Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2014, 05-27 Regular Meeting
AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday,May 27,2014 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 11707 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER: INVOCATION: Pastor Steve Williams,New Life Assembly of God Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: MAYOR'S REPORT: PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.)When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion:I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a.Approval of claim vouchers on May 27,2014 Request for Council Action,Totaling: $1,181,216.54 b.Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending May 15,2014: $312,980.36 c.Approval of May 6,2014 Study Session Council Meeting Minutes d.Approval of May 12,2014 Special Council Meeting Executive Session Minutes e.Approval of May 13,2014 Regular Formal Council Meeting Minutes NEW BUSINESS: 2.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-005, Comprehensive Plan Amendments—Lori Barlow [public comment] 3.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-006,Zoning Map—Lori Barlow [public comment] 4.Motion Consideration: Bid Award Appleway Resurfacing—Eric Guth [public comment] 5.Motion Consideration: 2015-2020 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan—Eric Guth [public comment] 6.Motion Consideration: Solid Waste Selection of Provider—Mike Jackson,Erik Lamb [public comment] Council Agenda 05-27-14 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.)When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 7. Spokane Conservation District—Walt Edelen, Garth Davis 8.Advance Agenda INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed): 9. Department Monthly Reports 10.Browns Park Master Plan CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meeting Schedule (meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting formats are generally held the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session formats(the less formal meeting) are generally held the 1st, 3rd and 5th Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included,comments are permitted after those specific action items. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509) 921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Council Agenda 05-27-14 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 27, 2014 Department Director Approval: IZ Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS TOTAL AMOUNT 05/08/2014 32168-32226, 505140019 $497,919.32 05/09/2014 4767,4779-4782,4791,32227-32229 $276,132.42 05/09/2014 32230-32258 $130,177.13 05/15/2014 32259-32271 $ 8,517.25 05/16/2014 4792-4796, 32272 $ 73,460.28 05/16/2014 5720-5726 $ 887.00 05/16/2014 32273-32303, 514140012 $194,123.14 GRAND TOTAL: $1,181,216.54 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists #001 -General Fund Other Funds 001.011.000.511 City Council 101 —Street Fund 001.013.000.513. City Manager 103 —Paths&Trails 001.013.015.515. Legal 105—Hotel/Motel Tax 001.016.000. Public Safety 120—CenterPlace Operating Reserve 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 121 —Service Level Stabilization Reserve 001.018.014.514. Finance 122—Winter Weather Reserve 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 123 —Civic Facilities Replacement 001.032.000. Public Works 204—Debt Service 001.058.050.558. Comm.Develop.-Administration 301 —Capital Projects(1St 1/4%REET) 001.058.055.558. Comm.Develop.—Develop.Eng. 302—Special Capital Proj (2nd 1/4%REET) 001.058.056.558. Community Develop.-Planning 303 —Street Capital Projects 001.058.057.558. Community Develop.-Building 304—Mirabeau Point Project 001.076.000.576. Parks&Rec—Administration 307—Capital Grants 001.076.300.576. Parks&Rec-Maintenance 309—Parks Capital Grants 001.076.301.571. Parks&Rec-Recreation 310—Civic Bldg Capital Projects 001.076.302.576. Parks&Rec-Aquatics 311 —Pavement Preservation 001.076.304.575. Parks &Rec- Senior Center 312—Capital Reserve 001.076.305.571. Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 402—Stormwater Management 001.090.000.511. General Gov't-Council related 403 —Aquifer Protection Area 001.090.000.514. General Gov't-Finance related 501 —Equipment Rental&Replacement 001.090.000.517. General Gov't-Employee supply 502—Risk Management 001.090.000.518. General Gov't-Centralized Services 001.090.000.519. General Gov't-Other Services 001.090.000.540. General Gov't-Transportation 001.090.000.550. General Gov't-Natural&Economic 001.090.000.560. General Gov't-Social Services 001.090.000.594. General Gov't-Capital Outlay 001.090.000.595. General Gov't-Pavement Preservation RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 05/08/2014 2:59:33PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32168 5/8/2014 000648 ABADAN, REPROGRAPHICS&IMAGING 31805 00t032.000.543 3 PRINTS 143.35 Total : 143.35 32169 5/8/2014 002816 ABLE CLEAN-UP TECHNOLOGIES INC 15642 001.058.056.524 HAZARDOUS WASTE TECHNICIAN 577.18 15649 001.058.056.524 FENCING RENTAL 1,065.26 Total : 1,642.44 32170 5/8/2014 002988 ACE LANDSCAPING 4464 101.042.000.542 2014 LANDSCAPING RIGHT OF WA 9,211.41 4623 101.042.000.542 2014 LANDSCAPING RIGHT OF WA 9,211.41 4688 311.000.180.595 SPRINKLER REPAIRS 117.20 Total : 18,540.02 32171 5/8/2014 000197 AIRFACTZ 82774 001.018.016.518 CRIMINAL REPORTS FOR NEW HIF 120.00 Total : 120.00 32172 5/8/2014 001081 ALSCO LSPO1462544 001.058.057.558 MAT SERVICE PERMIT CENTER 55.28 Total : 55.28 32173 5/8/2014 000394 AM LANDSHAPER INC PAYAPP 5(FINAL) 303.303.155.594 SULLIVAN PARK IMPROVEMNTS PI 55,561.19 Total : 55,561.19 32174 5/8/2014 001540 ARNOLD, DARLA 2ND PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPIGI 15.00 Total : 15.00 32175 5/8/2014 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 136216 101.042.000.542 RENTAL EQUIPMENT PW 130.44 Total : 130.44 32176 5/8/2014 001816 BENTHIN&ASSOCIATES 2148 303.303.149.595 0149-DESIGN&ROW SERVICES 1,200.00 Total : 1,200.00 32177 5/8/2014 003090 BIG R STORES 054818/3 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 97.78 Total : 97.78 32178 5/8/2014 002615 BULLOCK,SUSAN 1ST PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPIGI 10.00 Total : 10.00 32179 5/8/2014 001122 CAMERON-REILLY LLC PAYAPP 4 303.303.168.595 0168-WELLESLEYAVE&ADAMS I 370.61 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/08/2014 2:59:33PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32179 5/8/2014 001122 001122 CAMERON-REILLY LLC (Continued) Total : 370.61 32180 5/8/2014 001388 CARTEGRAPH SYSTEMS INC R-0934514 001.032.000.543 PAVEPLUS AND MAP REVIEW MAI? 1,947.50 Total : 1,947.50 32181 5/8/2014 003306 CENTURY SURVEY INC 2567 303.000.196.595 PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SER\ 3,080.00 Total : 3,080.00 32182 5/8/2014 002572 CINTAS CORPORATION 606810743 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES ACCOUNT 02356 125.64 606811663 101.042.000.543 SERVICE ACCOUNT 02384 176.99 606811842 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES ACCOUNT 02356 112.45 606812924 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES ACCOUNT 02356 112.45 606813823 101.042.000.543 SERVICE ACCOUNT 02384 206.39 606813999 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES ACCOUNT 02356 112.45 606815095 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES ACCOUNT 02356 125.64 Total : 972.01 32183 5/8/2014 000571 CODE PUBLISHING COMPANY 46423 001.013.000.513 MUNICIPAL CODE UPDATE 172.46 Total : 172.46 32184 5/8/2014 003319 CO-ENERGY, CONNEL OIL 0084914-IN 101.000.000.542 OIL PRODUCTS FOR MAINT SHOP 477.68 0085984-IN 101.000.000.542 OIL PRODUCTS FOR MAINT SHOP 1,413.56 Total : 1,891.24 32185 5/8/2014 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 36599552 001.018.014.514 APRIL 2014: FLEET FUEL BILL 2,575.14 Total : 2,575.14 32186 5/8/2014 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 109355 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 97.40 Total : 97.40 32187 5/8/2014 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC MAY 2014 101.042.000.543 COMMON AREA MAINT FACILITY C 179.68 Total : 179.68 32188 5/8/2014 003255 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 559762 101.042.000.543 TOWER RENTAL FOR PUBLIC WOF 204.02 Total : 204.02 32189 5/8/2014 003624 DEHN,SHELLY 1ST PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPIGI 10.00 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/08/2014 2:59:33PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32189 5/8/2014 003624 003624 DEHN,SHELLY (Continued) Total : 10.00 32190 5/8/2014 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE-313-ATB40415125 303.303.155.595 SULLIVAN RD W BRIDGE REPLACE 497.03 Total : 497.03 32191 5/8/2014 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST APRIL 2014 001.076.304.575 ADVERTISING FOR SENIOR CENTS 39.00 Total : 39.00 32192 5/8/2014 002385 DKS ASSOCIATES 54650 303.303.060.595 ARGONNE CORRIDOR SIGNAL&D 564.00 Total : 564.00 32193 5/8/2014 002157 ELJAY OIL COMPANY 4223598 101.000.000.542 FUEL PRODUCTS FOR SNOW PLO 205.12 Total : 205.12 32194 5/8/2014 001993 FISCH, PETE 2ND PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPIGI 15.00 Total : 15.00 32195 5/8/2014 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 118775 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 138.00 118776 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 207.00 41857 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 169.20 41859 001.058.056.558 LEGAL NOTICE 92.65 41860 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 71.40 41861 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 87.55 41862 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 98.60 Total : 864.40 32196 5/8/2014 002992 FREEDOM TRUCK CENTERS PC001167361:01 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 97.23 PC001167963:01 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 32.50 Total : 129.73 32197 5/8/2014 000609 GENDRONS CO 4085 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 114.95 Total : 114.95 32198 5/8/2014 000946 GRISSOM,JAY EXPENSE 001.058.055.558 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 258.07 Total : 258.07 32199 5/8/2014 000002 H&H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 114610 101.042.000.542 SERVICE ON PLOTTER: PW 95.00 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 05/08/2014 2:59:33PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32199 5/8/2014 000002 000002 H&H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. (Continued) Total: 95.00 32200 5/8/2014 001905 HERMANN, PHIL 1ST PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPIGI 10.00 Total : 10.00 32201 5/8/2014 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 100356 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 36.64 101273 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 1,138.47 101488 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 375.31 101489 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 72.56 101680 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 121.09 CM98236 101.000.000.542 CREDIT MEMO:SUPPLIES PW -329.98 Total : 1,414.09 32202 5/8/2014 002518 INLAND PACIFIC HOSE&FITINGS 507817 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 14.91 507829 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 378.94 507990 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 16.31 Total : 410.16 32203 5/8/2014 001987 JENKINS,ART EXPENSE 402.000.193.531 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 129.66 Total : 129.66 32204 5/8/2014 000910 MANTZ, GLORIA 2ND PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT'WELLNESS CAMPIGI 15.00 Total : 15.00 32205 5/8/2014 003251 MDI MARKETING 9923 001.090.000.558 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTADVEF 1,230.00 Total : 1,230.00 32206 5/8/2014 002948 NA DEGERSTROM NAD JOB#1413 101.043.000.542 ITEM 10 SULLIVAN BRIDGE WORK 9,053.50 Total : 9,053.50 32207 5/8/2014 000662 NAT'L BARRICADE&SIGN CO 83131 101.042.000.542 DECALS FOR STREET 589.15 83267 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 74.35 Total : 663.50 32208 5/8/2014 002289 NICKERSON, DEVEN 1ST PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPIGt 10.00 Total : 10.00 32209 5/8/2014 002936 NORSTAR INDUSTRIES INC 50497 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 608.30 Page: 4 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 05/08/2014 2:59:33PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32209 5/8/2014 002936 002936 NORSTAR INDUSTRIES INC (Continued) Total : 608.30 32210 5/8/2014 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 710576585001 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 235.09 Total : 235.09 32211 5/8/2014 000058 OMA A500163 001.018.016.518 NEW HIRE PHYSICALS 130.00 Total : 130.00 32212 5/8/2014 000881 OXARC R268882 101.042.000.542 CYLINDER RENTAL: PW 90.98 Total : 90.98 32213 5/8/2014 001204 POWELL, DOUGLAS EXPENSE 001.058.055.558 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 224.00 Total : 224.00 32214 5/8/2014 003208 RODDA PAINT CO. 9418552 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 228.31 Total : 228.31 32215 5/8/2014 003619 S&L UNDERGROUND INC PAY APP 2 403.000.173.594 CONSTRUCTION OF DECANT FACI 154,732.72 Total : 154,732.72 32216 5/8/2014 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. 5898374 101.042.000.542 2014 EMERGENCY TRAFFIC CONT 530.46 Total : 530.46 32217 5/8/2014 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 5-700976 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 251.59 Total : 251.59 32218 5/8/2014 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS INVC064487 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 10,356.23 Total : 10,356.23 32219 5/8/2014 000459 SPOKANE CO TITLE CO 5-195865 303.303.156.595 OWNER'S POLICY 293.49 Total : 293.49 32220 5/8/2014 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 110100035 101.042.000.542 ENGINEERING AND ROAD SERVIC 45,623.09 Total : 45,623.09 32221 5/8/2014 000093 SPOKESMAN-REVIEW 390725 001.013.000.513 ADVERTISING ACCOUNT 9013993 119.97 391683 001.076.301.571 ADVERTISING ACCOUT 42801 227.76 Total : 347.73 Page: 5 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 05/08/2014 2:59:33PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32222 5/8/2014 000335 TIRE-RAMA 8080028590 001.058.057.558 32809D:SERVICE 1,078.09 Total : 1,078.09 32223 5/8/2014 003458 TRAFFIC SAFETY SUPPLY CO 980894 303.303.181.595 SUPPLIES FOR TRAFFIC 12,621.75 Total : 12,621.75 32224 5/8/2014 000780 UNION PACIFIC RR CO 90043317 101.042.000.542 PINES RD WA DOT 662519S 881.58 Total : 881.58 32225 5/8/2014 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 2139864-2681-4 101.042.000.543 WASTE MANAGEMENT: MAINT SH( 173.74 Total : 173.74 32226 5/8/2014 000347 WORLEY,STEVE 1ST PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPIGI 10.00 Total : 10.00 505140019 5/5/2014 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER APRIL 2013 001.016.000.512 SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES 164,768.40 Total : 164,768.40 60 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 497,919.32 60 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 497,919.32 Page: 6 vchlist Voucher List Page: ---i—. 7 05/09/2014 9:12:59AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 4767 5/5/2014 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben54457 001.231.15.00 PERS:PAYMENT 75,724.28 Total: 75,724.28 4779 5/5/2014 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A PLAN Ben54459 001.231.14.00 401A:PAYMENT 31,515.02 Total: 31,515.02 4780 5/5/2014 000682 EFTPS Ben54461 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 32,965.02 Total: 32,965.02 4781 5/5/2014 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS,457 PL/ Ben54463 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:PAY! 6,291.32 Total: 6,291.32 4782 5/5/2014 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A EXEC PL Ben54465 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN:PAYMENT 1,127.26 Total: 1,127.26 4791 5/5/2014 000682 EFTPS Ben54476 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 964.82 Total: 964.82 32227 5/5/2014 000120 AWC Ben54451 101.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS:PAYMENT 114,162.69 Ben54474 001.