (5:911,907) ($1,977,915) (52,782,342) ,(S4,0U,383il{56,873,641; 3.93% 8.20% 17.11% 25.2096 31,763x' 49.52# _ O.OOIA 6.20% 8.23°e ' ' ' .20X. 3.559. 4,47%. ' $21.00 -$22.72 $24,59.-- ..S2S.87 $27.67 531.40 City Treatment Costs 2007 $1,517 mgal increased by Inflation (345) and adjusted for excise (uf ly) tax County Treatment Costs 2012 $1,973 regal increased by inflation (395) Replaoisrtent reserve delayed Aoil teml to fund Siosolidslmnsp-n-ationlreclamatbn, phased back in d 2010 Fund balance used to ease rate UanslOon in 2008 and 2008 4 Capital Program - Debt Funding • STEP costs require an additional $24.5 million in G.O bond debt through 2011 • SCWRF and RPWRF borrowings total $138.9 million through 2013 - $65.5 million G.O Bond (5% interest) - $73.4 million SRF ($8 million 1.5% interest, all other at 3%) Program 2007 2003- 2009 2010. 2011. 2012 2013 Total 0.0. WO SE69Sa $5.193 $3,141 $4,03 $2,419 £0 10 $20,554 Trcttrnent G.fl.8orx1: 53;180' S0 $O $32,052 524,3.10 $0 SO 565,622 SRF Si 9D0 58800. S17,0".0 $12.980 $12.98D $12980 $12900 $73400 -jcPATreetml $11,080 38,G30 $17,040 '345,OU 537,290 $12,980 512,980 St3a,922 T":AD $19,977 Stt,793 5181?,1 $40,915 $39,710: 512,990 £12,980 $103,47C Capital Program - GFC Funding • Billed to each. new customer connecting to the sewer system - Currently $2,510/ERU • Calculation includes both existing and new infrastructure capacity available to serve growth • 90,000 ERUs supported by capacity (18mgd at 2000pd per ERU) - Growth ERUs applicable to GFC 45,326 • Calculated GFC $3,632/ERU • STEP GFC capped at $1,885 -($2,510 less 25% subsidy) • 10 year average of $2.1 million per year 5 CFR Program - STEP Billed to each new customer inside a program area - Includes program cost + GFC - Current charge $5,395 ($3,510 CFR +$1,885 GFC) Fixed CFR at existing level plus inflation for remainder of program (2011) plus Capped GFC - Capping GFC @ $1,885 results in additional $0.75-on WWTP Charge Summary of Capital Costs [a] [a] Progra m ends in 20 11 Estimated Capital Costs 2007 - 2016 CFR,Progiam Costs S87,871,000 17iverside Park Water Reclamation Facility Projects $47,170,000 Spwcano County Regional Water Reclamation Facility $1013,135,000 Influent Pumping Station and Force Mtalns, and Oulfall Projects S27,542,000 Th4DL Compriance, Water Conservation, and Water Reclarnatton P S10,000,000 Saltese Flats Wetlands Projects $1,700,000 'I'roa!ment-Plant Do raciation $8,402.198 Total 5288,820,198 'T'otal Oi?bt Sonrk:r .$98,411,011 Total Capital + Debt Service $387,231,209 6 \ J; Summary of Capital Funding Sources Estimated CO ital Funding 2007 - 2016 State Grants (ends 2014) $30,000,000 Aquifer Protection Area (ends 2025) $16,500,000 Sondflcan Proceeds 5161,709,123 VMNI P Charge $63,210,8133 Capital Facilti?es Rate (CFR.- Program) $91,104,653 General, Facilities Rate (GFC - nowdevelopment) $20,710,771 InterestlM Ise. S5,180,443 Totnl $388,415,853 Less Capital Costs (previous page)' $387,231,209 Difference minimum funding $1.0 million $1,184,644 Summary Proposed ' Rates/Charges* 2007 2000 2009 2010 2011 2012 2Dt3 (Aont(17y Roles Sever Service Charge $21.00 $22.72 $24.59 $25.87 528,72 S27,07 S28.73 WATPUarge $0.68 510,73 $10.75 $10.75 $10.75 SM75 $10.79 Total MomtojCharge $27.68 533,47 5:5,34 536.62 $37.47 $38.42 $39.48 Mor4My Mamma $5.79 $1.87 51,25 $D.55 :0.95 S1.06 Capital Facilities Rate (CFR) Local COML(Lietian $3.510 $3.6t8 $3.724 53,836 $3,951 - GFCProgram $1,685 $1.695 51885 51865 $1885 Total CFR $3,395 $5,571 1,5,6+39 $5.721 55.830 CFR11Aonth 533.10 $39.41 $40.19 $40,D9 $41.81 General Facilities Charge (GFC) Nen•Derelopment S2,510 $3,632 $3.632 $3,632 $3,632 53,612 $3,740 Rate; listed are witildut the seniorku inoome disoount rate 7 2008 Proposed Rat s Options for Considera ion i. ant Rates PrCV9.4d Rates If~ttlay'.V.V17 Charge $863 1110.75 Gerwral Fanflbes Charge (GFC) $2,510 53.692 Capital Fsd1JIe3 Rate UR $5,395 1154501 Option I -GFC Optlcn S -GFC I" Option 4. GFC Now . plantains at Curren: , OP11o11 R - G C htcw. Oev. at $3,M and Ocv. At $3,672 and Option 5 - Only 50"!1 $2,610; CFR Ideld at Am at 13,100; CFR CFR &1 25% GFC CFR at 2511. GFC Growth Occurs; CPR aial cad a evnl 5~ H47d at aunt MonWj WARP Chuff 512,00 $11.29 $11,00 $10.00 S;2.75 Central Pacilifes Charge (GFC1 $2,510 $3,100 23,100 $7,892 $9.692 CAPilal Fad111es Rate (CFR) 35,501 $5,501 55,943 56,342 55¢01 Non-Point Source Funding • Not included in the analysis • Assumed other regional funding sources • One year of Funding @ $500K from Sewer Fund = additional $0.98/ERU/month on 2008 rates 8 Cost of Service • What is the equitable share of costs to collect from different customer classes? - County statistics of usage and demand - Planning, engineering and design criteria • 200 gpd /ERU used to design SCRWRF • Current volumetric rate based on 225 gpd/ERU or 900 cubic feet (cf) • Change to 200 gpd would trigger billed volume sooner (above 800 cf) • Shift would decrease residential allocated costs and increase rates based on volume (mobile parks/commercial/industrial) Summary - Cost of Service Results • 2008 cost of service assumes 800 cubic feet of waler per equivalent residential unit (ERU} • Actual billed flrnv provide for Mobile Park/Commllnd Classes • 8% of total costs related o customer billingkollection - allocated based on number of accounts • Remainder of costs allocated based on Hmv contribution Gsit:Onl Rain Siruclurc 2008 Cast of Service Difference Dfaferenoe Class - Re-senue Revenue 5 °.E, Slagle Family 56,827,740 . 57,3a0 ,90B Sr 13,158 7.6296 duplex 5574,391 S0i7,532 543,171 7.6296 :,1uI16.:nmBy $1,53.{,779 $i,0i5,79i 584,012 6,4996 +?,philc Park $1B,143 ' 521;349 53,OD8 10.3946 Con•.mcrcl~ and Industry 52 107430 . $2 435937 $268,551 12.39 .46 To>til 511119689 $12,031,596 5911907 8.20Y 9 l Proposed 2008 Rates Current Rate . COSA Base Volume Base Volume Single Family $27.68 - $33.08 - Duplex S55.36 - 566.15 - MultifamilylUnit* 520.04 - $23.99 - Mobile Home Parks $27.68 $2.84 $33.08 $3.78 Commercial $27.68 $2.84 $33.08 $3.78 ' Multi-family rate based on number of units in oomp".ex and charged @ A of single family rate, Base charge includes an account charged billed once for each account. Low Income Senior/Disabled Discount • County considering discount to monthly sewer service charges for specific customer group • Eligibility tied to city property tax exemption - Income <=$35K, property ownership, age 62 or disability • Discount funded by existing rate payers • 30% discount recommended - Rate decrease from $33.47 to $23.83 • 2,530 customers estimated to be eligible for participation • Results in $0.56 increase in Single Family Rate • 1.7% increase in all other rates 10 Summary of Neighboring Utility Rates Sing [a FamIIV GFCI Mbnthl • Rate r=RQ Airway Heights $41.56 $5,132 Deer Park, City of $39.03 $3,060 Spokane, City of $34.92 $2,404 Liberty Lake $23.00 $4,552 Spokane County - Current $27,68 52,510 Spokartie County- 2008 $33.47 $3.632 Policy Decisions ■ lour forward with proposed sower service charge and VVVVTP Charge? Implement new discount rate for senior/ low income? F at full cost for new development? Continue current practice to set FR rates for balance of STEP program? 11 Next Steps ■ Public Meetings May 16 & 17 ■ Rate Study Report Early July ■ Public Hearing August 14 ■ Rate Implementation January 1, 2008 Question and Answer Session 12 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 15, 2007. Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report: Title 24 Building Regulations GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70, WAC 365-195-800 et seq. PREVIOUS COUNCIUCOMMISSION ACTION TAKEN: The 2006-2026 Comprehensive Plan was adopted on April 25, 2006 and effective on May 10, 2006. Council received information concerning the proposed process on July 11, 2006, Council has previously reviewed Titles 17 - General Provisions, Title 18 - Administration, Title 20- Subdivisions, and Title 21 - Environmental Controls. Council was briefed on Title 24 on February 27, 2007. BACKGROUND: The development regulations implementing the Comprehensive Plan are subject to the same requirements for earty; continuous and collaborative public participation as the Comprehensive Plan. Title 24 - Building Regulations. Washington has mandated the adoption of the 2006 International Codes, to be effective July 1, 2007. Once adopted, the proposed regulations will allow for permit submittals under either the 2003 codes or the new codes until July 1, 2007. The provisions for grading and excavating remain unchanged. Planning Commission recommended approval of Title 24 - Building regulations on April 12, 2007. Title 24 was submitted to the Community Trade & Economic Development Department (CTED) on January 27, 2007 not less than sixty days prior to final adoption by the City Council. OPTIONS: Consensus to move forward as submitted, recommend changes or provide staff with additional direction. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None required. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Mary Kate Martin, Chief Building Official ATTACHMENTS: Title 24 - Building Regulations. i Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes Title 24 Building Codes . 24.10 Authority- 24.10.010 The City of Spokane Valley (hereafter referred to as the "City") adopts the State Building Code pursuant to RCW 19.27.031, and additional codes enumerated herein as allowed pursuant to RCW 19.27.040. 24.20 Purpose 24.20.010 These regulations have been established in compliance with the' State Building Code Act to promote the health, safety and welfare of the occupants or users of buildings and structures and the general public as enumerated in RCW 19.27.020. 24.30 Appeals The appeal of any decision, order or determination-of the Building Official shall'be made in conformance with SVMC 17.50. 24.40 Codes Adopted 24.40.010 General 1. These regulations'apply to any st \ture, equ pment or, activity regulated by the herein adopted codes./All referenced codes ar\e available for viewing at the City Permit Center. 2- All codes adopted under the former T`tle~ 10 (Ordinance 04-010) shall be in effect and acceptable for application/to projects submitted for review and approval prior to July 1, 2007. Nothing in this section would prevent submission of projects for review and approval under the current codes adopted pursuant to-Title 24. After July 1, 2007 projects submitted ive rand approval must conform to the requirements of this title. for 'review-a' 24.40.020 S cific The following codes, all as amended, added to, or excluded in this chapter, together with all amendments and additions provided in this title, are adopted and shall be applicable within the City: 1. Chapter 1-11 WAC-I Washington State Energy Code 2. Chapter 1~3 W I Washington State Ventilation and indoor air quality 3. Chapter 51-19.WAC 1Washington State Historic Building Code 4- Chapter 51 550,WAC - State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the 2006 edition of the International Building Code; including Appendix chapters F, G, I, and J 5. Chapter 51-51 WAC - State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the 2006 edition of the International Residential Code; including Appendix chapters H and J 6. Chapter 51-52 WAC - State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the 2006 edition of the International Mechanical Code and of the 2006 edition of the International Fuel Gas Code 7. Chapter 51-54 WAC - State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the 2006 edition of the International Fire Code Page I of 16 WcbainbridgetiAgenda Packets145-08-071Title 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes 8. Chapter 51-56 WAC - State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the 2006 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code 9. Chapter 51-57 WAC - State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of Appendix A, B and Appendix I of the 2006 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code 10. The 2006 International Plumbing Code as presently constituted or as may be subsequently amended; provided, that in the event of.conflicts with the State Plumbing Cade adoption of the Uniform Plumbing Code, the state code will prevail. Such conflicts will be reviewed and a determination issued by the Building Official or their designee 11. 2006 edition of the International Existing Building Code 12. 2006 edition of the International Property Maintenance Code, except Sections 106, 111, 302.3-.4, 302.8, 303, 304.2, 304.8, 304.13-.18, 305.3. 305 307, 308.2-.5, 404.1, 507, and 606 are not adopted. 24.40.030 Local Amendments to the Adopted Codes \ 1. 2006 International Building Code a. Amend section 105 Permits as follows: i. Alter the square feet in section 105.2 Work exempt from permit. Building: 1. to read as follows: One-story detached accessory structures used as tool and storage sheds, playhouses and similar uses provided the floor area does not exceed 200 square feet (11.15 m2) ii. Delete text of section 105.5 Expiration ,in its entirety and replace with the following: 105.5 Expiration of permits. All permits shall expire by limitation and be declared void if: 1 1..Work is not started within 180 days of obtaining a permit or, 2_,-Wo\isabandoned for 180 days or more after beginning work or, /3. Two y1 ars from t6 e ate of permit issuance. 105.5.1 Completion of work. If a permit expires subject to this section, and-the work authorized under the expired permit is not completeete anew permit may be obtained for '/Z the permit fee. The permit fee shall be based on the value of the remainder of the work not completed under the original permit or the actual cost to the jurisdiction to complete the permit process, whichever is greater. 105.5.2\Compliance actions. If a permit issued to resolve a code \ violation expires subject to this section, the property owner may be 'subject to the immediate imposition of remedies authorized by the ~ A Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. i H. Add subsection 105.8 Permit ownership to read as follows: ,The ownership of a permit issued pursuant to this title inures to the property owner. The permit applicant if not the property owner shall be held to be an agent of, and acting on behalf of, the property owner. b. Amend section 108 Fees as follows: i. Delete the text of section 108.4 Work commencing before permit issuance in its entirety and replace with the following: Any person who commences any work on a building structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system before obtaining necessary permits shall be subject to an investigation fee in accordance with the schedule established by the governing authority or such work. Page 2 of 16 H:lcbainbridge%Agenda Padcets105-W071TR1e 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes The investigation fee shall be equal and additional to the permit fee that would have been required had a permit been issued and is owed whether or not a permit is subsequently issued. Payment of the investigation fee does not vest illegal work or establish any right to a permit. ii. Delete the text of section 108.6 Refunds in its entirety and replace with the following: The Building Official may authorize the refunding of fees as follows: 1. The full amount of any fee paid hereunder that was erroneously paid or collected. 2. Up to 80% of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this chapter. 3. Up to 80% of the plan review fee- aid~when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. \ The Building Official shall not a thorize refunding of any fee paid except on written request filed by the original permittee not later,than 180 days after the date of fee payment. , / 2 2006 International Residential Code a. Amend section R105 Permits asf6llow§: i. Delete text of section 105. Expiration in its entirety and replace with the following: R105.5 Expiration of permits All per is shall expire by limitation and be declared void if: ,1. Work is not started within 180 days of obtaining a permit or; /,,2. Work is abandoned fo 180 days or more after beginning work or, \ 3. Two years from the date of permit issuance. R105.5.1 - Compietioof work. If a permit expires subject to this i \ \ section, and the work authorized under the expired permit is not 'complete, a new permit may be obtained for '/z the permit fee. The permit fee shall be based on the value of the remainder of the work not ,completed under the original permit or the actual cost to the jurisdiction to complete the permit process, whichever is greater. 1,05.5.2 Compliance actions. If a permit issued to resolve a code olation expires subject to this section, the property owner may be abject to the immediate imposition of remedies authorized by the pokane Valley Uniform Development Code, subsection R105.8 Permit ownership to read as follows: The ownership of a permit issued pursuant to this title inures to the property owner. The permit applicant if not the property owner shall be held to be an agent of, and acting on behalf of, the property owner. b. Amend section R108 Fees as follows: i. Delete the text in section R108.4 Work commencing before permit issuance in its entirety and replace with the following: i Page 3 of 16 H:lcbainbrWge\Agenda Padcets145-0"71Title 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes j Any person who commences any work on a building structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system before obtaining necessary permits shall be subject to an investigation fee in accordance with the schedule established by the governing authority for such work. 0 The investigation fee shall be equal and additional to the permit fee that would have been required had a permit been issued and is owed whether or not a permit-is subsequently issued. Payment of the investigation fee does not vest illegal work or establish any right to a permit. ii. Delete the text in section R108.6 Refunds in its entirety and replace with the following: The Building Official may authorize the refunding of fees as follows: 1. The full amount of any fee paid hereunder that was erroneously paid or collected. 2. Up to 80% of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this chapter. 3. UP to 80% of the plan review fee paid when an a PP lica\ fora permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. V The Building Official shall not authori funding of an fee aid except on written request filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. \ . c. Replace Table R301.2(1) CLIMACTIC, AND GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIA with the following: \ ~L Ground Snow Wind Seismic ~i SUBJECT TO DAMAGE F120M .,Winter Desi n Ice Barrier Underla ment Flood Air Freezing Mean' Annual Load' Speed (Gust) Design Category ' weathering` F etthe limits Decay g Temp° y Required Hazards Index Tempi p d ' 39 Ibs fV mph C \ Severe / ~ 24 Moder to None ) to 10°F Yes 2006 1992 FIRM 1232 47.2°F slight 'Minimum roof snow load: 30 IbsRr \ , d. Add'a subsection 'to section R310 Emergency escape and rescue openings as follow\\ R310.6 Replacement, of emergency escape and rescue openings except for replacement of glazing only in such windows shall be of the size required by this section. ) e~Amend section R324 Flood-resistant construction as follows: 1 General to add municipal code reference and read as follows: All development in whole or in part within a designated floodplain shall comply with SVMC 21.30 and be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions contained in this section. ii. Add a sentence to sub-section R324.1.3 - Establishing the design flood elevation such that the section reads as follows: The design flood elevation is equal to base flood elevation plus one foot. The design flood elevation shall be used to define areas prone to flooding, and shall describe, at a minimum, the base flood elevation at the depth of peak elevation I of flooding (including wave height) which has a 1 percent (100-year flood) or greater chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. Page 4 of 16 Wcbainbridge\Agenda Packetsl05-08-071Titie 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes iii. Delete item 1. in sub-section R324.2.1 Elevation requirements and replace with a new Item 1. to read as follows: 1. Buildings and structures shall have the lowest floors elevated to or above base flood elevation plus one foot. iv. Delete item 3. in sub-section R324.2.1 Elevation requirements and replace with a new Item 3. to read as follows: 3. Basement floors that are below grade on all sides shall be elevated to or above base flood elevation plus one foot. Add a second paragraph to R324.3.6 Construction documents to read as follows: The documents shall include a verification of foundation elevation prior to footing inspection approval and a- verification of lowest floor elevation to be base flood elevation plus one foot prior to framing inspection approval. 3. 