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS(COUNCIL):PAYMENT 9,936.06 Total: 124,098.75 32228 5/5/2014 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben54453 001.231.21.00 UNION DUES:PAYMENT 2,579.95 Total: 2,579.95 32229 5/5/2014 002574 WASHINGTON TRUST BANK Ben54455 001.231.20.00 BERG20110-02-03952-4:PAYMENT 866.00 Total: 866.00 9 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 276,132.42 9 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 276,132.42 Page: -a-- vchlist Voucher List Page: -4- '05/09/2014 1:05:38PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32230 5/9/2014 000150 ALLIED FIRE&SECURITY IVC1026881 001.076.305.575 KEYS FOR CENTERPLACE 10.88 Total : 10.88 32231 5/9/2014 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL LLC INV010175 001.016.000.521 PRECINCT JANITORIAL SERVICES 2,386.87 Total : 2,386.87 32232 5/9/2014 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9533469 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 217.76 9535490 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 145.39 S0079253 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 89.38 S0079924 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 41.25 S0079990 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 55.00 Total : 548.78 32233 5/9/2014 001103 CAREER TRACK, FRED PRYOR SEMINAI 20-3091269 001.076.305.575 SEMINAR REGISTRATION: B.MOAT 179.00 Total : 179.00 32234 5/9/2014 000572 CARTER, CAROL 1st PICTURE 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPAIC 10.00 2nd Picture 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPAIC 15.00 Expenses 001.076.305.575 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 161.60 Total : 186.60 32235 5/9/2014 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY APRIL/MAY 2014 001.018.016.518 PETTY CASH: 10240, 10241 26.82 Total : 26.82 32236 5/9/2014 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION#19 April 2014 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES: PARKS 406.84 APRIL2014 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW 148.49 Total : 555.33 32237 5/9/2014 000795 EARTHWORKS RECYCLING INC. 33323 001.076.305.575 RECYCLING COLLECTION CP 20.00 Total : 20.00 32238 5/9/2014 002308 FINKE, MELISSA April 2014 001.076.301.571 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 659.10 April 2014 001.076.301.571 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 210.60 Total : 869.70 32239 5/9/2014 003500 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 613204 001.076.305.575 COFFEE SUPPLIES FOR CP 32.00 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: -2 9 05/09/2014 1:05:38PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32239 5/9/2014 003500 003500 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES (Continued) Total : 32.00 32240 5/9/2014 003277 INLAND NW BUSINESS ALLIANCE 21708 001.076.305.575 ADVERTISING FOR CENTERPLACE 1,500.00 Total : 1,500.00 32241 5/9/2014 000070 INLAND POWER&LIGHT CO 94202 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES:APRIL 2014 PW 409.74 Total : 409.74 32242 5/9/2014 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST.#6 April 2014 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES: PARKS 166.00 Total : 166.00 32243 5/9/2014 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 724800 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLAI 189.64 727256 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLAI 163.29 729353 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLAI 184.36 729463 001.076.305.575 APRIL 2014 MONTHLY CLEANING C 7,136.00 Total : 7,673.29 32244 5/9/2014 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW CP M-4-23-2014 001.076.305.575 MEDIAAND PURCHASES EXPENSE 147.00 Total : 147.00 32245 5/9/2014 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 04500-01 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW 8,479.23 Total : 8,479.23 32246 5/9/2014 000240 NAT'L LEAGUE OF CITIES 97378 001.011.000.511 MEMBERSHIP FOR NATL LEAGUE 6,697.00 Total : 6,697.00 32247 5/9/2014 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC 1st QTR 2014 CAM 001.090.000.518 1ST QTR 2014 CAM CHARGES 1,000.85 Total : 1,000.85 32248 5/9/2014 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 1676597938 001.018.013.513 SUPPLIES:OPS&ADMIN 11.27 Total : 11.27 32249 5/9/2014 001084 PAPICH,JENNIFER 1st Picture 001.018.016.518 "PICTURE IT"WELLNESS CAMPAIC 10.00 Total : 10.00 32250 5/9/2014 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. 2013 001.223.40.00 RETAINAGE RELEASE:2013 PARK 33,259.20 5488865 001.076.300.576 CONTRACT MAINT:PARKS APRIL 2 58,057.77 6052235 001.016.000.521 MONTHLY SERVICES AT PRECINC- 1,121.79 ` Page: 12- vchlist Voucher List Page: 3- 05/09/2014 1:05:38PM Spokane Valley 0 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32250 5/9/2014 000709 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. (Continued) Total : 92,438/6 32251 5/9/2014 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 April 2014 101.042.000.542 WATER CHARGES: PW 36.39 April 2014 001.076.300.576 WATER CHARGES FOR PARK ROA 32.95 Total : 69.34 32252 5/9/2014 000420 SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DIST 2014 001.076.302.576 PERMIT FEES FOR WATER REC FA 2,110.00 Total : 2,110.00 32253 5/9/2014 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 51961 001.016.000.521 ARPIL 2014: MONTHLY MAINTENAIN 587.80 Total : 587.80 32254 5/9/2014 003532 STERICYCLE COMMUNICATION,SOLUTI 140411173101 001.076.305.575 ANSWERING SVC FOR CENTERPL 31.20 Total : 31.20 32255 5/9/2014 001472 TESTAMERICA LABORATORIES 59009085 001.076.300.576 TC/PA ANALYSIS: PARKS 27.00 Total : 27.00 32256 5/9/2014 000167 VERA WATER&POWER April 2014 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES:APRIL 2014 2,944.44 Total : 2,944.44 32257 5/9/2014 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 2139862-2681-8 001.076.305.575 WASTE MANAGEMENT: CENTERPI 752.10 2139863-2681-6 001.016.000.521 WASTE MANAGEMENT: PRECINCT 286.27 Total : 1,038.37 32258 5/9/2014 000347 WORLEY,STEVE Expenses 001.032.000.543 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 19.86 Total : 19.86 29 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 130,177.13 29 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 130,177.13 Page: (-2.-- )0 1t vchlist Voucher List Page: -4— 05/15/2014 9:32:31AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32259 5/15/2014 001081 ALSCO LSPO1454311 001.016.000.521 FLOOR MAT SERVICE AT PRECINC 20.39 LSPO1460097 001.016.000.521 FLOOR MAT SERVICE AT PRECINC 20.39 LSPO1466007 001.016.000.521 FLOOR MAT SERVICE AT PRECINC 20.39 Total : 61.17 32260 5/15/2014 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9537534 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 421.20 S0080645 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 138.14 Total : 559.34 32261 5/15/2014 003300 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL April 2014 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE, GENEF 1,721.32 Total : 1,721.32 32262 5/15/2014 003658 COMPOGNO, DALE Refund 001.058.059.345 PERMIT REFUND: NO PERMIT REC 17.31 Total : 17.31 32263 5/15/2014 003657 HEARTH HOMES 2014 001.090.000.560 2014 SOCIAL SERVICES GRANT RE 1,097.19 Total : 1,097.19 32264 5/15/2014 002990 INPRO 34 001.076.305.575 ANNUAL DUES FOR 7/1/14-6/30/1; 150.00 Total : 150.00 32265 5/15/2014 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO April 2014 001.076.302.576 UTILITIES: PARKS 1,393.31 Total : 1,393.31 32266 5/15/2014 003659 MR. ROOTER PLUMBING Refund 001.058.059.322 PERMIT REFUND:OUTSIDE SCOPI 43.00 Total : 43.00 32267 5/15/2014 000283 NRPA 93303-2014 001.076.000.576 MEMBERSHIP-GROUP PACKAGE 390.00 Total : 390.00 32268 5/15/2014 001860 PLATT ELECTIRCAL SUPPLY B880404 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 126.80 Total : 126.80 32269 5/15/2014 000323 SPOKANE CO UTILITIES May 2014 001.076.302.576 SPOKANE CO SEWER CHRGS:MA 1,582.01 Total : 1,582.01 32270 5/15/2014 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 April 2014 001.076.300.576 WATER CHARGES FOR APPLEWAI 17.92 Page: ,4_ I( - tt 12 vchlist Voucher List Page: -� 05/15/2014 9:32:31AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32270 5/15/2014 000324 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 (Continued) Total : 17.92 32271 5/15/2014 002306 TERRELL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MIC 1191 309.000.195.594 DISCOVERY PLAYGROUND CONST 1,357.88 Total : 1,357.88 13 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 8,517.25 13 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 8,517.25 I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: i2. r� vchlist Voucher List Page: 4-- 05/16/2014 8:37:01AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 4792 5/20/2014 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A PLAN Ben54686 303231.14.00 401A:PAYMENT 31,644.78 Total: 31,644.78 4793 5/20/2014 000682 EFTPS Ben54688 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 33,024.06 Total: 33,024.06 4795 5/20/2014 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS,457 P11 Ben54690 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:PAYI 6,270.66 Total: 6,270.66 4796 5/20/2014 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A EXEC P1 Ben54692 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN:PAYMENT 1,127.26 Total: 1,127.26 32272 5/20/2014 002227 IDAHO TAX COMMISSION Ben54684 001.231.50.03 IDAHO STATE TAX BASE:PAYMENT 1,393.52 Total: 1,393.52 5 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 73,460.28 5 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 73,460.28 Page: —4— I lLI vchlist Voucher List Page: 3' 05/16/2014 8:37:01AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: —2- 114 )S vchlist Voucher List Page: 4-- 05/16/2014 12:52:19PM Spokane Valley Bank code: pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5720 5/16/2014 003663 CARCHEDI,ALISON PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT DISCOVERY PL 52.00 Total : 52.00 5721 5/16/2014 003665 FREEMAN HIGH SCHOOL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT FIRESIDE LOU' 210.00 Total : 210.00 5722 5/16/2014 003662 GILE, CARIS PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND FOR F 52.00 Total : 52.00 5723 5/16/2014 003375 HAAKON INDUSTRIES PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT FIRESIDE LOU' 52.00 Total : 52.00 5724 5/16/2014 001328 INLAND EMPIRE GOLDEN, RETRIEVER( PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT; BROWNS PARI 52.00 Total : 52.00 5725 5/16/2014 003664 KEEN,SHEILA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 CANCELATION REFUND FOR FIRE. 210.00 Total : 210.00 5726 5/16/2014 001336 RIVERSIDE HIGH SCHOOL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT GREAT ROOM 259.00 Total : 259.00 7 Vouchers for bank code: pk-ref Bank total : 887.00 7 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 887.00 Page: -1-- IS vchlist Voucher List Page: -2-- 05/16/2014 12:52:19PM Spokane Valley Bank code: pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: �-- 17 vchlist Voucher List Page: --9- 05/16/2014 2:07:31 PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32273 5/16/2014 000958 AAA SWEEPING LLC RETAINAGE 2013 402.223.40.00 STORM DRAIN RETAINAGE RELEA 9,423.51 Total : 9,423.51 32274 5/16/2014 000150 ALLIED FIRE&SECURITY JC1014639 001.090.000.518 IT SERVICES 1,623.99 Total : 1,623.99 32275 5/16/2014 000659 ASCE INLAND EMPIRE REGISTRATION 001.058.055.558 PLANNING SEMINAR: G GALLIGER 100.00 Total : 100.00 32276 5/16/2014 000173 BINGAMAN, GREG EXPENSE 001.018.014.514 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 156.20 Total : 156.20 32277 5/16/2014 001888 COMCAST MAY 2014 001.090.000.518 HIGH SPEED INTERNET FOR CITY 119.77 Total : 119.77 32278 5/16/2014 000409 DEPT OF REVENUE 71-0914170 001.239.90.01 UNCLAIMED PROPERTY PAYMENT 685.23 Total : 685.23 32279 5/16/2014 000409 DEPT OF REVENUE 3213-2014-QTR1 001.090.000.518 MLS CREDIT CARD FEES Q1 2014 488.49 Total : 488.49 32280 5/16/2014 003256 DISCOVERY BENEFITS INC, HRA PLAN 0000458474-IN 001.018.016.518 APRIL 2014 HRA SERVICE FEE 396.00 Total : 396.00 32281 5/16/2014 003661 DOLPHIN ENTERPRISES LLC CIP0202 311.000.202.595 TEMPERARY ACCESS AND CONST 10.00 Total : 10.00 32282 5/16/2014 002296 ELECTRONIC COMMERCE LINK 10400 001.018.013.513 MAINT&HOSITNG: E-GOV BASIC 7 1,512.00 Total : 1,512.00 32283 5/16/2014 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 41898 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 104.00 41899 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 76.80 41904 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 25.00 41905 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 91.80 Total : 297.60 32284 5/16/2014 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL APR 14 1042 001.011.000.511 LOBBYIST SERVICES 3,428.72 Page: --9-- i7 vchlist Voucher List Page: ---� 05/16/2014 2:07:31 PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32284 5/16/2014 001253 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL (Continued) Total : 3,428.72 32285 5/16/2014 001728 HP FINANCIAL SERVICES CO 600410493 001.090.000.548 SCHEDULE 572DA494: 05/19-6/18/1 839.80 600410494 001.090.000.548 SCHEDULE 572DD016:5/11-6/10/14 745.84 600412209 001.090.000.548 SCHEDULE 572D81 DD:4/7-5/6/14 550.02 Total : 2,135.66 32286 5/16/2014 003660 KALEY, RICHARD CRYWOLF 001.000.000.342 FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT V: 85.00 Total : 85.00 32287 5/16/2014 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER LLP 499 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,870.60 Total : 2,870.60 32288 5/16/2014 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 92291 001.018.016.518 SLOTTED NAME BADGE 28.26 Total : 28.26 32289 5/16/2014 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 707402457001 001.076.000.576 SUPPLIES: PARKS&REC 190.92 Total : 190.92 32290 5/16/2014 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER APRIL 2014 001.016.000.586 STATE REMITTANCE 55,996.45 Total : 55,996.45 32291 5/16/2014 002243 ORBITCOM 00755052 001.076.305.575 CENTERPLACE PHONE SERVICE 209.26 Total : 209.26 32292 5/16/2014 003587 PACE, ED EXPENSE 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 40.32 Total : 40.32 32293 5/16/2014 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. RETAINAGE 2013 101.223.40.00 STREET/STORMWATER MAINT RE 70,099.83 Total : 70,099.83 32294 5/16/2014 000675 RAMAX PRINTING&AWARDS 25534 001.013.015.515 NAME PLATES 21.20 Total : 21.20 32295 5/16/2014 002228 RASMUSSEN, MICHELLE EXPENSE 001.018.014.514 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 18.46 Total : 18.46 32296 5/16/2014 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 50311197 402.402.000.531 COUNTY IT SUPPORT 12,804.37 Page: -2- I ,, 2-I ,, 19 vchlist Voucher List Page: —3- 05/16/2014 2:07:31 PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32296 5/16/2014 000090 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS (Continued) Total : 12,804.37 32297 5/16/2014 000308 SPOKANE CO PROSECUTING ATTY APRIL 2014 001.016.000.586 CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATION F 831.94 Total : 831.94 32298 5/16/2014 000391 SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DIST.#1 1ST QTR 2014 001.229.45.00 1ST QTR 2014 FIRE FEES 19,709.02 Total : 19,709.02 32299 5/16/2014 003314 STALKER RADAR 252094 001.016.000.521 EQUIPMENT FOR SVPD 4,052.34 Total : 4,052.34 32300 5/16/2014 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3230539805 001.013.000.513 SUPPLIES: COUNCIL 84.50 3230539806 001.011.000.511 SUPPLIES: COUNCIL 33.60 Total : 118.10 32301 5/16/2014 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRIZES L.L.0 4302014 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING COUNCIL MTGS:, 1,432.00 Total : 1,432.00 32302 5/16/2014 000676 WEST 829508953 001.013.015.515 SUBSCRIPTION CHARGES 743.69 Total : 743.69 32303 5/16/2014 003002 XO COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES 0265896380 001.076.305.575 TERMINATION FEE-001000000079: 609.86 Total : 609.86 514140012 5/15/2014 002244 AOT PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION SPKVLY-53 001.016.000.521 CRY WOLF CHARGES-APRIL 2014 3,884.35 Total : 3,884.35 32 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 194,123.14 32 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 194,123.14 Page: '3-- ' 1 252) vchlist Voucher List Page: — 05/16/2014 2:07:31 PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: 2o CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 5-27-2014 Department Director Approval : ❑ Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Period Ending May 15, 2014 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 264,729.00 $ $264,729.00 Benefits: $ 48,251.36 j $ 48,251.36 Total payroll $ 312,980.36 $ $312,980.36 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington May 6, 2014 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Dean Grafos,Mayor Mark Calhoun,Finance Director Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Bill Bates, Councilmember Eric Guth,Public Works Director Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Recreation Director Rod Higgins, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Ed Pace,Councilmember Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Ben Wick, Councilmember Scott Kuhta,Planning Manager Carolbelle Branch,Public Information Officer Rick VanLeuven,Police Chief Chris Bainbridge,City Clerk Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll;all Councilmembers were present. ACTION ITEM: 1. Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Proposed Amendments—Lori Barlow Mayor Grafos explained the procedure for holding the hearing, opened the public hearing at 6:04 p.m., and after Senior Planner Barlow went over the proposed amendments (and later briefly explained each proposal),Mayor Grafos invited public testimony as follows: 1. CPA 01-14: Mirabeau Park, change from Parks/Open Space to Mixed Use Center: Speaking in favor of the proposal: Jamie Tregor, Spokane Wa., the property manager and leasing agent for Pinecroft Business Park, land owners between that parcel in question and all the way west to Pines Road; she said they own the majority of the land and the buildings there; she encouraged approval of the amendment; said all the land to the west is zoned mixed use commercial, and approving this would allow development in that parcel; said the land is currently vacant and could be developed if the change were permitted. John Miller, Colvert, Wa., Manager of Pinecroft Business Park, said he feels there are opportunities to create some space that would be good for specialized retail development, such as a restaurant, bike shop, or other things that would serve the trail, the park and the corporate entities; said in Pinecroft they probably have 300-400 people daily and that this would be very positive for the community. There were no further comments on this proposal,either in favor or against. 2. CPA 02-14 SCRAPS,Bradley Rd. change from Low Density Residential to Corridor Mixed Use. Speaking in favor of the proposal: Nancy Hill, Director of SCRAPS, said the new facility would open later this month; that the main parcel is zoned corridor mixed use, and the second property and the subject of this amendment is owned by SCRAPS and is zoned residential; she said green space is critical to animal shelters; she said the area in question would be used for walking dogs on leashes; said that from the beginning SCRAPS only intended to use the area in question as green space and as a dog walking area with dogs on leashes; said dogs will only be walked outside after being temperament-tested so as not to put anyone at risk, and that dogs perceived as a"flight risk"will be kept in the building. She said all dogs are vaccinated.Ms.Hill said that Council Study Session 05-06-2014 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT SCRAPS has no intention to build on that parcel or to sell later because green space is very valuable to an animal shelter. She noted that SCRAPS' use of that parcel will be the lowest impact use; she said there has been illegal dumping on the property and that SCRAPS will clean up, fence,and improve the property to make it more "parks-like." Ms. Hill said the use of the property would also be limited to daylight hours, and only a few dogs will be exercised at any one time. Director Hill said SCRAPS' impact will be far less than the currently allowed residential development of three to four houses with five-foot setbacks and no required fencing; she said each residence is permitted up to four dogs, which she said is a far greater impact than a few dogs being walked on a leash. She noted that barking should not be a problem as dogs bark when they are bored or not happy, and added that SCRAPS will have to abide by the nuisance regulations. She said SCRAPS will be a good, quiet, and responsible neighbor and that being part of the community is important, and it is important that dogs get outside for exercise; and she asked for approval of the proposal which will be low impact yet have great benefits to the community. Council asked for confirmation that SCRAPS has no intention of building on this property, and Ms. Hill confirmed that is correct; she said they are moving into a 30,000-foot building which will serve the needs of the community for likely fifty years, and confirmed that the idea of the SCRAPS building being sold is off the table. Speaking in opposition to the proposal: Mark Schollenburger: said he lives in Spokane Valley and his property borders the proposed rezone; said he opposes the rezone and that it is a "gross conflict of interest;" that they are not trying to rezone a secondary lot but are trying to rezone a third and fourth lot back from Trent; and said excluding Trent and Argonne,that doesn't occur anywhere on Trent in the valley; said this rezone will result in increased light and noise pollution and traffic congestion; said he can't walk in his own backyard at night without shielding his eyes because of the intensely bright lights on the new SCRAPS building; he said the County will be required to put in a 20-foot beauty zone and that there won't be a lot of property left after they do that. He said the problems will only get worse, and the business to the west, "Mutual Materials" would no longer be bound to the conditions of their rezone of approximately fifteen years ago and that they would gain about 4,400 feet of ground space; he said living next to them has been horrible; that their existing beauty zone is unsightly, and if the current rezone is approved, "Mutual Materials" will re-try to get the property at the corner of Montgomery and Elizabeth rezoned so they can use that; and said "Mutual Materials" can't use their own property now because it is residential. He also said that this re- zone would have an avalanche affect, and he asked if Council is aware of Avista's plan to acquire all eight houses on the west side of Elizabeth; that they want to buy the property, and change the zone to commercial and that they are working to acquire ten lots on the east of Elizabeth and they want the ten lots on the west side of Bradley all evacuated and changed to commercial. He said that probably won't happen for decades, but if it does go through, it will only leave nine lots on Bradley. He said that no traffic study was conducted and the current traffic on Bradley is terrible and that people turning left out of SCRAPS will have a difficult time getting onto Trent; said he is working to get no parking signs posted on the east side of Bradley since that part of the road is in"gross violation of current road standards." He asked council not to approve the proposal, and he submitted four pages of signatures of his neighbors opposing this proposal. 3. CPA 03-14: Barker and Sprague,Low Density Residential to High Density Residential Speaking in favor of the proposal: Todd Whipple, of Whipple Consulting Engineers, the Applicant: he referenced the large handout dated May 6, 2014, which was distributed to Council by the Clerk; and he went over some of those documents. Attachment one, Mr. Whipple explained, is a letter from property owner Wendell Olson, which letter addresses previous comments and concerns that this would be low income property. Mr. Whipple said this is not now and never has been intended as low-income property, and that a condition of approval could be that it not be low income property, and he said this was always intended to be market rate property. He explained that attachment 2 is intended to let Council know that they will hear a lot about Council Study Session 05-06-2014 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT rural character, and said he would challenge the rural character and nature of this neighborhood, and said in looking at the map, one sees the area of Spokane County's light industrial zoning directly to the east of Hodges, and further east is Liberty Lake, which is commercial mixed use; and said to characterize this neighborhood or anything inside the urban growth boundary as rural is "strictly erroneous" regardless of the lot size; and said there is no rural inside the City limits unless Council has designated it as one acre, which he said is what Council did in the Comp Plan Code. He explained that attachment 3, Traffic Analysis includes a memorandum concerning a traffic study they conducted; he said they used a count that was available to the Planning Commission but was never asked for, that clearly shows that the existing level of service is an acceptable level of service; he said the current level of service of the intersection of Barker and Sprague is C, in the evening it is B; he said there has also been circulating a comprehensive traffic analysis that looks at a ten year use for all the additional subdivisions not yet developed, and said they included the traffic from that which demonstrates that in a ten-year time frame, that intersection will be at D in the morning and E in the evening, and by City standards,it doesn't require signalization so that current intersection meets all the standards even with no improvements. Mr.Whipple said that doesn't mean there aren't problems at the freeway,but unequivocally as a licensed engineer, said there is nothing wrong with that intersection. Mr. Whipple noted that the next attachment is a copy of the City's TIP [Transportation Improvement Plan]; he said the materials also include a land quantity analysis his company did and said they calculated how many apartments have been constructed in the last three years and used the City's building department to determine how many houses were constructed in the last three years, and said if you use the land quantity analysis of approximately 735 residents a year,that only meets the goal and does not build any surplus. He brought council's attention to the Planning Commission's decisions as well as the staff report; and said that schools,traffic,noise, and rural character are not decision criteria outlined in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Whipple strongly encouraged Council to read the staff report to understand why City staff reviewed the application and recommended approval; he said City staff recommended approval because it met all of the goals associated with the Comp Plan and for a comp plan change. Mr. Whipple said the Planning Commission made it a "beauty contest" and said that is not what it is supposed to be. Scott Krajack, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho (spoke after#40 below): said he does not work for the applicant but is part of the development team that will be building the apartments if approved; said if approved,part of the project is improving the frontage, putting in sidewalks and participating in the intersection improvements, which would help that intersection; said he realizes there are problems with the intersection now and if nothing is done on the site, the City would have to pay for those improvements, whereas if they were able to develop the project, they'd do their frontage and participate in the intersection improvements; said they have two other projects they built, both of which are beautiful and well maintained with landscaping, and that they have very strict rules for admittance;he said they haven't experienced a lot of problem with crime; concerning schools, he said schools get money per student and by having bonds approved by voters; said if they built single family homes, he said he doesn't think people would buy a home there because there's too much traffic there now;the issue is to try to fix it. Kristin Agostinelli,property manager(spoke after#42 below), and manages the two properties previously developed; she showed council some pictures of the two complexes they built; said the apartments they manage have never had criminal problems described by Miles Daniel; and said she doesn't anticipate having those problems in this area either; they make sure the apartments are very well maintained; they have a very strict application process including a criminal, sexual offender background check as well as rental background check and an employment verification; they screen people as much as possible; said there are a lot of reason why people rent, some because they can't do lawn maintenance,or possibly can't afford a down payment; said they have had some renters stay in their unit as long as thirteen years; said they have 85%renew their leases; said tenants pay property tax as that is included in part of their rent. Council Study Session 05-06-2014 Page 3 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT The following spoke in opposition to the proposal, based on increased traffic, crime, congestion, overcrowding of schools and the need for busing,lack of sidewalks,lack of services, adding a multi- story apartment complex instead of residential homes, transient apartment residents, doing what a company wants instead of doing what citizens want, vacant apartments in Spokane Valley, that the area is rural and should be kept rural, objection to low income housing, maintaining the integrity and characteristics of the neighborhood,that they bought their homes based on current zoning; and depreciation of home values and property: 1. Clarisa Yake, Spokane Valley,lives just down the street from the property; 2. Danny Smith, Spokane Valley,proposal is 15 feet from his bedroom window 3.Justin Deymonaz, spoke of the transient apartment residents 4. Shirley Nowka,lives on Barker,been there thirty years,trouble backing out of her driveway 5. Carrie Sicilia,lives around the corner from the property, spoke of poor visibility at the intersection 6.Heather Graham, Spokane Valley, spoke of right to have a stable, safe community 7. Scott Jutte,lives across the street from the planned development;mentioned housing fairness 8. Kathy Scott, Spokane Valley,distributed a Central Valley School District handout about overcrowding 9.Jamie Bolinski, and on behalf of Curt Neal and she read his letter in opposition 10. Dallas Williams,Harmony Rd,erroneous Comp Plan tables 3.3, 3.4; services not in walking distance 11. William Donais,lives on Sprague,counts hundreds of cars going by his house in evenings 12.Miranda Colombo, Spokane Valley,read her poem about home is where the heart is 13. Clyde Smith, Spokane Valley,did his own traffic study this morning, 945 in the first hour; said 1997 ruling from Hearing Examiner Michael Dempsey includes restrictions on the property 14.Zeta Smith,Harmony Rd., said staff contacted basketball coach instead of other school officials 15. Debra Farnsworth, Spokane Valley,renter's lack of financial investment; emergency vehicles 16. Peter Higgins, Spokane County,outdated traffic study figures; gravel roads not up to code 17.Miles Daniel,people in apartments don't have same respect as single family home owners 18. Jackie Williams,lives next to the property; said no one supports this except Mr. Whipple 19. Stephanie Colombo, said Mr.Whipple said traffic would be ok in ten years but argument not founded 20.Myrna McElwain, said most people here are against this; don't need it,don't like it,don't want it 21.Keith Atkins,on Barker; his realtor said his house value will drop another$35,000 if build apartments 22.Kathleen McGaugh,lives two blocks east of Barker and Sprague;wants a peaceful community 23. George Covax,comments about roundabouts and lack of safety; they all have tire tracks on them 24. Craig Savage, Spokane Valley, schools too full;he sends his kids to private school 25. William Deymonaz, said Mr.Whipple is paid to say what he says; also mentioned fast traffic 26. Lee Nelson, speaks for him and his wife,area is rural; has large animals;has water pressure problems 27. David Colombo, said there is no money for improvements now or in ten years Mayor Grafos called for a recess at 7:30 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:45 p.m., at which time testimony continued from those opposed to the proposal. 