2006 International Mechanical Code and 2006 International Fuel Gas Code' a. Amend section 106.5 Fees as follows: I. Delete the text of '106.5.1 Work commencing before permit issuance in its entirety and replace with the following: Any person who commences any work on a building structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system before obtaining necessary permits shall be subject to an investigation fee in accordance with the schedule established by the goveming authority for such" work. /he investigation fee shall "be equal and additional to the permit fee. that would \ave been required had.a permit been issued and is owed whether or not a permit is subsequently issued., Payment of the investigation fee does not vest illegal work br establish .any rnght to a permit. /f ii..ln section 10\ Fee Schedule insert the following the language where indicated \ Spokane ValleMaster Fee Schedule iii. Delete the text of'106.5.3 Fee Refunds in its entirety and replace with the following: . The Building Official may authorize the refunding of fees as follows: 1. ".The full amount of any fee paid hereunder that was erroneously paid or collected. 2. Up to 80% of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this chapter. 3. Up to 80% of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The Building Official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written request filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. Page 5 of 16 HAcbainbridge\Agenda Packetsl05-08-071Title 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes b. Amend Appendix C to add an exception after the last paragraph in C105.1 Hydrant spacing as follows: Exception: The fire chief is authorized to reduce the number of required hydrants by up to 50% when the building is equipped with an approved, automatic fire sprinkler system and the fire chief has approved the location of those required fire hydrants." c. Amend Appendix D Section D101.1 to read as follows: D101.1 Scope. Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with this appendix and all other applicable requirements of the International Fire Code including the provisions of Section 503 Fire Apparatus'Access Roads. 4. 2006 Uniform Plumbing, Code a. Amend section 103.4.5 Fee Refunds as i. Delete the text of section 104.5.1 in its'entirety and ~epl a with the following: The Building Official may authorize the refunding of the full amount of any fee paid hereunder that was erroneously paid or collecte~ ii. Delete the text of section 104.5.2 in its /entirety and replace with the following: , The Building Official may authorize the refunding of up to 80% of the permit fee paid when no work has been c6e\under a permit issued in accordance with this chapter.. f iii. Delete the text of section 104.5:3its entirety and replace with the ~ follo>nring:_ V\ , The-Building Official may, thorize the refunding of up to 80% of the plan / review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee l has been paid is withdra \ri or canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The Building Official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written request filed,by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment' \a. Amend section 106.5 Fees as follows: \i. Delete the text of 106.5.1 Work commencing before permit issuance in its \entirety a `d replace with the following: Any person who commences any work on a building structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system before obtaining necessary permits shall be subject to an investigation fee in accordance with the schedule established by the governing authority for such work. The investigation fee shall be equal and additional to the permit fee that would have been required had a permit been issued and is owed whether or not a permit is subsequently issued. Payment of the investigation fee does not vest illegal work or establish any right to a permit. ii. In section 106.5.2 Fee Schedule insert the following the language where indicated: Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule Pale 6 of 16 W: lcbainbddge\Agenda Packetsl05-08-07%Tide 24 draldoc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes iii. Delete the text of 106.5.3 Fee Refunds in its entirety and replace with the following: " The Building Official may authorize the refunding of fees as follows: 1. The full amount of any fee paid hereunder that was erroneously paid or collected. 2. Up to 80% of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this chapter. 3. Up to 80% of the plan review fee paid when ad application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is w`ithdlawn o_r canceled before any plan reviewing is done. The Building Official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written request filed by the original permlttee not laterrth n 180 days after, the date of fee payment. 6. 2006 International Existing Buildino Code-Reserved 7. 2006 intemational PropedX Maintenance Code a. Amend section 202 General Definitions by adding the following definitions: i. Drug properties and structures. Any building, structure and/or associated property, identified by Sthe~'Chief of Police, wherein or upon which the manufacture, distribution, production or storage of illegal drugs or the precursors to create illegal drugs has taken place in a manner which could endanger the public. ii. Blighted property. A property,,dwelling, building, or structure which constitutes blight on the, surrounding \ neighborhood. `Blight on the surrounding < ',neighborhood" is 'any property;,.dwelling, building, or structure that meets any two of the following factors: ~ \A d'welling, building,. or structure exists on the property that has not been lawfully occupied fora period of one year or more; \2. The property, dwelling, building, or structure constitutes a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare as determined by the executive authority of the City or designee; 3. The property, dwelling, building, or structure is or has been associated with illegal drug activity during the previous twelve months, b. Amend section 202 General Definitions by deleting the following definitions: i. Garbage ii. Housekeeping unit iii. Inoperable Motor Vehicle c. Amend section 108 Unsafe structures and equipment as follows: Add a new sub-section 108.6 Drug properties and structures. to read as follows: Drug properties and/or structures are declared to be unsafe properties or structures and are a classification of property subject to the special procedures set forth in section 108.6. The Building Official is authorized to abate such Page 7 of 16 H:lcbainbridge%Agenda Packets105-08-071Title 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes unsafe buildings, structures, and/or associated properties in accordance with the procedures set forth in this code and Washington statute, RCW 64.44.010, - with the following additional actions: 1. Due to public safety hazard in drug production facilities, all public and private utilities shall be disconnected. 2. Building(s) and structures shall be inspected to determine compliance with all City ordinances and codes. 3. Building(s) and any entry gates to the property shall be secured against entry in the manner set forth in this code; 4_ Reconnection of utilities or occupancy of, the building(s), structures or property shall not be allowed until all violations have been addressed, all dangerous conditions abated and a notice; of release for re-occupancy has been received from the health department and sheriffs office. 5. If dangerous conditions cannot be abated, occupancy shall be prohibited and the structure and/or property may be subject to condemnation pursuant to RCW 35.80A.010„Condemnation of blighted property. ii. Add a new sub-section 108.7 Blighted. properties. to read as follows: In conformance with RCW 35.80A.010, thCty may acquire by condemnation, in accordance with the notice requirements and other procedures for condemnation provided in Title &\RdW` any property, dwelling, building, or structure which constitutes a blight on the surrounding neighborhood. Prior to such condemnation, the City Councifshall adopt a resolution declaring that the acquisition' of the peal, property `described therein is necessary to eliminate neighborhood blight., Condemnation of property, dwellings, buildings, and structures for the purposes described in this chapter is declared to be for a f blic use. d. Replace the code reference, Int6mational Plumbing Code, in section 505.1 General with he followin J the State adopt of the Uniform "Plumbing Code. e. Delete th\text of section 602.2 Residential occupancies and replace with the follo\ g: Dwellings shall be provided with heating facilities capable of maintaining.a room temperature'of 68°-F (20° C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms, and toilet rooms. \ Cooking appiiances shall not be used to provide space heating to meet the requirements of this section. f: Delete the text of section 602.3 Heat supply and replace with the following: Every: owner and operator of any building who rents, leases or lets one or more dwelling units or sleeping units on terms, either expressed or implied, to supply heat io occupants thereof shall provide heat to maintain a temperature of 68° F (20° C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms, and toilet rooms. g. Replace paragraph one of section 602.4 Occupiable work spaces with the following: Indoor occupiable work spaces shall be supplied with heat to maintain a temperature of 65° F (18° C) during the period the spaces are occupied. f. Replace the code reference, /CC Electrical Code, in section 604.2 Service with the following: the State adoption of the NEC. Page 8 of 16 K: bainbrod99\A9cnda Packets105-O"71Title 24 draft doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes 24.50 Excavation, Fill and Grading 24.50.010 Purpose This chapter safeguards the public health, safety and welfare by regulating grading and excavation, including fills and embankments, on public and private property located within the City and establishes procedures for the issuance of permits; approval of plans and inspection of grading construction. 24.50.020 Permit Required Except as specified in SVMC 24.50.030, all excavation, fill, grading and leveling of land requires a Spokane Valley Grading Permit. All grading within the City shall comply with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act. 24.50.030 Exempted Work A Grading Permit shall not be required for the following:i 1. Grading in an isolated, self-contained area~if there is no danger to private or public property, provided however, that any grading in any critical area, floodpllaiinn or floodway shall not be exempt from a Grading Per 6i. \ V 2. Work located within a dedicated public right-0f-way. 3. Landscape ponds or water features that do not exceed 500 sq feet water surface area'or three feet in depth and are fully lilined with an app`'oved_synthetic pond liner. 