28.Brian Ewasko,lives in the valley; said Twin Bridges neighborhood has a plan to add another church 29. Selena Filler, said she is opposed to this from the"bottom of her heart" 30.Ashley Pierson, 110 N Barker; mentioned dangerous traffic issues and young children 31.Karen Oshogay,lives four houses south of the intersection 32.Frank Roberts, also lives about four houses from the proposal 33.Beverly Enyeart,doesn't live in the neighborhood,said their kids are being bused to her area,she fears the same for her area eventually 34.Mary Derky,worries grandchildren won't have same ability to play outside if large apartment near by 35. Joyce Warner,doesn't want apartments; wants to keep her area peaceful and safe 36.William Currier, 110 N Barker, said his is the"island property;" said there isn't a mobile home park, just mobile homes on lands that people own;wants to keep his area peaceful with a nice view Council Study Session 05-06-2014 Page 4 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT 37. John Pearson, lives with the family on the "island," said apartments would destroy sense of community 38. Claude Hoskins,lives in"Greenacres"community,not Spokane Valley; renters are transients 39.Judy Polley,works at Central Valley School District,knows of challenges of over-crowded schools 40. Ron Polley, agreed with his wife's comments; apartments will create problems in the area 41.Alias Sariani: said being asked to fund another school is not fair;renters don't pay property taxes. 42. Russ Boucher, said an apartment would stick out like a sore thumb. City Clerk Bainbridge mentioned she received two written responses in opposition: Frank Roberts and Danyel Currier,both who live on North Barker. 43. Eugene Henthorn, said he and his wife Melody oppose this as well. No others indicated a desire to speak on this proposal, and in closing on this proposal, Mayor Grafos invited Mr.Whipple to speak for another three minutes. Mr. Whipple said the traffic count information he gave earlier was made after Chapman Road was completed; he referenced page 4 of the handout concerning residential multi-family demand, a critical area that goes with the staff report, and he reiterated the points contained therein concerning the population increase of about 15,000 over the next twenty years; over the last three years there were 850 apartment building permits and 383 single family building permits; said that today we meet the numbers to satisfy the OFM standard but if we don't continue to provide high density residential the single family won't keep up and will have to turn the OFM estimates back to the County or to the City of Spokane; it also shows the overall apartment vacancy in Spokane is 4%. He referenced page 5 approval criteria which he said he clearly outlined in the staff report and he said this was not considered by the Planning Commission and said he feels that was an error. He said if Council evaluates this information as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, Council will agree with staff's conclusion of not having enough multi-family apartment ground. He said that three years ago he came to Council for an apartment project on 4th Avenue, and two years ago they brought another project forward; with the 4th Avenue project resulting in a development agreement, and the second a change in the development standards as it relates to development; and last year they did a small project; said the apartment project on 32"d and Highway 27 done by Wolf four years ago was a comp plan change, and they just went back last year to the County to get another one. He said this is the only way to get multi-family ground to meet the City's development standards requirements set out in the comp plan with this City's OFM numbers. 4. CPA 04-14 through 08-14, and 10-14: City Initiated Text Amendments Senior Planner Barlow briefly explained the City-initiated text amendments in the Comprehensive Plan Chapters of Land Use, Transportation, Capital Facilities, Private and Public Utilities, Economic Development, and Bike and Pedestrian; she said that most are changes intended to coordinate the comprehensive plan with projects that have been completed, budgets approved, and fmancial plans adopted, and removing the reference to "City Center" and in summary, to make them consistent with what Council has already reviewed and approved with the budget; and she mentioned that the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the amendments; and that the recommended text changes are shown in the track-change format in the yellow notebook. Mayor Grafos invited public comments and no comments were offered. Council/staff discussion included population projections/assumptions and Ms. Barlow said the 15,000 population figure mentioned takes into consideration our existing land-use designations, as well as some under-used property. Ms. Barlow mentioned that some changes are only changes to update our maps based on projects and budgets already approved by Council. Narrow property lots, flag lots, and the division of large properties were also briefly discussed.Mayor Grafos also asked the procedure to address Council Study Session 05-06-2014 Page 5 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT a major zone change such as on the north side of Trent Avenue, and Ms. Barlow explained that could be part of the next comprehensive plan amendment cycle. Mayor Grafos closed the public hearing at 8:30 p.m. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 2.Advance Agenda—Mayor Grafos Deputy Mayor Woodard asked about including at a future council meeting, a reading of the history of Spokane Valley and area such as what was read at the recent medical building opening; and after Council discussion of the pros and cons, it was determined that reading such at a Council meeting would not be considered the business of the City or specific to Spokane Valley, and for that and other reasons, it was decided not to include that on a future Council agenda. Mayor Grafos asked that the issue of trucks in residential areas be brought back, as well as idea of examining regulations that would address cleaning up properties that have been damaged or destroyed due to weather or other means,to control those properties from becoming an "eyesore." Concerning the truck issue, City Attorney Driskell said this issue was addressed about one and a half years ago, and he proposed that he could either include an informational only item, or an administrative report; or both so that Council could review that as a starting point. Councilmember Hafner said that he is aware that Councilmember Pace met with some citizens about this issue, and suggested if the topic is to be revisited, he would like Councilmember Pace to share with all Councilmembers, any information he received from those citizens. Councilmember Pace said the information referred to was included in e-mails that went to all Councilmembers. Councilmember Hafner said that when council last discussed this issue, it was discussed at length, and that he would appreciate receiving any information that has been circulated since this issue was last discussed so Councilmembers can know what people are now discussing regarding trucks. Mr. Driskell said he would include the topic as an informational only item first,to be followed up by an administrative report later. Council concurred. Concerning Mayor Grafos' other issue, Mr. Driskell said staff will begin examining regulations dealing with damaged properties. INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS: 3. The Items of (a) Stormwater Effectiveness Studies Consultant Agreement, (b) Stormwater Capital Improvement Projects 2015-2020, (c) Greater Spokane, Inc 2014 First Quarter Report, and (d) Noxious Weed Control Board were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 4. Council Comments—Mayor Grafos There were no Council comments. 5. City Manager Comments—Mark Calhoun Finance Director Calhoun,sitting in for absent City Manager Jackson,had no comments. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Dean Grafos,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Study Session 05-06-2014 Page 6 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Executive Session Monday,May 12,2014 Attendance: Councilmembers: Staff: Dean Grafos, Mayor Mike Jackson,City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Bill Bates,Councilmember Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll;all Councilmembers were present. EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately sixty minutes to discuss potential litigation and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i))J. Council adjourned into executive session at 5:01 p.m. At approximately 6:00 p.m., City Attorney Driskell returned to Council Chambers and announced that the Executive Session would be extended another hour. At approximately 7:00 p.m., Mayor Grafos declared council out of executive session after which it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. Dean Grafos,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Minutes:05-12-2014 Page 1 of 1 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, May 13,2014 Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: City Staff: Dean Grafos,Mayor Mike Jackson,City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell,City Attorney Bill Bates, Councilmember Mark Calhoun,Finance Director Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Rod Higgins, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Ed Pace,Councilmember Eric Guth,Public Works Director Ben Wick,Councilmember Sean Messner, Senior Traffic Engineer Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Marty Palaniuk,Planner Rick VanLeuven,Police Chief Carolbelle Branch,Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge,City Clerk INVOCATION: In the absence of a pastor,Mayor Grafos asked for a few moments of silence. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council, Staff, and audience rose for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Bates: reported that he attended the stormwater improvement project community meeting; went to the monthly 9-1-1 Board meeting where they discussed the state-wide outage that occurred April 10 and said that we are fortunate to have CrimeCheck as a backup in those situations;went to the Spokane Valley Tech Center luncheon; attended the Worker's Memorial Day Ceremony at Mission Park; went to the grand re-opening of the Sheriffs SCOPE station at the mall as they moved from downstairs to upstairs; went to the Spokane Regional Clean Air Board Meeting; the Law Enforcement Appreciation Breakfast as well as the Law Enforcement Officers' memorial at the courthouse; attended the City Hall at the Mall and expressed thanks to Mayor Grafos for his State of the City presentation; and said he participated in the Junior Lilac Parade. Councilmember Wick: stated that he attended the Valley Hospital Community Meeting and said they have some big capital plans for that facility; went to the Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee meeting which featured members of our staff concerning the subject of Bridging the Valley, including the Barker Road separation; discussed the Bridging the Valley topic at the SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council)Board Meeting and said that committee has not had a direct role in the Comprehensive Plan amendments and the group mentioned their desire to review all Comp Plan transportation chapters; said he gave a presentation to the Good Roads Committee about our pavement preservation plan; went to the Valleyfest Community Dinner and Auction with over 250 people in attendance; and participated in the Junior Lilac Parade. Council Regular Meeting 05-13--2014 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Deputy Mayor Woodard: said he also attended the State of the City Address and said that Mayor Grafos did a remarkable job and had a very upbeat message, and also complimented Mr. Wasson for his article in the newspaper that covered that event; said he went to the Valleyfest Dinner and Auction; and attended a ribbon cutting for a small local upholstery business. Councilmember Hafner: reported that he went to the community meeting at the Roadway Inn; attended the Board of Health Meeting, which he chairs, and said they saw a presentation concerning oil trains and safety factors; also saw a presentation by the Fire Chief regarding CPR and how we can be involved with our Smartphone; went to the SCOPE dedication program; attended the Chaplain's breakfast honoring those law enforcement people who put their lives on the line for us all; also went to the Law Enforcement Memorial; and said he too attended the City Hall at the Mall and that Mayor Grafos delivered an outstanding State of the City address. Councilmember Pace said he went to the stormwater projection orientation meeting at the Roadway Inn; went to the Health Board Directors meeting; attended the Workers' Memorial at Mission Park; the Spokane Regional Health District Finance meeting; the Valley Chamber of Commerce Government Action Committee meeting; the STA (Spokane Transit Authority) planning committee; also went to the City Hall at the Mall and commended Mayor Grafos for his outstanding address and commended Mr. Wasson on the article he wrote for the Spokesman; and said he rode in the Junior Lilac Parade. Councilmember Higgins: said he also attended the Valley Tech luncheon, the Memorial Ceremony, the SCOPE station opening; Officer's Memorial and Law Enforcement breakfast, as well as the City Hall at the Mall, and said that Mayor Grafos gave an excellent presentation on what we are and where we're going. Councilmember Higgins also commended Mr.Wasson on his article. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Grafos reported that he went to the worker's memorial at Mission Park; the SCOPE office changing at the mall; the Tech Open House; the Retired Military Officers' event as well as the Law Enforcement Memorial at Spokane County; and participated in a finance committee meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Grafos invited public comment;no comments were offered. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion:I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a.Approval of claim vouchers on May 13,2014 Request for Council Action,Totaling: $2,990,351.59 b.Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending April 30,2014: $422,585.16 c. Approval of April 15,2014 Study Session Council Meeting Minutes d. Approval of April 22,2014 Formal Format Council Meeting Minutes It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2.Motion Consideration: Stormwater Effectiveness Studies Consultant Agreement—Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to negotiate, finalize and execute a WSDOT Local Agency Agreement for consulting services with Herrera Environmental Consultants for the Eastern Washington Effectiveness Study Development — Phase 1 Project,for up to $270,000 for any or all activities in the proposed scope of work. Public Works Director Guth explained that City staff with concurrence from staff representing sixteen cities and six counties in eastern Washington, is leading the initial effort for this project, receiving grant funding from the Department of Ecology for the first phase of studied development; he said future phases would require other jurisdictions to take the lead of various tasks and studies to be determined; and requires a commitment from all jurisdictions to fund the studies. Mr. Guth explained that this is 100%reimbursable for up to $300,000 and as noted in his Request for Council Action, he explained the project benefits; the Council Regular Meeting 05-13--2014 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT process for soliciting a consultant, and the ultimate recommendation to choose Herrera Environmental Consultants. Deputy Mayor Woodard said this is in response from complaints about unfunded mandates and feels this funded mandate is a good start. Mr. Guth also explained that the Phases are simply a designation for the population of the cities as categorized by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Ecology. Mayor Grafos invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None.Motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 3. Roundabouts—Eric Guth, Sean Messner Senior Traffic Engineer Messner explained that tonight's presentation is in response to several questions generated concerning various factors of roundabouts, and by means of his PowerPoint presentation, explained what roundabouts are and are not, the purpose of roundabouts, mentioned we have three, said they improve safety, increase the performance at intersections, reduce pollution, allow for better accommodated accesses, and in the long run, save money. He also mentioned costs for roundabouts versus cost of signalization, how roundabouts can accommodate driveways, when to consider roundabouts, how to make them successful and that they are not always the solution but are a tool to enhance an intersection by relieving congestion and providing traffic calming. Discussion ensued on varying cost depending on rights-of-way; different sizes for different areas; pedestrians and the refuge island, the idea of burying conduit for future flashing signals if nearby schools, and a question from Councilmember Bates about accident studies done before and after having a roundabout,and Mr.Messner said he was not aware of any. 4. Comprehensive Plan Amendments(CPA 2014)—Lori Barlow Senior Planner Barlow said that she and Planner Palaniuk have been assigned to the Comprehensive Plan; and that her role tonight is to continue discussion with Council and give Council time to discuss these proposals as Council moves forward next week to ultimately decide via motions on each proposed comprehensive plan amendment. She said staff is here tonight to answer any questions and that next week Council can approve, modify or deny the proposals, and then the process will move to two ordinance readings. Ms. Barlow briefly went over each proposal. City Manager Jackson confirmed that the motion on the 20th will determine if these items go to a first and second ordinance reading; and that tonight is Council's opportunity to discuss those so as to be prepared for the vote next week.Mayor Grafos clarified that there is no voting tonight, but voting will be done next week at which time, the public will have an opportunity to comment. CPA 01-14: The question of what to do with that area, if anything, or when, was discussed, with Councilmember Wick commenting that members of the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee had many comments on the river area and were encouraging us to take more advantage of that corridor. Councilmember Higgins mentioned if the zone were changed, it would allow more options for use, and Ms. Barlow confirmed that action on this proposal would not bind Council in any way to sell or dispose of the property, and said a private party now would be very limited on what could occur on that area. Mr. Jackson said that staff has discussed this and feels it has merit enough to bring to Council, but that the fundamental question is whether or not to re-zone the area; he said a concept was brought up years ago about a restaurant and parking to enhance recreation use; and said if the property remains park property, then that discussion would be taken off the table. Councilmember Pace said he likes the idea of having flexibility; and Mayor Grafos said he has concerns that once it gets re-zoned, it could be used as parking and feels a re-zone would be "going down a slippery slope," and said he feels it should be left as it is. When asked about putting in a parking area,Ms. Barlow confirmed that even without a re-zone, a parking area could be installed as an amenity to the trailhead or park,but it couldn't be used for a private office to develop as parking for their business; and in response to questions about vendors,Ms. Barlow said likely mobile vendors for various functions would be permitted, possibly with a written agreement. City Attorney Driskell said he sees no reason why that would not be permitted,but would like to research that further. Councilmember Bates mentioned he is a little disappointed that some other organizations like Council Regular Meeting 05-13--2014 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Friends of the Centennial Trail haven't been interested in this; he said the State Parks Department said they prefer leaving it as open space, but we could still change the zoning if desired. Ms. Barlow concurred. The idea of developing the area for a first-class restaurant, or even coffee shop was briefly discussed, as well as the amount of land in question,which is a little over an acre. Councilmember Wick mentioned he likes the idea of flexibility and having for example, a rental equipment business renting bikes, rollerblades, and other equipment to use on the trail. Several Councilmembers expressed the positive aspect of changing the zoning in order to allow greater flexibility in use of that area. It was noted that this would come forward as a motion next week. CPA 02-14: Concerning the SCRAPS parcel, there was some discussion about the idea of aggregating one parcel to the other, boundary line adjustments or eliminations, and that none of those options would result in having the two parcels the same zone. It was noted that this would come forward as a motion next week. CPA 03-14: For the Barker and Sprague proposal to change from low to high density residential, during Council discussion several Councilmembers mentioned that this is an extremely difficult decision as they take into consideration the citizens' desire to maintain the existing character of their neighborhood while keeping in mind the idea of adhering to the criteria and goals outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and/or Municipal Code, and whether apartments would be a good "fit" for that neighborhood. There was also discussion about the need to do something to address the intersection problems, and that Council would be making a decision on the zoning and not on a particular project. Council acknowledged the issues with overcrowding schools and area changing over time. In response to a Council question about right-of-way and existing infrastructure, Ms. Barlow said she would have to research the width of the right-of-way on Barker; that there are no curbs or sidewalks but there is a pathway on the west side and that with the current zoning of R3, a fourteen to twenty unit duplex would be permissible. Mayor Grafos asked about Spokane County's connection off Chapman Road and Ms. Barlow said she would research that and include it as part of next week's packet. Planner Barlow explained that the remaining proposed amendments are the text amendments and Council agreed to bring those back for a motion consideration, and indicated they were comfortable moving them forward for a motion and did not need to discuss them tonight. Mayor Grafos called for a recess at 8:00 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 8:12 p.m. 5.Federal Consultant—Mike Jackson As noted on his May 13, 2014 Request for Council Action form, City Manager Jackson explained that with the development and application of the TIGER Grant for the Barker Overpass, staff considered hiring a federal legislative analyst to assist in creating awareness and support for this project as well as future projects such as Bridging the Valley; he said this position would be similar to Briahna Taylor's, and in this case,we would be contracting with Mr. Travis Lumpkin who also works for Gordon,Thomas, Honeywell. Mr. Jackson said that he,Mr. Lumpkin and the City's Finance Committee met and feels Mr. Lumpkin would be an asset to the City. Mr. Jackson said he feels it is important to have someone in Washington, D.C. to bring forth our issues and he has already made some suggestions about Bridging the Valley. Mr. Jackson said he is asking for consensus for moving forward with a contract and that this would require a future budget amendment, which will be forthcoming. Council concurred and gave their consensus. 5a. Solid Waste Update—Mike Jackson (added agenda item) Mr. Jackson said this issue is coming close to a decision point; and the purpose of tonight's discussion is not to go over the fine details,but more to let Council know that next week staff anticipates bringing two options to Council. Mr. Jackson noted that the numerous previous Council actions taken are listed in the Request for Council Action form placed on Council's dias tonight, as well as a narrative on the various Council Regular Meeting 05-13--2014 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT alternatives that have been explored and discussed, and said it would be beneficial for Council to read the material as an aid in moving forward next week. Mr. Jackson said that a determination was made previously that we should move forward on our own solid waste plan and staff has been working with the Department of Ecology in that regard, to have a plan submitted in time for November 16, and said he wants that plan ready whether we go with the County or a private vendor. He said we also talked about investigating public/private partnerships, and that only one potential private vendor has been identified, that of Sunshine Recyclers Incorporation; and said they are working through some of the final details. Mr. Jackson stated that all this is in anticipation of the issue coming to Council next week but is contingent on some final information from both Spokane County and Sunshine, and said once we have the materials, we will come forward with two separate options, adding that staff spent considerable time on both options. To recap, he said we wrote to Spokane County with some concerns, they replied and made several changes in acknowledgement of our request although they did not agree with all our requests;he said staff is currently working through a"handful of points" and still working to try to obtain a price quote from the County. In terms of what the County has considered, he said they have not reviewed the RFP for operation of the transfer stations, and if they were to provide a rate, it would be more of a rate they'd be able to live with as opposed to a rate done by a study. He said the County extended our deadline until the end of May,that we think that should work, and we want to complete this as well; and said if necessary,this issue can be brought back not only next week but the following week. Mr. Jackson went through his PowerPoint presentation explaining the Council's CORE beliefs, the timeline of the issue since about 2011, a comparison of options for private versus County, and mentioned the attached letters as well, and said some of the content of those letters will be in contract form next week, and we can compare the final interlocal proposed by the County with suggestions we made and see how that comports with Council's wishes; and said that once we bring this forward in the next two weeks, this should represent the best offer from the private sector and from the County. 6.Advance Agenda Deputy Mayor Woodard asked if Council would be getting a revised Advance Agenda based on tonight's added agenda item of solid waste, and Mr. Jackson said that a new advance agenda will be forthcoming, and staff is still gathering information. INFORMATION ONLY(will not be reported or discussed): 7. Centennial Trail Draft Agreement was for information only and was not reported or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Jackson said he received information from Briahna Taylor about upcoming discussions on streamlined sales tax mitigation and federal legislation that would address taxing Internet sales, and said he is still sifting through the materials, but it appears if the new legislation were approved, it would represent a net loss to us. Mr. Jackson said he would bring up this topic again once he has more information. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:39 p.m. ATTEST: Dean Grafos,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Regular Meeting 05-13--2014 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 27,2014 Department Director Approval Item: Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑unfinished business ®new business ❑public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin.report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading - Proposed Ordinance No. 14-005: Comprehensive Plan Amendments (includes text and map amendments). GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, SVMC 17.80.140 and 19.30.010. PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: Administrative Report April 15, 2014; Public Hearing May 6, 2014; Administrative Report May 13, 2014; Motion Consideration May 20, 2014. BACKGROUND: For the 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendment period, the Community Development Department received two privately initiated requests for site-specific Comprehensive Plan amendments and corresponding zoning classification amendments. In addition, the City proposed one site- specific Comprehensive Plan amendment and a corresponding zoning classification amendment. The 2014 Comprehensive Plan text amendments include amendments to six Comprehensive Plan Elements: Chapter 2 - Land Use, Chapter 3 — Transportation, Chapter 4 — Capital Facilities and Public Services, Chapter 6—Private and Public Utilities, Chapter 7—Economic Development, and Chapter 11 - Bike and Pedestrian. The proposed amendments also entail minor changes to other elements referencing the proposed amendments, such as a single reference to the City Center in the Comprehensive Plan Introduction. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments on February 27, 2014 and continued the hearing to the March 13, 2014 meeting. The Planning Commission recommendations on each proposed amendment are as follows: Project# Applicant Location Map Text Amendment Planning Amendment (Chapter) Commission Recommendation CPA-01-14 COSV Mirabeau Park x Deny Trailhead CPA-02-14 SCRAPS Bradley Road x Forwarded without a recommendation CPA-03-14 Whipple Barker and x Deny Engineering Sprague CPA-04-14 COSV Land Use Approve CPA-05-14 COSV Transportation Approve CPA-06-14 COSV Capital Facilities Approve CPA-07-14 COSV Utilities Approve CPA-08-14 COSV Economic Development Approve CPA-10-14 COSV Bike and Pedestrian Approve CPA-09-14 COSV Parks and Recreation Withdrawn 1 of 2 An administrative report was presented to City Council on April 15, 2014, and a public hearing was conducted on May 6, 2014. The Council deliberated on the requests May 13, 2014 with no action being taken. On May 20, 2014 the Council voted on a motion for each amendment to place the request in an ordinance for approval at a subsequent Council meeting. The motion failed for CPA-03-14, but passed by majority vote for all other requested amendments. Each amendment, except CPA-03-14, has been placed in the draft ordinance for adoption. CPA- 03-14 is included in the ordinance stating that it will be denied. At this time the Council will consider the consolidated proposed amendments as a group in one ordinance for final adoption at first and second readings with appropriate findings included. Staff will also prepare a separate ordinance with zoning map changes which correspond with the proposed amendments, which will be considered for first and second reading on the same agendas as the ordinance approving or denying the proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendments. OPTIONS: Advance Ordinance No. 14-005 to second reading with or without modifications, or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance No. 14-005 to a second reading. STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1) Draft Ordinance No. 14-005 with attached text, map, and findings. 2) See separate yellow notebook provided April 15, 2014: Contents include 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendments with individual Staff Reports, Planning Commission Meeting minutes, and comments received. Please note that the yellow notebooks will be used throughout this entire process, and at the end of the process they should be returned to Community Development for use in subsequent years'Comprehensive Plan amendments. 