4. Excavation below finished grade for basements and\footings of a building, retaining wall or other structure less than four feet in depth or authorized by a valid building permit. This shall not exempt any fill made with the material -from \such excavation or exempt any excavation having' an unsupported "heigk greater than y5 feet (1524 mm) after the completion o j uch structure, r 5. Cemetery gravest 6. Refuse disposal sites controlled by other regulations. 7. Excavations for wells; tunnels or utilities. This includes any grading required for equipment stag g,_hot including roads, facilitating the excavation. This also includes excavation work done to facilitate the Septic Tank Elimination Program. 8. "'Mining, quarrying, excavating, processing or stockpiling of rock, sand, gravel, aggregate or r 'clay where established and provided for by law, provided such operations do not affect the \ateral support or'increase the" stresses in or pressure upon any adjacent or contiguous property. 9. Exploratory excavations under the direction of a professional engineer or professional geologists / 10. An excavation that a. is less than two (2) feet in depth or, b.does not create a cut slope greater than five (5) feet in height and steeper than one (1) unit vertical and one and one half (1 units horizontal (66.7% slope). 11. A fill less than one (1) foot in depth and placed on natural terrain with a slope flatter than 1 unit vertical in 5 units horizontal (20% slope). 12. Fill less than 3 feet in depth that a. Is not intended to support structures; b. Does not exceed 50 cubic yards on any one lot; or Page 9 of 16 HAcbainbridqe\Agenda Rackets%05-08-07MUe 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes c. Does not obstruct a drainage course. This exemption includes landscape berms if no slope is created greater than 1 unit vertical in 1 % units horizontal (66.7% slope); is not more than five feet (5') in height; creates no danger to private or public property, and is otherwise permitted. Exemption from the permit requirements of this chapter shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in any manner in violation of the provisions of this chapter or any other laws or ordinances of this jurisdiction, the state of Washington or the United States of America. 24.50.040 Testing The standards listed below are, for the purpose of this Code, recognized standards: 1. ASTM D 1557, Test Method for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort 2. ASTM D 1556, Test Method for Density and Unit Weight of Soil In PI\ by the Sand-Cone Method j 3. ASTM D 2167, Method for Density and Unit Weight of Soil In Place by\Rubber Balloon Method 4. ASTM D 2937, Test Method for Density of Soil In Place by the Drive-Cylinder Method 5. ASTM D 2922, Test Methods for Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate In Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth) 6. ASTM D 3017, Test Method', for4Water Contentbf Soil and Rock in Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth) 7. ASTM D 698, Moisture-density Relations of Soils and-Soil Aggregate Mixtures. 8. ASTM D 2488, .Pe for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual \ \ / Procedure) 9. ASTM D 2487, Test Method for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System)' 24.50.050 Hazards -y ~1. Whenever any existing excavation, embankment or fill on public or private property has become-a' a hazard to persons or property, or adversely affects the safety, use or stability of a public way~or drainage channel, the owner, owner's agent or other person in control of \ the property, shall `repair or eliminate the excavation or embankment, within the period of time specified on the"written notice. 2. Unless exempt, any excavation, grading or fill performed without a permit, shall be considered hazardous and a public nuisance, subject to all enforcement actions and penalties as found in. SVMC 17.60. / i 2450.060 Permit Requirements 1. Grading Permit Requirements: a. A separate permit shall be obtained for each site, and may cover both excavations and fills. b. Grading commenced without first obtaining a grading permit from the City, unless pursuant to SVMC 24.50.030 is subject to all penalties described in SVMC 17.60, including the assessment of an investigative fee for the portion of the work accomplished without a permit pursuant to International Building Code section 108.4 Work commencing before permit issuance based on the value of the work accomplished illegally. The fee is payable prior to the acceptance of a grading Page l0 of 16 HAcbainbrddge\Agenda Packets105-08-07%Title 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes permit application. Payment of the investigative fee does not vest the illegal work with any legitimacy, nor does it establish any right to any permit for continued development of the project. Excavation or fill work that remains illegal for 90 days after service of a stop work order shall be deemed hazardous. c. The provisions of Section 106.1.1 Information on Construction Documents apply to application for a Grading Permit Applicant shall note the estimated quantities of materials involved on the Spokane Valley Grading Permit Application. d. Grading involving less than 500 cubic yards shall be designated "regular grading" unless the permittee elects 'engineered grading," or the submitted plans are prepared by a Washington-licensed design professional, or the Building Official determines that special conditions or unusual hazards exist, in which case grading shall conform to the requirements for engineered grading. . i 2. Engineered Grading / Grading, fill or excavation in excess of 500 cubic yards or,located in critical areas or floodplains, require construction plans/specifications prepared by a professional engineer licensed to practice in the state of Washington, and shall be designated as "engineered grading." b. C. Application for a grading permit shalllbe made on'a form prepared by the City and accompanied by two sets of plans and specifications, and supporting data. Supporting data includes but is not limited to soils engineering report and/or an engineering geology report, prepared, signed and sealed by Washington-licensed professionals. That individual shall be considered the registered design professional in responsible charge Plans shall be drawn to scale sufficient to illustrate the nature and extent of the proposed work, signed and sealed by the design professional and shall include the following - - Vicinity map of the proposed site. limits and accurate contours of existing ground and details of ii. Property, terrain and`aRea drainage- iii. Limiting dimensions, elevations or finish contours to be achieved by the grading, and proposed drainage channels and related construction. iv. Detailed 'plans of all surface and subsurface drainage devices, walls, cribbing dams and other protective devices to be constructed with, or as 'a part of, the>proposed work, together with a map shouting the drainage area and the estimated runoff of the area served by any drains. v. Designated 100-year floodplains. and the plans or specific and the may be vi. Recommendations included in the soils engineering report engineering geology report shall be incorporated in the grading specifications. When approved by the Building Official, recommendations contained in the soils engineering reports engineering geology reports, which are applicable to grading, included by reference. vii. Location of any buildings or structures on the property where the work is proposed and the location'of any buildings or structures on land of adjacent owners that are within 15 feet of the property or that may be affected by the proposed grading operations. viii. A SEPA checklist shall be submitted, along with .all other plans to complete an application. Pane I I of 16 H:lcbainbridge\Agenda Packets105-08-071Title 24 draftdoc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Tide 24 Building Codes ix. The dates of the soils engineering and engineering geology reports together with the names, addresses and phone number of the firms or individuals who prepared the reports and their professional stamp and/or seal. 3. Residential subdivision grading plans shall also include the following: Grading associated with residential subdivision development shall be engineered grading. Plans for residential subdivision grading shall contain the following details in addition to the general information required under SVMC 24.50.060(2) a. Details of subdivision construction to mitigate the effects of storm water and irrigation run off for all lots and areas of the subdivision.' Specific site construction requirements to mitigate collection of water in crawlspace's and basements shall be provided. placed on building lots, b. Final location of all grading construction spoils. ~fspbisare* the surface overburden, i.e. topsoil and any underlying soils not conforming to the project requirements of the lots shall be removed prior4p the placement of any other fill. If lots are comprised of fill materials more than ~two~feet in depth, the compacted fill materials below two,feet'in depth from finished grade shall have a minimum allowable bearing capacity of 1500 pounds per square foot In addition, if the foundation is placed on fill materials, a'foundation analysis ,and design, prepared by a licensed Washington engineer, shall be required to be submitted with any subsequent Spokane Valley Building Permit Application. c. Maximum and minimum `elevations for \'all basement and crawl space floors. Maximum and minimum ')elevations for the.top, of foundation walls. Maximum elevation for lot/ property boundary lines to provide positive drainage from building sites. d. Requirements for swales or drainage devices to manage storm water and landscape irrigation runoff. 