2 of 2 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 14-005 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, through Spokane Valley Ordinance No. 06-010, the City of Spokane Valley adopted land use plans as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and maps as the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Spokane Valley (as subsequently amended,the Comprehensive Plan); and WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) allows comprehensive plans to be amended annually(RCW 36.70A.130); and WHEREAS, amendments to the City Comprehensive Plan may be initiated by the Planning Commission (Commission), the City Council (Council), citizens, or by the Community Development Director based on citizen requests or when changed conditions warrant adjustments; and WHEREAS, the GMA requires comprehensive plans to be implemented with development regulations,including the zoning of property consistent with land use map designations; and WHEREAS, consistent with the GMA, the City adopted public participation guidelines to direct the public involvement process for adopting and amending comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) provides that amendment applications shall be received until November 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan, as originally adopted by Ordinance No. 06-010, has been amended by Ordinance No. 07-026, Ordinance No. 08-011, Ordinance No. 09-008, Ordinance No. 09- 039, Ordinance No. 10-007, Ordinance No. 11-001, Ordinance No. 11-007, Ordinance No. 11-009, Ordinance No. 12-014, Ordinance No. 12-018, Ordinance No. 13-008 and Ordinance No. 13-009; and WHEREAS, applications were submitted by the applicant, owner or by City staff to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; and WHEREAS, staff conducted an environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the proposed amendments;and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014, after reviewing the environmental checklists, staff issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposals, published the DNS in the Valley News Herald, and where appropriate posted the DNS on the sites and mailed the DNS to all affected public agencies; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014, notice of the Planning Commission (the Commission) public hearing was published in the Valley News Herald; and Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 1 of 9 DRAFT WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014 and February 11, 2014, notice of the Commission hearing was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject properties; and WHEREAS, on February 12, 2014, notice of the Commission hearing had been posted on all the subject properties; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2014, the Commission conducted a study session to review the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2014, the Commission received evidence, information, public testimony, and a staff report and recommendation at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2014,the Commission conducted a public hearing to consider proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and continued the public hearing to March 13, 2014. After receiving additional public testimony on March 13, 2014, the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-01-14, and CPA-03-14, to Council with a recommendation for denial; and CPA-04-14, CPA-05-14, CPA-06-14, CPA-07-14, CPA-08-14, and CPA-10-14 to Council with a recommendation for approval. CPA-02-14 was forwarded to Council without a recommendation as the Commission vote ended in a tie;and WHEREAS, CPA-09-14 was withdrawn because it was not considered during the Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2014 cycle due to a delayed adoption date of the Parks Master Plan, and it will be added to the 2015 docket prior to the November 1 deadline; and WHEREAS, on March 20, 2014, the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 of the City's intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2014, Council conducted a briefing to review the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2014, notice of the Council public hearing was posted on all the subject properties; and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2014, notice of the Council public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject properties; and WHEREAS, on May 6, 2014, the Council conducted a public hearing to consider proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on May 13, 2014, the Council discussed the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on May 20, 2014, the Council voted on separate motions on whether to place CPA-01- 14, CPA-02-14, CPA-03-14,CPA-04-14, CPA-05-14, CPA-06-14, CPA-7-14, CPA-08-14, CPA-10-14 in an ordinance for approval; and WHEREAS, on May 27 2014, Council considered a first ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendments;and Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 2 of 9 DRAFT WHEREAS, on June 10,2014, Council considered a second ordinance reading at which time Council approved written fmdings of fact setting forth the basis for recommending approval of the proposed amendments. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Section 2. Findings. The Council acknowledges that the Commission conducted appropriate investigation and study and held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, and the Council hereby approves the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan map and text,with the exception that the motion to approve CPA-03-14 failed and is therefore denied. The Council has read and considered the Commission's findings. Council fmdings specific to each proposed amendment, if any, are contained in Section 4 below. The Council hereby makes the following general findings applicable to all proposed amendments: 1. SVMC 17.80.140 provides the framework for the public to participate throughout the Comprehensive Plan amendment process,including notice and public hearing requirements. 2. On February 7,2014,notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Valley News Herald. 3. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act set forth in RCW 43.21C (SEPA), environmental checklists were required for each proposed Comprehensive Plan map and text amendment. 4. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each Comprehensive Plan amendment. 5. On February 7, 2014, Determinations of Non-Significance (DNS) were issued for the requested Comprehensive Plan amendments. 6. On February 7, 2014, the DNS's were published in the City's official newspaper, the Valley News Herald,consistent with SVMC 21.20. 7. The procedural requirements of SEPA and SVMC Title 21 have been fulfilled. 8. On February 11, 2014, individual notice of the site-specific map amendment proposals were, or had been previously,mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each affected site. 9. On February 12, 2014 each site subject to a site-specific amendment was, or had been previously, posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing" sign,with a description of the proposal. 10. On March 20, 2014, the Washington State Department of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 11. The Commission and Council have reviewed the proposed amendments concurrently to evaluate the cumulative impacts. The review was consistent with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW. 12. On February 27, 2014, the Commission held a public hearing on each of the Comprehensive Plan amendments. After receiving public testimony, the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-01-14 and CPA-03-14 to Council with a recommendation for denial, and CPA-04-14, CPA-05- Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 3 of 9 DRAFT 14, CPA-06-14, CPA-07-14, CPA-08-14, and CPA-10-14 to Council with a recommendation for approval. CPA-02-14 was forwarded to Council without a recommendation as the Planning Commission vote ended in a tie. 13. The Commission adopted findings for CPA-01-14 through CPA-08-14 and CPA-10-14. Such findings were presented to Council. Specific findings for CPA-01-14, CPA-02-14 and CPA-03-14 are contained in Section 4,below. 14. The Council adopts the Commission findings as the Council findings for CPA-04-14 through CPA- 08-14 and CPA-10-14, as set forth in Attachment "C"(Findings). 15. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, with the exception of CPA-03-14, are consistent with GMA and do not result in internal inconsistencies within the Comprehensive Plan itself. 16. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan were considered and the proposed amendments, except CPA-03-14, are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 17. Findings were made and factors were considered to ensure compliance with approval criteria contained in SVMC 17.80.140H(Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones). 18. The Comprehensive Plan land use map and text amendments will not adversely affect the public's general health, safety,and welfare. Section 3. Property. The properties subject to this Ordinance are described in Attachment "A" (maps). Section 4. Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, the Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as set forth in Attachment "A" (maps) and Attachment "B" (text). The Comprehensive Plan amendments are generally described as follows: Map Amendments: File No. CPA-O1-14: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Parks/Open Space (P/OS) with a Parks/Open Space (P/OS) zoning classification to a Mixed Use Center (MUC)designation with a Mixed Use Center(MUC)zoning classification. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, 11707 East Sprague Ave, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location: Parcel 45101.9068; generally located 800 feet east of Pinecroft Way and Mirabeau Parkway on the east side of Mirabeau Parkway as it bends to the south and east; further located in the NE I/4 of Section 10, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington. Council Findings: 1. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment. 3. The amendment provides a suitable land use designation consistent with the City's GMA-compliant Comprehensive Plan. Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 4 of 9 DRAFT 4. The amendment is a reasonable extension of the existing Mixed Use Center designation located north of the property. 5. The surrounding land uses are complimentary in nature to the concept of mixed use development. 6. The amendment does not correct a mapping error. 7. The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 8. Any future development will be subject to SVMC Title 21, Environmental Controls which addresses the State Environmental Policy Act, Critical Areas,and the Shoreline Management Act. 9. The amendment is compatible with adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. 10. Community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools are adequate to support the amendment. 11. The neighborhood,City, and region would benefit by the amendment by providing for a desirable mix of commercial,office and parks/open space. 12. The amendment will have little impact on population density and does not demand population analysis. 13. The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. Council Decision: Change parcel#45101.9068 to Mixed Use Center(MUC) File No. CPA-02-14: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Low Density Residential(LDR)with a Single-Family Residential Suburban (R-2) zoning classification to a Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)designation with a Corridor Mixed Use(CMU)zoning classification. Applicant: Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Services,2521 North Flora Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216. Amendment Location: Parcel 35124.0813; generally located 500 feet north of the intersection of Trent Avenue and Bradley Road; further located in the SE I/4 of Section 12,Township 25 North,Range 43 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment may be served by the proposed amendment. The applicant, Spokane Regional Animal Protection Services (SCRAPS) is a necessary community facility and is located on the property adjacent to and south of the proposed amendment property. Expansion of the SCRAPS facility would serve the larger metropolitan community. 2. Impacts to the residential uses already occur from the light industrial and commercial uses located west and south of the residences. Twenty-foot setbacks and Type 1 screening would be required for any development on the amendment site. 3. Due to the surrounding land uses,the site is no longer suitable for single family development, allowed by current zoning. 4. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Growth Management Act (GMA)Chapter 36.70A. Specifically the following planning goals: a. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses,recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. SCRAPS is a regional facility that may enhance the local economy by drawing people to the area who may patronize local businesses. b. Each city that is required or chooses to plan under GMA shall perform its activities and make capital budget decisions in conformity with its comprehensive plan. The City has a contract with SCRAPS to provide animal control, and the SCRAPS facility should be viewed as a regional capital facility. Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 5 of 9 DRAFT c. Cities required to plan under GMA shall ensure amendments to their comprehensive plans provide sufficient capacity of land suitable for development within their jurisdictions. This shall include the accommodation of medical, governmental, educational, institutional, commercial, and industrial facilities related to growth. 6. The proposal would allow SCRAPS to expand its facility to the subject property. SCRAPS stated an intention to exercise animals in the area and allow prospective new pet owners to walk and play with dogs in the area. Development requirements would mitigate the impacts to some extent. SVMC 19.60.080(B)(6)prohibits animal shelters in the CMU zone from having outside runs,requires human supervision of all outdoor activities, that they be located along an arterial street, and that they meet the noise standards for commercial noise. In addition, the requirements contained in SVMC Title 22 must be met. Those requirements include Type 1 screening and 20 foot setbacks for any building on the site. Type 1 screening consists of a six-foot sight obscuring fence with a five-foot wide landscaped area vegetated with sight-obscuring bushes to create a dense sight-obscuring barrier of two-to-three feet in height, selected to reach six feet in height at maturity. 7. The amendment would be compatible with commercial and light industrial uses located south and west of the site. The SCRAPS facility is located south of the site. A manufacturing use with associated outside storage is located west of the site. A single-family residence lies directly adjacent to the site along the northern boundary. Several single-family residences lie across Bradley Road from the site. Development requirements would mitigate impacts to the single family uses. 8. Trent Avenue is the primary four lane arterial road serving the site. Development would have a minimal impact on public facilities such as transportation,water, and sewer. 9. The proposed amendment would not increase population densities and does not require population analysis. Council Decision: Change parcel 35124.0813 to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). File No. CPA-03-14: Proposal: Site-specific comprehensive plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) with a Single Family Residential (R-3) zoning classification to a High Density Residential (HDR) designation with a High Density Multifamily Residential (MF2) zoning classification. Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers Inc.,2528 North Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley,WA 99216. Amendment Location: 4 North Barker Road - Parcel #55173.1005 generally located at the NE intersection of Barker Road and Sprague Ave.; further located in the SE 1/4 of Section 17, Township 25 North,Range 45 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The proposed amendment is detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment since it would increase density within an area of the Central Valley School District that has reached overcapacity. Neighborhood schools are over capacity and students are bussed out of the neighborhood. 2. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW. 3. The proposed amendment would allow construction of a multi-family development immediately adjacent to the intersection of two minor arterial streets and a collector which has experienced an increase of traffic as a result of significant growth in the area. However, the increase in traffic does not warrant the need for a transitional use to be constructed between the street and the existing single family development to act as a buffer. 4. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendment does address the identified deficiency of vacant HDR-designated large lots. However, expanding the HDR designation would allow for multi-story apartments in an area currently developed with one and two family residences,many of which are on large lots. Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 6 of 9 DRAFT 6. Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls),the City as the lead agency has determined that the proposed amendment would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. 7. The proposed amendment is a non-project amendment and would not affect open space, streams, rivers, and lakes. 8. The proposed amendment is contiguous to single family development on all four sides with the exception of a church located on the southwest corner of the intersection. If granted,the amendment would create an island of LDR land. Development of two and three-story buildings would be inconsistent with the single family character of the area. 9. Future development of the site may impact traffic in the area beyond that which would be generated by the current land uses allowed. The intersection currently experiences delays and is designated to be improved by 2019. Commercial services and public transportation services are approximately 1,000 feet to the north, which may be beyond the desired walking distance to reach services and inconsistent with the intent of the designation criteria to place high density residential near services. 10. The proposed amendment would increase the amount of available HDR lands within the City,but the location is not conducive to multifamily development since the nearest commercial services and public transit stop is approximately 1,000 feet to the north. 11. The proposal is not consistent with the residential character of the neighborhood and the impacts of multifamily development cannot be mitigated by the bulk standards in the SVMC. 12. The proposed amendment would increase population densities in the area and would increase the density from six dwelling units per acre up to 22 dwelling units per acre. A population analysis was not done to determine area impacts. 13. The proposed amendment is inconsistent with the intent of the HDR land use designation,which is to act as a buffer between residential uses and higher intensity land uses such as commercial or office uses. The higher volume roadway does not warrant a buffer between the existing residential uses. Council Decision: The request is denied. Text Amendments File No. CPA-04-14: Proposal: Chapter 2 — Land Use: City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments will update section 2.2.1 City Center Plan and section 2.5.3 City Center,to remove the land use scenario and associated land use designation; remove all goals and policies and references to the City Center concept, and within section 2.3 Relationship to Other Comprehensive Plan Chapters, update section 2.4.1 Projected Growth, update Table 2.1 Land Capacity Analysis, and add policy language to support infill and connectivity in residential zones. Map 2.1 Land Use will display land use designation changes approved through the 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendment process. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location:Not applicable. Council Decision: Adopt amendments to Chapter 2—Land Use as proposed by staff. File No. CPA-05-14: Proposal: Chapter 3 — Transportation: City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments will remove section 3.2.7.3 City Center to be consistent with the removal of the City Center Concept in Chapter 2, and update Map 3.1 Arterial Street Plan to reflect the removal of Appleway Boulevard extension, the minor arterial upgrade of a portion of Mission Avenue, and the removal of a section of Forker and Progress roads that lie outside City limits. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location:Not applicable Council Decision: Adopt amendments to Chapter 3—Transportation as proposed by staff. File No. CPA-06-14: Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 7 of 9 DRAFT Proposal: Chapter 4 — Capital Facilities and Public Services: City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments will update the following tables: Table 4.4 Population Projections, Table 4.9 Spokane Valley Fire Department (SVFD) Station Locations, Table 4.10, SVFD City Responses, Table 4.11 SVFD Capital Projects Plan, Table 4.13 Park Facilities, Table 4.15 Future Park Demand, Table 4.17 Parks Capital Facilities Plan, Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis, Table 4.37 Pavement Preservation Revenues and Expenditures, and all tables associated with the Six-year Transportation Improvement Program; add Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan, Table 4.34 Stormwater Management Budget Summary of Revenues and Expenditures,and Table 4.35 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan Summary. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location:Not applicable. Council Decision: Adopt amendments to Chapter 4— Capital Facilities and Public Services as proposed by staff. File No. CPA-07-14: Proposal: Chapter 6 —Private and Public Utilities: City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments will remove all references to City Center Plan Concept Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location:Not applicable. Council Decision: Adopt amendments to Chapter 7—Economic Development as proposed by staff. File No. CPA-08-14: Proposal: Chapter 7—Economic Development: City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments will remove all references to City Center Plan Concept,and update Map 7.1 to reflect the latest Development Activity. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location:Not applicable. Council Decision: Adopt amendments to Chapter 7—Economic Development as proposed by staff. File No. CPA-09-14: Withdrawn,will be placed on the 2015 Comprehensive Plan amendment docket by November 1,2014. File No. CPA-10-14: Proposal: Chapter 11 —Bike and Pedestrian: City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments will update the following maps to reflect improvements developed during the 2013 development cycle and add a proposed Shared Use Path extension from the City limits to Appleway Trail along Barker Road: Map 11.1 Existing Bike Facilities,Map 11.2 Recommended Bikeway Network,Map 11.3 Existing Sidewalk Network, and Map 11.4 Recommended Pedestrian Network. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location:Not applicable. Council Decision: Adopt amendments to Chapter 11 —Bike and Pedestrian as proposed by staff. Section 5. Copies on File - Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with maps) is maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City's Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan in a manner consistent with this Ordinance,including correcting scrivener's errors. Section 6. Liability. The express intent of the City is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This Ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 8 of 9 DRAFT Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of June,2014. Mayor, Dean Grafos ATTEST: City Clerk,Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 14-005 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 9 of 9 Existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation 45J_4 V_1-,0 4%35 +__3 45033[;816 is 1 r.. 11 49334 9175 45033 OW441111 illirlia'a -Ipoppt... /51019068 • SPOKANE VALLEY �` /51059010 451015)95 CPA 2014-0001 Request: Applicant: City of Spokane Valley Community Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Development Department designation from Parks/Open Space to Mixed Parcel#: 45101.9068 Use Center,MUC; Address: The site is vacant and is not addressed and Subsequent Zoning change from Parks and Open Space, P/OS to Mixed Use Center, MUC. Existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Map - ^ -' 35124.0302 ■ r 1 `ti ` 3s124.0815 ti - . :moi . . - - i 'tl i . -, k 35124.0303 _ -Z = �� .. �icex-- --.7-7-."--..--.----..1-_:--Z--.. .�^ makti �-:,,--....,::--‹.-.--._:-.-_--- 3 5124.0807. ^� .,�.�.M1 . -------....----.--:-.--`11--- � - :� -- :�=7 k .�1- - 35124.0304 ^. k -- _- --� 17----"..--,.--'-'--- - t� .� .. -, 35124.0808 �� ti .----"...-35123.2204-. � . "--::-:-."--.:,-.--------•---...„-,:,..-- 35124.0305ma, 35124 0908 ZL; ^ ,'' 35124.0814. - max :: ti 1-1 . ,. ::„:-"„'-,-z',::_---"---.-_--..-`"- ,' \ 1 35124.0308 • 35124.0307 -.-<-,1,.----.:-.--. .--. w - z � SPOKANE VALLEY 35123'2107zz 1`` ti -'. mow . '.� . - _ � ------•-$-....-_---.::-.7-: . 3512 4.0812 4 D][i 5124:0907' 35124.03� -- -ti k'wokw � 3 : z � ,,1�. 41 4 ""mak ---.. ... . . , � t:35123.2008 �. . , �. .- . " kti ..35123.2004 ate. .. := ^._ . ..: k . '� 45077.0002 . ^tl .tit '. _ _ _75 CPA 2014-0002 Request: Applicant: Nancy Hill, Director, Spokane Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map County Regional Animal Protections Services designation from Low Density Residential, LDR to Parcel #: 35124.0813 Corridor Mixed Use, CMU; Address: 2117 NBradley Avenue and Subsequent Zoning change from R-3, Single Family Residential to CMU, Corridor Mixed Use. Existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Map \3S'''cr"r„....,,3-, Lr9 133 -�`�,� 8yw55'.s.".- r �— i ca55173. 55173.1227 P� r� CD'S' I 551 328,, _e 1 CbS an C ,ice, u �, 55173 1225 L. wL. 55184.3506 I I ., 1.4w s' °` 55573.15{}.8 —" 55173.1226 _T 55173 1020 u, 55184.9004 55173 1019 HI.M. 55173.1901 551/3'17 a ' m 55173 1709 p025 M1Il7H I1 b.„ 4I 55173.1018 0 fc 55173.1710 55173 1904 R En: N E LEY \ I.9017 y iw 55173 1910 L=IP 55184.9018 I y 155173.'191'1 55173.181 J k I V .4 341 I .0302 55202.0803 55202.0802--- ._-- 55202.0801 55202.0183 55202.0: 55191.0516 +1 ]SQ2 2.0303 yl yl l CPA 2014-0003 Request: Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers, INC Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Parcel #: 55173.1005 designation from Low Density Residential, LDR to Address: 4 NBarker Road High Density Residential, HDR; and Subsequent Zoning change from R-3, Single Family Residential to MF-2 High Density Residential. City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 2 — LAND USE 2.0 Introduction The Land Use chapter serves as the foundation of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (SVCP) by providing a framework for Spokane Valley's future physical development and by setting forth policy direction for Spokane Valley's current and future land uses. Development of land, according to adopted policies and land use designations discussed in this chapter, should result in an appropriate balance of services, employment, and housing. The land use policies are supplemented by a Comprehensive Plan Map (Map 2.1) that provides a visual illustration of the proposed physical distribution and location of various land uses. This map allocates a supply of land for such uses as retail, office, manufacturing, public facilities, services, parks, open space, and housing to meet future demand. 2.1 Planning Context State and locally adopted county-wide land use policies provide a statutory framework for the development of City land use policies. It is important to briefly review state and county level policies to better understand historical conditions that have shaped the goals and policies in this chapter. 2.1.1 Growth Management Act The Growth Management Act (GMA) acknowledges that, "...a lack of common goals expressing the public's interest in conservation and the wise use of our lands, pose a threat to the environment, sustainable economic development, and the health, safety and high quality of life enjoyed by residents of this state'." The GMA provides a framework for content and adoption of local comprehensive plans. The GMA provides 14 goals to be, "...used exclusively for the purpose of guiding development of comprehensive plans and development regulations." GMA goals pertaining to land use include: • Urban Growth — Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. • Reduce Sprawl— Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low density development. • Housing— Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of the state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. • Open Space and Recreation — Encourage the retention of open space and development of recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks. • Environment — Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and water quality and the availability of water. • Public Facilities and Services— Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. • Historic Preservation — Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures that have historical or archaeological significance. 1 RCW 36.70A.010 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 1 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • Property Rights — Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions pursuant to state and federal law. The GMA requires that Comprehensive Plan land use elements: • Designate the proposed general distribution, location and extent of the uses of land for housing, commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, public utilities, public facilities, and other appropriate land uses; • Population densities, building intensities, and estimates of future population growth; • Provide for protection of the quality and quantity of ground water use for public water supplies; • Review drainage, flooding, and stormwater runoff in the area and nearby jurisdictions and provide guidance for corrective actions to mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute water of the state. 2.1.2 County Wide Planning Policies The County Wide Planning Policies (CWPPs) required by GMA2 provide a regional framework to achieve the goals of the GMA. The CWPPs are a refinement of policy direction contained in the GMA and are a result of a collaborative process between Spokane County and the cities and towns within the County. The CWPPs provide a policy framework for both the county and its respective cities. Adherence to these policies ensures that plans within the county are consistent with one another. These policies address such issues as the designation of urban growth areas, land use, affordable housing, provision of urban services for future development, transportation, and contiguous and orderly development. The following are specific CWPPs that relate to the Land Use Element3: Policy Topic 1 - Urban Growth Areas Policies 1. Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) are areas within which urban growth shall be encouraged and outside of which growth can occur only if it is not urban in nature. Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) shall include areas and densities sufficient to permit the urban growth that is projected to occur in the county for the succeeding 20-year period4. "Urban growth" refers to growth that makes intensive use of land for the location of buildings, structures and impermeable surfaces to such a degree as to be incompatible with the primary use of such land for the production of food, other agricultural products or fiber, or the extraction of mineral resources5. Urban growth should be located first in areas already characterized by urban growth that have existing public facility and service capacities to serve such development, and second in areas already characterized by urban growth that will be served by a combination of both existing public facilities and services, and any additional needed public facilities and services that are provided by either public or private sources. Further, it is appropriate that urban government services be provided by cities, and urban government services should not be provided in rural areas6. Rural government services may be provided in rural areas. However, Urban Growth Areas may be established independent of incorporated areas. Within these independent Urban Growth Areas (UGAs), urban governmental services may 2 RCW 36.70A.210 3 Note to reader: The following policies are numbered according to the policy number in the CWPPs, resulting in non-sequential numbering in this document. 4 RCW 36.70A.110 5 RCW 36.70A.030(17) 6 RCW 36.70A.110(3) Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 2 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan be provided by other than cities. Some cities may rely on contracts from Spokane County for provision of urban services. Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) include all lands within existing cities, including cities in rural areas. 9. Within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs), lands that fall within planned high-capacity transportation corridors should be designated for sufficient intensity of land use to support the economic provision of multimodal transportation. 11. Where applicable, comprehensive plans should contain land use policies which provide protection for the continued viability of Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane International Airport, Felts Field, Deer Park Airport and other publicly owned airports within Spokane County. 