4. All ponds, water features and man-made lakes greater than 500 sq. ft. in surface area shall be engineered grading. Plans and specifications for ponds, water features and man-made lakes greater than 500 sq. ft'in surface area shall contain the following details in addition to the information` required under SVMC 24.50.050(1&2): a: Plot plan showing the location of all proposed pond construction relative to any lot line; utility easement, septic system or replacement area for septic systems. b.Details of,pond construction including section views, soil materials, lining material, special inspectionlobservation program and spoils disposal. Provide proposed final water surface elevation. mac; Details of ariy water retention device or dam along with provisions for overflow. d. Written approval of a water source required to maintain the pond demonstrated by water rights, well permit or other documentation provided by state of Washington Department of Ecology (DOE). Indicate classification and status with respect to DOE dam safety regulations (Chapter 173-175) if exempt; justification of exempt status is required. e. Proof of notification of the proposed construction submitted to. the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. f. If fish are proposed to be stocked in the pond, proof of Washington Fish and Game approval is required. 6. Private Driveways in excess of 150 feet in length measured from the intersection of the public way to the building the driveway serves shall be considered engineered grading regardless of the amount of excavation or fill required for construction. Specifications for Page 12 of 16 HAcbainbridge%Agenda Padcets105.08.07XTitle 24 dratl.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes these private driveways shall contain the following details in addition to the information required under SVMC 24.50.060(1&2): a.Dimensions. Unobstructed width of 20 feet and an unobstructed height of 13 ft 6 inches. b.Surface. The surface of a private driveway shall be designed and maintained to support a 75,000 pound fire truck. The road shall be surfaced so as to provide all- weather driving capabilities. c. Turn radii. Turn radii of 28.5 feet minimum are required. Smaller radii may be used if a design is submitted that will allow a 75,000 pound fire truck to drive over the curb or road shoulder. / > d.Tumaround. For private driveways over 150 feet in,length, a 120 foot hammerhead, 60 foot "Y° or a 96 foot diameter cul-de-sac is f qu e.Grade. Private driveways shall be paved wlth,a hard~non slip, water repellant surface, such as asphalt or Portland cement concrete, Grasscrete, grassblock paver blocks or other or equivalent hard'surface material\~\ 7. The soils engineering report shall include data regarding the nature,distribution and strength of existing soils. Conclusions,and recommendations for grading procedures and design criteria for corrective measures,, including buttress. fills, when necessary, and an opinion on adequacy for the intended use of sites to be developed by the proposed grading as affected by soils engineering factors, including the stability of slopes shall be included- 8. The engineering geology report shall include an `adequate description of the geology of the site, conclusions and recommendations-regarding the effect of geologic conditions on the proposed development, and opinion on the adequacy for the intended use of sites to be developed by the proposed grading, as affected by geologic factors. 9. Regular Grading Requirements. Each application for a grading permit shall be accompanied by. a plan in sufficient clarity,to'indicate the nature and extent of the work. The plans shall give.the location of the work, the name of the owner and the name of the person who prepare the plan. The( plan shall include the following information: a.General vicinity of the proposed site',, b. Limiting dimensions and depth of cut and/or fill. Total volume of cut or fill. Location of nbuildings or structures where work is to be performed and the location of any buildings or structures within 15 feet of the proposed grading. 24. 0.070 Excavation and Fill 1. All excavation or fill within Pipeline Hazard areas identified in SVMC19.130.040 shall meet the standards and notification requirements of that section. 2. Unless otherwise recommended in the approved soils engineering or engineering geology report, the slope of cut surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use and shall be no steeper than 1 unit vertical in 2 units horizontal (50% slope). Cut slopes steeper than 50% shall require an Engineered Grading Permit. 3. Fill slopes shall not be constructed on natural slopes steeper than 1 unit vertical in 2 units horizontal (50% slope). The ground surface shall be prepared to receive fill by removing vegetation, non-complying fill, topsoil and other unsuitable materials and scarifying to provide a bond with the new fill. Where slopes are steeper than 1 unit vertical in 5 units horizontal (200/6 slope) and the height is greater than 5 feet; an Engineered Grading shall be required. 4. Detrimental amounts of organic material shall not be permitted in fill. Except as permitted by the building official, no rock or similar irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches shall be buried or placed in fill. Page 13 of 16 H: lcbafnbrfdgMAgenda Padcets108 08-07M le 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes 5. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, potential rock disposal areas shall be delineated on the grading plan. Rock sizes greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension shall be 10 feet or more below grade, measured vertically. Rocks shall be placed so as to assure filling of all voids with well-graded soil. 6. All fills shall be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density. 24.50.080 Setbacks 1. The top of cut slopes shall not be made nearer to a site boundary line than one fifth of the vertical height of cut with a minimum of 2 feet. 2. The toe of fill slope shall be made not nearer to the site boundary line than one half the height of the slope with a minimum of 2 feet with no required set back from the boundary greater than 20 feet. Where a fill slope is to be located. near the site boundary and the adjacent off-site property is developed, special precautions shall be incorporated in the work as the building official deems necessary to, protect the adjoining property from damage as a result of such grading. These precautions include but ate not limited to: a. Additional setbacks. au ! b. Provision for retaining or slough walls. c. Mechanical or chemical treatment of the fill slope surface to minimize erosion. d. Provisions for the control of surface waters. e.Consultation with a professional engineer.\ 3. The building official may approve alternate setbacks,The building official may require an 11 investigation and recommendation 'by, a qualified professional engineer or professional geologist to demonstrate that the intent of this section has b\e satisfied. 24.50.090. Drainage ad Terracing 1. Unless othervr se indicated on the approved soils engineering report, drainage facilities and terracing shall conform to the provisions of.this section for cut or fill slopes steeper than 1 unit vertical in 3\\units horizontal (36.3% slope). 2. Terraces at east 8 feet inwidt shall -b6 established at not more than 30-foot vertical intervals on all cut or fill slopes to control'surface drainage and debris. Where only one terrace is required; it shall be at mid-height. Cut or fill slopes greater than 60 feet in height shall be designed by a professional engineer and shall be considered Engineered Grading. ~3. ` Swales or ditches on terraces shall have a minimum gradient of 5 percent and must be paved with reinforced concrete or gunite not less than 3 inches in thickness or an approved equal paving. They shall have a minimum depth at the deepest point of 1 foot and a minimum paved width of 5 feet A single run of swale or ditch shall not collect runoff from a tributary area exceeding 13,500 square feet o(prjected) without discharging into a down drain. 4. Cut and fill slopes shall be provided with subsurface drainage as necessary for stability. 5. Paved interceptor drains shall be installed along the top of all cut slopes where the tributary drainage area above slopes toward the cut and has a drainage path greater than 40 feet measured horizontally. Interceptor drains shall be paved with a minimum of 3 inches of reinforced concrete or gunite, or an approved equivalent. Drains shall have a minimum depth of 12 inches and a minimum paved width of 30 inches measured horizontally across the drain. The slope of drain shall be approved by the building official. 6. All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry 100 year event waters to the nearest practicable drainage way or other discharge point approved by the building official. Erosion Page 14 of 16 HAcbalnbrbdge'Agenda PacketsW-08-07MI:le 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes of ground in the area of discharge shall be controlled by installation of down drains or other devices. 7. Surface drainage shall be diverted to a storm sewer conveyance or other approved point of collection so as to not create a hazard. Lots shall be graded so as to drain surface water away from foundation walls. The grade away from foundation walls shall fall a minimum of 6 inches within the first 10 feet. 8. Exception: Where lot lines, walls, slopes or other physical barriers prohibit 6 inches of fall within 10 feet, drains or swales shall be provided to ensure drainage away from the structure. 24.50.100 Erosion Control 1. The faces of cut and fill slopes shall be prepared and maintained to control erosion. The protection for the slopes shall be installed as soon as practicable and prior to calling for final approval. An Erosion Control Plan shall be submitted for approval in conjunction with X \11 2. Where necessary, check dams, cribbing, riprap o -other devices or methods shall be employed to control erosion and provide safety./ 3. Seeding and planting of erosion control vegetation may be delayed until the next planting season, provided that a bond or surety is executed in favor of the City to assure performance. ` 4. The City may require professional inspection and testing by a soil engineer. When the building official has cause to believe that geologic factors-may be involved, the grading will be required to conform to Engineered -Grading requirements. 24.50.110 Fees 1. Fees, including Plan Review shall be assessed 'in,accordance with the Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule. 2. When a plan or other data is required to be submitted, a 'plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. 3. For excavation and fill on the same site, the fee will be based on the volume of excavation or fill, whichever is,greatet. 4. Separate permits and fees shall apply-to retaining walls or major drainage structures as /otherwise required-,There shall be no separate charge for* standard terrace drains and / similar facilities.\\ 24.50.120, Inspection and Final Report 1.\ Professional observation and testing to determine conformance with project plans and 11 specifications of grading operations shall be provided by professional engineer and/or the professional geologist' retained to provide such services. That individual shall be the registered design professional in responsible charge. 2. The profess`onal geologist shall provide professional observation and testing to determine conformance' with project plans and specifications within such engineer's area of technical specialty, which shall include professional observation and testing of the bedrock excavation to determine if conditions encountered are in conformance with the approved report. Revised recommendations relating to conditions differing from the approved engineering geology report shall be submitted to the soils engineer. 3. The professional engineer shall provide professional observation and testing to determine conformance with project plans and specifications within such engineer's area of competence, which shall include observation and review during preparation of the natural ground, site grading, placement of fill, testing for compaction as well as establishment of line, grade and surface drainage of the development area. If actual work will differ from the approved plans and reports and revised plans are required during the course of the work, Page 15 of 16 H:lcbainbridgOAgenda Packetsl05-08-071Title 24 draft.doc Planning Commission Recommend Draft Title 24 Building Codes they shall be prepared under the direct supervision of the professional engineer and submitted to the building department for review and approval prior to any revised work commencing. 4. The permittee shall be responsible for work to be performed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and in conformance with the provision of this article, and the permittee shall engage consultants, if required, to provide professional inspections on a timely basis. The Permittee shall act as a coordinator between the consultants, the contractor and the building department. 5. Revised plans, if any, shall be submitted for approval prior to any changes. 6. The Building Official or their designee shall inspect the project and/or the inspection documents at the various states of work requiring approval. to. determine that the project is within the requirements of this article. / 7. Permittee shall request a final inspection upon~complet\on~of the project, following installation of all approved drainage facilities and eros`on-controi ea ures. s un 8. der this article, the design professional If, in the course of fulfilling their respective dutie in responsible charge finds that the work is note in conformance with, this article or the approved grading plans, the discrepancies shall be reported immediatelyin writing to the permittee and to the Building Official. < \ execution i th h d d bl h / i l i 9. ur ng e ts c ange e c i rge If the registered design professiona n responsi of the Spokane Valley grading permit, the work shall be stopped until the replacement has been named and been approved by the Building Official. Further, that replacement shall agree in writing to accept their responsibility within4the area of technical competence. It shall be the duty of the permittee to notify the Building Official in writing of such change prior to the recommencement of such grading. \ 10 the on completion of the,rough grading work and at the final completion of the work U . , p design professional -inresponsible charge for engineered grading or when professional determine Iconformance with project plans and specifications is observation and testing to ` performed for, regular grading, as applicable, shall submit record plans and final report. Those plans and reports shall indicate: a ding work was done in conformance with the approved plans. a. All g b: All discrepancies encountered with the approved plans and resolutions of those discrepancies. c. All plans and reports shall bear the stamp or seal of the licensed professional preparing the,report~~ 11. The permittee shall, notify the Building Official when the grading operations read for final inspection. Final approval shall not be given until all the work, including installation of all drainage facilities and their protective devices, and all erosion-control measures have been completed in accordance with the final approved grading plan, and the required final reports have been'submitted to the City. 24.50.130 Enforcement Work done in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter is declared to be a public nuisance and subject to enforcement pursuant to SVMC 17.60. Page 16 of 16 H:lcbainbridge\Agenda PacketsM-08-0-Mtle 24 draft.doc U.n-ifor' Devel' '0nt- ,ode Ttele?4 1 c_~ / r- ~rTe-- s bui(d~ng coas currently . y locate in a secs pn Q T:16 CY-,- f-the a S~po_kan e Valley Munici p' !i ~.~,;~~n;n~. al C'ode---- ` 4 w format--locatesilhe;Ief~Butiding Code:, in its o'vn--Title - Title~2 n 1 ! Format Changes ❑AII code adoptions now found in section 24.40.020 and identified as State adopted codes, where appropriate 01-ocated all local amendments in section 24.40.030: mostly administrative: fees, permit expiration, local design criteria, process details ❑Grading code located in section 24.50 2 V Summary of Changes No substantiSve c nges reformatted 1 1' r f1 current municipal code language=nor n w.F .focal: reouirernents - > .E,1i'minMed language al' ady,contained`in:. the~statute or, the Lbody; the State~Codes, .,,Replaced,=theme- hJniform~ Code for~the l ~ ~ Abatement of Dangerous~Bu'ildirngs~ _A 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings (UCADB) > UrC'ADB was outdated and no longer ,?F~" main:tainedbythet model code rl FrAdopti on~of`the-lnternatronalE~xi`sting-,~ by r ~S yw.~9 sr ' Y, f.., Buildrng and-Proper t-y-~Maintenance~ode's with laca_Imendmen ts effectively__~, Ci _1[ repl,acOd. the UCADBt=--; 3 Any Questions? 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 15, 2007. Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report: Policy Issues & Progress Report: Title 19 Zoning Regulations, Title 22 Development Standards GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70, WAC 365-195-800 et seq. PREVIOUS COUNCIL/COMMISSION ACTION TAKEN: The 2006-2026 Comprehensive Plan was adopted on April 25, 2006 and effective on May 10, 2006. Council received information concerning the proposed process on July 11, 2006. Council has previously reviewed Titles 17 - General Provisions, Title 18 - Administration, Title 20- Subdivisions, and Title 21 - Environmental Controls. Council was briefed on Title 19 on February 27, 2007. BACKGROUND: The development regulations implementing the Comprehensive Plan are subject to the same requirements for early, continuous and collaborative public participation as the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission has taken care to evaluate the comments submitted by members of the public in evaluating the proposals. The Planning Commission is presently working through the provisions of this title, but has reached preliminary consensus on some issues. Title 19 -Zoninq Regulations. Council has complete discretion to alter or change most of these provisions. This chapter establishes the various zoning districts, as well as addressing non-conforming uses, changes in the map and text of the regulations. It also deals with Home Occupations, Accessory Dwelling Units, animal-keeping, manufactured housing and manufactured housing parks. Planned Residential Development is an entirely different approach to that reviewed earlier by Council, allowing a transfer of development rights within the property itself. Planning Commission has been working on the regulations and has initiated a review of a zoning map. Non-Conforming Uses. This provision addresses uses that were legally established but have become nonconforming due to changes in zoning regulations. The provisions address uses and structures separately, something that has created some confusion in the past. Non-conforming uses may be expanded on property under the same ownership at the time the regulations go into effect, but subsequent purchase of adjoining property to expand the non-conformity is not permitted. Different non- conforming uses are permitted, provided the property does not become more non-conforming than it was earlier. Non-conforming structures may be continued and enlarged, provided that the 'occupancy" under the building code remains unchanged, and the non-conformity is not increased. Proposed lot sizes are per dwelling unit, and do not change because the units are attached or detached. Zoning Districts- Sinqle-family Residential The philosophical underpinnings of staff proposals have been to establish criteria and dimensional standards that would permit new and infill development to occur as a matter of right, eliminating both rezoning and fragmented development within the criteria for each district, also preserving neighborhood character. Special hearings and rezoning actions are costly, in both time and money. These costs are passed on to the purchasers of new dwelling units. Planning Commission has recognized that large lot development and affordable housing may be mutually exclusive in an urban setting. Planning Commission will also evaluate criteria for limiting rezoning Administrative Report SVMC Title19 Zoning Regulations; Title 22 Design & Development Regulations Page 2 of 5 in Low Density Residential areas, to provide more certainty for the neighborhoods and direction to the Hearing Examiner for such land use actions. Townhouses are single-family detached dwellings, and will likely be located in multi-family zoning districts, although they should not be prohibited elsewhere. Provisions recognize that while they may be located on individual lots, they are more likely to be part of a condominium regime, with exterior grounds and maintenance under the management of a homeowners association. Present rules really do not permit them. R-1- Single-family Residential Estate: Continues the provisions of the interim UR-1 zoning. The Commission discussed the advantagestdisadvantages of reducing the minimum square footage for new lots to 25,000 square feet, but elected to retain the 40,000 square foot minimum lot area requirement for the Ponderosa and Rotchford areas. R-2 Single-family Suburban Residential Planning Commission has expressed a preference for maintaining the 10,000 square foot minimum to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods. The Commission will be reviewing the map which would identify those areas which should retain what is effectively the UR 3.5 dimensional standards. This district was added