12. Jurisdictions should work together to protect critical areas and open space within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). Policy Topic 2 -Joint Planning within UGAs Policies 1. The joint planning process should: a. Include all jurisdictions adjacent to the Urban Growth Area and Special Purpose Districts that will be affected by the eventual transference of governmental services; b. Recognize that Urban Growth Areas are potential annexation areas for cities; c. Ensure a smooth transition of services amongst existing municipalities and emerging communities; d. Ensure the ability to expand urban governmental services and avoid land use barriers to expansion; and e. Resolve issues regarding how zoning, subdivision and other land use approvals in designated joint planning areas will be coordinated. 2. Joint planning may be accomplished pursuant to an interlocal agreement entered into between and/or among jurisdictions and/or special purpose districts. Policy Topic 3 — Promotion of Contiguous and Orderly Development and Provision of Urban Services Policies 5. All jurisdictions shall coordinate plans that classify, designate and protect natural resource lands and critical areas. 7. Each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall include, at a minimum, the following policies to address adequate fire protection: a. Limit growth to areas served by a fire protection district or within the corporate limits of a city providing its own fire department. b. Commercial and residential subdivisions and developments and residential planned unit developments shall include the provision for road access adequate for residents, fire department or district ingress/egress, and water supply for fire protection. c. Development in forested areas must provide defensible space between structure and adjacent fuels and require that fire-rated roofing materials be used. 10. Each jurisdiction shall include provisions in its comprehensive plan for equitable distribution of essential public facilities. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 3 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 13. Each jurisdiction shall plan for growth within UGAs which uses land efficiently, adds certainty to capital facilities planning and allows timely and coordinated extension of urban governmental services, public facilities and utilities for new development. Each jurisdiction shall identify intermediate growth areas (six to ten year increments) within its UGA or establish policies which direct growth consistent with land use and capital facility plans. Policy Topic 4— Parks and Open Space Policies 2. All jurisdictions should cooperate to identify and protect regional open space lands, natural areas and corridors of environmental, recreational and aesthetic significance to form a functionally and physically connected system which balances passive and active recreational uses. Each jurisdiction shall identify open space corridors within and between urban growth areas. All jurisdictions shall identify implementation, management, preservation and conservation strategies through both regulatory and non-regulatory techniques, to protect identified lands and corridors to sustain their open space benefits and functions. Implementation and management strategies should include collaboration and coordination with land trusts and other land preservation organizations. 3. Each jurisdiction shall require the development of parks and open space as a means to balance the impacts associated with higher-density development. 5. Each jurisdiction shall make appropriate provisions for parks and recreation areas. Policy Topic 5-Transportation Policies 5. Local jurisdictions shall develop and adopt land use plans that have been coordinated through the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC)to ensure that they preserve and enhance the regional transportation system. These plans may include high-capacity transportation corridors and shall fulfill air quality conformity and financial requirements of Federal Transportation Laws and Regulations, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and the GMA. 6. Local jurisdictions shall designate within land use plans areas that can support public transportation services. These areas shall include existing as well as new development. Each jurisdiction's land use plan, the regional transportation plan and the Spokane Transit Authority's (STA) Long Range Transit Plan shall support, complement and be consistent with each other. 11. Each jurisdiction shall address land use designations and site design requirements that are supportive of and compatible with public transportation, for example: a. pedestrian-scale neighborhoods and activity centers; b. mixed-use development; and c. pedestrian friendly and non-motorized design. Policy Topic 7—Affordable Housing Policies 2. Each jurisdiction's development policies, regulations and standards should provide for the opportunity to create affordable housing in its community. Such policies may include regulatory tools, such as inclusionary zoning, performance/impact zoning, mixed-use development and incentives for increasing density to promote greater choice and affordable housing in its community. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 4 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 6. In conjunction with other policy topics, coordinate housing, transportation and economic development strategies to ensure that sufficient land and densities for affordable housing are provided in locations readily accessible to employment centers. 2.2 Land Use Plan As shown in Figure 2.1 below, the majority of land is designated residential (62%) under this Plan. Of the land designated residential, 54% is designated as Low Density Residential with densities up to six dwelling units per acre. Twenty percent of the land area is designated as Heavy and Light Industrial. The remaining land is designated as commercial, office, mixed use or parks/open space. Figure 2.1: Land Use by Comp Plan Category Office Parks and Regional Community Neighborhood 2.0% Open Space Commercial Commercial Corridor Mixed Use Commercial 2.2% 3.2% 2.3% 4.2% 0.1% Mixed Use Center High Density 3.5% Residential Medium Density 4.0% Residential 4.1% Heavy Industrial Light Industrial_/ 15.2% 5.1% Low Density Residential 54.2% 2.2.1 City Center Plan the City of Spokane Valley. The purposes of creating a Spokane Valley City Center are: 1. Create an identifiable city center that is a social and economic focus of the City; 2. Strengthen the City overall by providing for long term growth in employment and housing; 3. Promote housing opportunities close to employment and services; transportation system, whatever the ultimate configuration may be; 5. Reduce dependency on automobiles; 6. Consume less land with urban development; 7. Maximize the public investment in infrastructure and services; 8. Provide a central gathering place for the community; and future. These include: Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 5 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 1. The development of a more intensive, multi-use city center is a natural step in Spokane Valley's evolution. Most new urban areas start out as bedroom communities. Retail and commercial uses then develop to serve the new residential population. Office and industrial activities next begin to locate at key transportation crossroads, adding jobs and strengthening the employment base. Spokane Valley has experienced these evolutionary phases and is now ready for a defined City Center. 2. Economic Development Spokane Valley has an opportunity to transform itself from an o centially rosidential community with rotail and service based economy to a sub regional oconomic center with an expanded, more diverse employment base. 3. Community Support A survey of Spokane Valley area citizens prior to incorporation overwhelmingly indicated that the lack of identifiable "downtown" and a community gathering place was of concern to a majority of respondents. Community support wa& tested again when the city conducted a statistically valid survey in the spring of 200'1. The support to create a City Center was reiterated throughout the community meetings held during the development of the comprehensive plan and the city's informal community survey. A discussion of the results of the city's survey is included in Section 2.10. The following could be components of the City Center: 1. Location: Cenerally located along the Sprague/Appleway corridor. 2. Size: Between 300 and /100 acres in size. 3. Streets: New streets could be added at every 200 to /100 feet to create an internal grid street system to provide an urban atmosphere. 4. On-street parking would be provided on internal grid streets. 5. Ground floor retail on both sides of streets. 6. Building out to the edge of the right of way and include wide sidewalks to encourage a lively street scene. adjacent to pleasant surroundings such as open space, retail shops and services. and provides a pedestrian friendly streetscape with connections to parks, schools, shopping, services and transit. 9. Civic/public uses such as city hall, community library, performing arts center, city center, extended portion of the day. Other characteristics of this land use scenario include the following: 1.Neighborhood/community retail centers current land use patterns dictate that residents travel to the Sprague Avenue corridor to access some of the most basic goods and services. This scenario northeast portions of the city. Potential locations for these centers would be focused at intersections of arterials at the periphery of the city, such as Highway 27/32"4 Avenue, Dishman Mica Road/Bowdish Road and Barker Road/Boone Avenue. 2.Office zoning districts currently, there is no specific zoning district or comprehensive plan designation for professional office uses. The county has used the UR 22, Multi family zoning uses would be re designated to an "Office" comprehensive plan designation and zoning districts developed to implement this plan designation would include development standards to implement the policies of the comprehensive plan. Specific areas in the city include the Evergreen corridor north of Sprague Avenue; Mission east of Pines Road in the Valley Hospital/medical office area; Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 6 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan inventory process. The majority of these dealerships are located between Argonne Road and Thierman Road. Two dealerships are located just west of Dartmouth Road, near the U City Mall. New car dealerships provide the city with substantial sales tax revenue on one hand, on the other hand auto dealerships can have a significant visual impact on a community and have somewhat unique needs related to development standards, such as signage and street frontage landscaping. This scenario provides policy direction for the implementing development regulations. '1.Mixed use this scenario suggests reducing the strip commercial on Sprague Avenue by maintaining Community Commercial zoning only at major intersections such as Pines, Evergreen and Sullivan Roads. Areas in between these commercial "nodes" would be designated as Corridor Mixed use or some other appropriate designation, which would encourage conversion of these manufacturing and specialty retail. proposed based on policy direction of the comprehensive plan. 6.The majority of land in the City of Spokane Valley is dedicated to single family residential zoning and land use. The majority of the single family residential areas are designated Low Density Residential under the interim comprehensive plan. This plan designation allows for residential residential zoning districts would be evaluated, and a series of single family districts with minimum lot sizes ranging from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet would be considered. Reducing overall lot sizes multi family zoning to accommodate the city's 20 year population growth projection. 7—Areas previously platted in 1-q acre lots There are areas in the City that were platted as approximately one acre lots. These areas would be rezoned to an R-1 zoning designation with the intent to preserve the original intent of the zoning for these areas. Moreover, these areas would be allowed to maintain a small number of livostock such as horsos, cows, or llamas in keeping with the rural character of these neighborhoods. 2.3 Relationship to Other Comprehensive Plan Chapters Until a new land use scenario is developed through a full comprehensive plan update the existing land use patterns are maintained. This e land use concept set forth in this chapter is consistent with all SVCP chapters. - _ _ _e• :•_ . _ _•_ •_ _•_e _ e •_ _ . _• _• _ _ - _ coordinated growth and an efficient use of limited resources. Below is a brief discussion of how the Land Use chapter relates to the other chapters of the SVCP. 2.3.1 Economic Development Spokane Valley's economy is disproportionately divided. Dr. Grant Forsyth, Assistant Professor of Economics at Eastern Washington University prepared a report based on year 2000 Census information for the Spokane Valley area. This report, "A Demographic and Economic Analysis for the City of Spokane Valley" indicates that there were nearly 3,000 employer firms employing approximately 43,305 people in the year 2000 with an average annual payroll per employee of approximately$29,000 (in 2000 dollars). Dependence on retail trade and service occupations stems primarily from the City's evolution into a regional shopping destination for eastern and southern Spokane County and counties in northern Idaho. Increased regional competition from other retail areas, such as Post Falls and Coeur d'Alene and the City of Spokane, may impact the City's ability to capture future retail dollars. To improve Spokane Valley's economic outlook, the economic development strategy is to promote a Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 7 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan more diverse economy. A diversified economy would achieve a better balance between jobs and housing and support the City's desired quality of life. In conjunction with the Economic Development chapter, this Land Use chapter promotes the following: •Redevelopment and development of the Sprague Avenue/Appleway Boulevard corridor into an area of quality commercial and Mixed-use development. .2.Establishment of design standards. 4.3.Preservation of existing single family neighborhoods. The land use map designations support development necessary to achieve the above (see the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map 2.1). A complete discussion of economic development is set forth in the Economic Development chapter. 2.3.2 Capital Facilities Capital facilities provided by the City include: transportation and streets, parks and open space, and surface water management. The amount and availability of urban services and infrastructure influences the location and pace of future growth. The City is responsible for the construction and maintenance of parks and recreation facilities, streets and transportation improvements, and surface water facilities. Providing for future growth while maintaining existing improvements depends upon the community's willingness to pay for the construction and financing of new facilities and the maintenance of existing facilities. As outlined in the Capital Facilities Plan, new infrastructure and services may be financed by impact fees, grants, designated capital taxes (real estate excise tax, fuel tax, utility tax), money from the City's general fund or voter approved bonds. To capitalize on the City's available resources for urban services and infrastructure, this Land Use chapter recognizes that concentrating growth is far more cost effective than allowing continued urban sprawl. Concentrating growth also supports the enhancement of future transit improvements. Annexation of Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) to the City of Spokane Valley may be a logical progression to ensure centralized planning and prevention of urban sprawl. A major goal of the GMA is to reduce urban sprawl by encouraging development in urban areas where adequate public facilities exist. GMA further states that cities are the logical provider of urban government services. Prior to annexation, the City of Spokane Valley will consider the economic impacts of providing municipal services at a level consistent with other areas within the City. The City will not provide a lower level of service in areas being considered for annexation that were in existence in the proposed areas at the time immediately preceding the annexation process. The City will consider Potential Annexation Areas' (PAAs) topography, land utilization, and population density when determining service levels. Water Availability— Potable water is provided to residents of Spokane Valley by thirteen water and irrigation districts. All