at the request of the PC, although there is no final determination as yet.. R-3 Single-family Residential This district would reduce the minimum lot size to 7,500 square feet. Many of the existing PUDs have lot sizes in the 7,200 to 8,500 square foot range. This was staff's original proposal for the Residential Suburban District as more reflective of urban standards that the present 10K minimum. R-4 Single Family Urban Residential The standards for this district remain those existing under the UR-7` zoning district with 6,000 square foot minimum lot size. Zoning Districts- Medium and High Density MF-1 Medium Density Multifamily. Since the provisions are cumulative, the dimensional standards applicable to r-4 would apply in the case of single family detached housing. The proposed standards continue the present minima for UR-12. Proposed is establishment of a 10% open space requirement within the project. The amount of open space may be reduced by up to 50% with the provision of amenities available to residents. MF-2 High Density Multi-family The proposed standards continue the present minima for UR-22. Proposed is establishment of a 10% open space requirement within the project. The amount of open space may be reduced by up to 50% with the provision of amenities available to residents. Planned Residential Developments This is completely different than the existing provisions. In theory, this should represent unusual circumstances resulting from topography or sensitive environmental areas, not a loop-hole for minimum lot sizes. Home Occupations Continues most existing regulations for (formerly) "Home Professions," with the added proviso prohibiting activities that may be objectionable as a result of noise, dust, odor and glare. The Commission recommended that permits NOT be issued for home occupations, since this may have the effect of vesting uses based on the characterization at the time the permit is issued (which is not always accurate), but may change over time. Administrative Report SVMC Title19 Zoning Regulations; Title 22 Design & Development Regulations Page 3 of 5 Dwellings. Accessory Apartment This provision would allow accessory dwelling units in detached structures on single-family lots subject to conditions concerning parking and size. It does not require that the principal structure be owner-occupied, but does require that water and wastewater utility service be extended from that of the principal dwelling, rather than a separate connection, to prevent 'de facto" subdivision. Interim regulations require that the accessory dwelling be located within the principal structure. Detached accessory dwelling units, combined with all other accessory structures, may not occupy more than 10% of the lot area. Other Accessory Uses Ham operator towers. Animal Raising & Keeping Allowed in all single family residential zoning districts, provided that the area is 40,000 square feet or more with the same limitation on the number of animals which applied to the UR-1 interim zoning district. In addition, the keeping of swine (including potbellied pigs) is prohibited and allowance for "hobby bee-keeping (up to 25 hives) is permitted. Manufactured Housinq Provides for limitations on foundations and appearance of manufactured housing placed on individual lots as authorized by statute. Manufactured Home Parks Continues existing requirements. Non-residential Zoning Districts Only front and side/rear yard setbacks adjacent to residential will be regulated, as well as building height. Office Garden Office and Office may be distinguished only by the height, which is not limited in the Office District. The proposed designations track the UR-12 and UR-22 distinctions, where Garden Office, because of lower heights is less intrusive to adjacent single-family neighborhoods. There is provision that service alleys be provided for new development exceeding 60,000 square feet. Commercial Commercial uses should generally be cumulative, with higher intensity uses allowing those of less intensity, allowance that should be reflected in the Schedule of Permitted uses. NC - Neighborhood Commercial This district is generally the interim B-1 district, intending to provide limited retail/office for adjacent residential areas. Proposed limitations include animalfvet clinics for small animals, single bay carwashes. Planning Commission has made no decision on whether larger developments would be required to provide service alleys and shared access with adjacent commercial properties. C - Community Commercial This district supersedes the B-1 interim zoning district. Planning Commission declined to allow kennels not associated with an animal/veterinary clinic. Planning Commission has made no decision on requirements for service alleys and shared access with adjacent commercial properties.. Outdoor storage is generally not permitted. RC- Regional Commercial This district provides for a wider variety of uses that the C district. Outdoor storage is generally not permitted, although this does not apply to the display of vehicles and equipment for sale. Administrative Report SVMC Titte19 Zoning Regulations; Title 22 Design & Development Regulations Page 4 of 5 MUC - Mixed Use Center, CMU- Corridor Mixed Use and CC- City Center These new districts encourage a mix of residential, quasi-industrial and commercial uses in an urban environment. Many of the requirements outlined here may be superseded by the FTS proposals as part of the Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan. The development of residential would require dedication of land or open space associated with any residential development. Essential Public Facilities. Council cannot unilaterally change the Regional Process for siting Essential Public Facilities. However, recent experience suggests that notwithstanding the regional siting process, a conditional use permit should be required to address transportation and other issues such as parking, lighting and landscaping. Airport Hazard Overlay No change from current regulations. Planning Commission has recommended approval of this section. Pipeline Hazard Limited safety requirements and notification of pipeline companies. Site Plan Review Authorizes site plan review prior to issuance of a building permit. Administrative Exceptions Clarifies the purpose of these exceptions. Otherwise unchanged from current regulations. Conditional Use Permits Unchanged from current regulations. Temporary Use Permits Unchanged from current regulations. Variances Unchanged from current regulations. Conforms with statutory requirements. Schedule of Permitted Uses Planning Commission has initiated a final review of the schedule of specific uses permitted in individual zoning districts, existing and proposed. Title 22 - Desiqn & Development Regulations. Planning Commission has not initiated its review of this title. This Title includes concurrency, dimensional standards, off-street parking and loading, outdoor lighting, fencing, screening and landscaping, sign regulations, wireless communication facilities, streets, sidewalks and public places, street vacations, and stormwater management regulations. Each of these is discussed in summary manner below: Concurrency This provision is required for transportation, and water and wastewater, and is primarily procedural. As drafted, concurrency for other services is optional. Performance Standards & Incentives (Reserved) Evacuation and Emergency Response Standards (Reserved) Off-Street Parking & Loading Standards Council has complete discretion to alter or change any of these provisions. This section provides for the number, location and dimensions of required off-street parking. It also provides for shared parking, compact cars, car and van pool parking, accessible parking, stacking and queing, parking lot design, and off-street loading, as well as bicycle parking. Administrative Report SVMC Title19 Zoning Regulations; Title 22 Design & Development Regulations Page 5 of 5 Outdoor Lighting Standards Council has complete discretion to alter or change any of these provisions. This section incorporates provisions of the Washington Energy Code as a requirement for outdoor lighting (except in all but one and two family dwellings), minimizing light pollution. Unlike most lighting ordinances, it does NOT establish maximum height of light standards, but alloys height to be determined by a proponent based on location relative to adjacent property. Fencing, Screening & Landscaping Council has discretion to change any of these provisions except those established by AASHTO for clearview triangles. Allowing electric fences and under what conditions was a question raised during earlier consideration of clearview triangles. The proposed provisions identify requirements for screening and buffering that are aligned with present practice. Significant changes include establishing a point system for the minimum amount of landscaping, requiring that landscaping design and installation be certified by a licensed landscape architect, requires additional landscaping along aesthetic corridors, provides for headlight screening, street trees, screening of loading docks, landscaping for free-standing signs, and xeriscaping. It also provides for tree preservation by providing credit against landscaping requirements for existing trees. Included are planting details and plat species recommended for this area. Sign Regulations The proposed regulations are those recommended by the ad hoc Sign Committee. The regulations have been simplified and definitions are included. These provisions anticipate that additional zoning districts will be established, include "cap and replace" for billboards established in the Comprehensive Plan. Wireless Communication f=acilities Council has complete discretion to alter or change any of these provisions. These provisions generally continue the previous standards. Streets Sidewalks & Public Places This section adopts existing street and sewer construction standards by reference as well as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. It also adopts the Regional Pavement Cut Policy, clarifying inconsistencies in the policy. Council cannot modify the Regional Policy. Street Vacations State law is fairly prescriptive. This section has no changes from the existing regulations. Stormwater Management This section does not change the existing regulations. Titles 19 and 22 were submitted to the Community Trade & Economic Development Department (CTED) on January 27, 2007 not less than sixty days prior to final adoption by the City Council. OPTIONS: Approve as submitted, recommend changes or provide, staff with additional direction. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None required. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Mary Kate Martin, Chief Building Official ATTACHMENTS: Title 19 - Zoning Regulations and Title 22- Design & Development Standards Progress Report Update Uniform Development Cade. Title 19 - Zoning F egulations Title 22 R- Design Development Standards May 15, 2007 E-1i4ik '0 -OFnIIILL11it. OV.IOJ4 ment `~.~1 r', I'lilnllrrl~'F}rwr~ion ` ' Purpose o Brief Council on Planning Commission Review of Title 19- oiling Regulations and ride 22 - Design & Development Standards pepHrtment V nimunity lle`velopmen't Title 19 Zoning Regulations • Zoning regulations-implement the land use provisions of the Comprehensive Plan • Zoning regulations typically address permitted land use, dimensional and use standards, non-conforming uses and variances • Cities over 20,000 population must permit accessory dwelling units • Manufactured housing must be permitted where site built housing is allowed r)e~:ir6- itof Coniiiiunif~'Ue:~elopnieiits 4' Sprrla.nu~ t r ,xr'~r'fi' r i"Y =j4.iU~K l"14 -Dnision;c: Major Issues • Low density residential - 3 zones or 4? Minimum lot size and criteria for limiting rezones to "preserve character" • Schedule of Permitted Uses • The zoning map • Detached accessory dwelling units • Open space required for multi-family • Service alleys for larger commercial/office development • Shared access for commercial/office Aci)urtment of C otniiiu ii- beev elopmefit ~.~~~~~3~ii~ y •i'18nnui~D~~ision Title 22 Design & Development Standards • Planning Commission has not considered the proposed Title - Likely Issues: • Outdoor lighting • Off-street parking • Fencing screening & landscaping • Sign regulations • Generally unchanged, at least for the time being • Wireless Communications • Street Vacations • Road Standards • Stormwater Requirements Department of Communit}. Development j`1 illee Planning Division e Questions? DRAFT )OWANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of May 9, 2007 4:30 p.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings May 22, 2007, ReLular MeetinR, 6:00 p.m. [due date Monday, May 141 1. Consent Agenda: Payroll, Claims, Minutes [5 minutes] 2. Ordinance re Definitions - Cary Driskell [10 minutes] 3. Proposed Resolution Amending 2007 TIP - Steve Worley [10 minutes] 4. Motion Consideration: Appleway Extension, MT P Request - Steve Worley [10 minutes] 5. Motion Consideration: Solid Waste Options - Cary Driskell [20 minutes] 6. Admin Report: Lodging Tax Committee Recommendations - Steve Taylor [15 minutes] 7. Admin Report: Panhandling - Cary Driskell/Erik Lamb [20 minutes] 8. Admin Report: Sprague Appleway Revitalization Plan - Scott Kuhta [20 minutes] 9. Admin Report: Draft 3, CenterPlace Marketing Plan - Mike Jackson [ 15 minutes] 10. Information Only: Department Reports; Response to Public Comments EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending Litigation [estimated meeting: 115 minutes] May 29, 2007 - DAY AFTER MEMORTAia DAY-NO M-EETLNG Sat, June 2, 2007 - Council/Staff Retreat, 9 a.m. - 3 p.m. (disc date Monday, LMay Councilmember Denenny's Cabin. 29897 N. Isle View Road, Spirit ,Lake, Idaho 83869. Tentative Agenda hems: Fiauling Options, Bond issues, 2005 Gools (Valley CDBG Program); Council webcasts; Updated Financial Forecast; Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan; Business Plan; Brainstorming une 5, 2007, Special-Mecting 6:00 p.m. Idue date.Ttjesdtiv; May 29, 2_0"a . t'UI3I iC;~T,F:ARI\'(; Proj~oszd '?008-2013 1`Ll' - Steve \Arorley[l0 minutes] PUBLIC 1[) i~Itl\'G:.~tiistin FIe<irini:.Fxarnincr Ancieal Quasi-Judicial, closed record hearing 1'30 mina 3. Consent Agenda: Payroll, Claims, Minutes [5 minutes] 4. Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Committee Grant Approvals - Steve Taylor [5 minutes] 5. Motion Consideration: Appleway Avenue Construction Contract Award -Steve Worley [10 minutes] 6. Admin Report: MasterPlan Final Presentation - Steve Worley/ JUB Representative [60 minutes] [estimated meeting: 1.20 minutes] Tuesday, Tune 12, 2007 - No Meeting or Study Session (June 12-15: AWC Cities Conference, Tacoma) iIlonday, June .18, i0 p.nr. JOINT AfEETIA'G fV/SI'OKANF. COUiArTY COALVI1SSIONERS:.Conf1r171~'CI Cotmty s HR Training Room June 1.9,2007,6:00 p.m. Study Session [due date Monday, ,Tune 11] 1. Miscellaneous Financial Policies - Ken Thompson (15 minutes) 2. Pines/Mansfield Construction Contract Schedule & Budget - Steve Worley (20 minutes) 3. Jail Issues - Cary Driskell/Rick VanLeuven (20 minutes) 4. Police Department Update -Rick VanLeuven (20 minutes) 5. Street Vacations Compensation - Mike Connelly (20 minutes) 6. Presentation on Crime Reporting Options - Mike DeVleming (15 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 110 minutes Draft Advancc Agenda 5/10f2007 8:05 AM Page I of2 .Tune 26, 2007, Regular Meeting, 6:00 pan. (due date Monday, June 181 1. Consent Agenda: Payroll, Claims, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Amendment to Animal Control Ordinance - Cary Driskell [10 minutes] 3 Ftrsllttraclin s F ~tuce Oxdinanc'tis Ken Thompson'' [20.niiiiutes] 4. Proposed Resolution Adopting 2008-2013 TIP - Steve Worley [10 minutes] 5. Motion Consideration: Approval of Pines/Mansfield Construction Contract Award - Steve Worley [10 minutes] 6. Motion Consideration: Adoption of CenterPlace Marketing Plan - Mike Jackson [10 minutes] 7. AdminR.eport: Initial Legislative 2008 Agenda - Dave Mercier [20 minutes] 8. Information Only: Department Reports [estimated meeting: 85 minutes] Z67neelini% :Tuy 3,x2007 RA:YRFEAR}._ ' t`OF' JUT 1' - 7 July 10, 2007, Regular Meeting, 6:00 p.m. [due date Monday, July 2] 1. Consent Agenda: Payroll, Claims, Minutes [5 minutes] 2. Second Reading Amendment to Animal Control Ordinance - Cary Driskell [10 minutes] 3. Second Readings Finance Ordinances - Ken Thompson [20 minutes] 4. Admin Report: UDC Title 24 - Marina Sukup [15 minutes] [estimated meeting: 60 minutes] Julv 17.2007, 6:00 p.m. Study Session UDC Deliberation, including consensus for Title 24 [due date Monday, July 9] [120 minutes] July 24, 2007, Regular Meeting, 6:00 p.m. (due date Monday, July 161 111:4103LI fit, ARENGI: 200K;ReveiuiesfPro T Takes Kcn Thoinpsofl ~ [l5~ mii iites: 2. Consent Agenda: Payroll, Claims, Minutes (5 minutes] 3. Admin Report: Paperless Agendas, Cost Comparisons - Chris Bainbridge (20 minutes] 4. Information Only: Department Reports [estimated meeting: minutes] July 31, 2007, 6:00 p.m. Studv Session [due date Monday, July 231 UDC Deliberation [120 minutes] August 7, 2007: Possible Alo Meetint► (Presumed National Night Out) August 14, 2007, Regular Meeting, 6:00 p.m. [due date Monday, Aug 6] 1. Consent ,Agenda: Payroll, Claims, Minutes [5 minutes] August 21., 2007, 6:00 p.m. Study Session [due date 'Monday, Aug 13]] OTHER PENDING AN'WOR UPCONTING TSSUESNTEETiNGS: 1,ibrary Capitat'Facil.ities :Area Formation Ap r2.,•r j (resolution) Fork Force Development, In-Service Definitions CDBG Review Noise Ordinance (Construction Activity) Modified Crime Check/Crime Reporting Central Valley School District Impact Fee Request Sewer Collection Systems -Nei I K.ersten Sept 27-29, 2007: NLC, Energy, Environment & Nat ral Resources Steering Committee Fall Meeting: CenterPlace Accident Statistics along Broadway - October 2007 Adoption of 2008 Budget - October 30, 2007 Solid Waste - NVUTC notice - Cary Driskell Outdoor Pool Concepts -,dike Jackson estimated meeting time does not include time for public comments. s] Draft Advance Agenda 5/10/2007 8:05 AM Page 2 of 2 Rr"piM) ne ,;OOVaHey 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org Informational Memo Date: May 3, 2007 To: David Mercier, City Manager and City Council Members From: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer- Capital Projects Cc: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Re: Appleway Avenue Extension - Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Over the past year city staff has been working with a team of consultants on the development of a subarea plan for the development of a City Center and the economic revitalization of the Sprague/Appleway corridor. An integral part of this work evaluated the existing transportation network and identified proposed recommendations to support the revitalization efforts. On March 1, 2007 t:he consultant team presented to City Council and Planning Commission members their land use and transportation recommendations. Three important elements of the transportation recommendations included: 1) The extension of Appleway Avenue from University Road to beyond Sullivan Road as a two- lane, two-way residential boulevard, 2) The reduction of Sprague Avenue from seven lanes to five lanes east of University Road, and 3) The conversion of the existing one-way couplet between Argonne Road/Dishman-Mica Road and University Road to two two-way streets. The general consensus of the City Council and Planning Commission members was to have the consultant proceed with the development of the remainder of the subarea plan based on their recommendations for land use and transportation network. In anticipation of the subarea plan being completed with the three transportation elements described above, Public Works staff recommends that a request be forwarded to the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) to include these recommendations in the 2007 update of the Metropolitan 'T'ransportation Plan (MTP) for 2030 currently being developed by SRTC staff. Staff believes the recormendations from the subarea plan consultants as described above and the process used in developing these recommendations rneet the required Regional Transportation Goals and Policies as outlined in the current MTP. In order to pursue transportation grants to help fund these projects, they must be included in the m'rP. Requesting this MTP amendment now for the Sprabue/Appleway corridor puts the city in a position to Info Memo 5/3107 Appleway Avenue Extension - Metropolitan Transportation Plan (W fl?) Page 2 begin developing transportation grant applications; one of which could be to the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) clue at the end of August this year. The SRTC Transportation Manager has been briefed on this and has indicated agreement with moving forward with the MTP request. Staff has scheduled on Council's May 22 regular meeting agenda, a Motion Consideration to move forward with this MTP request. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments.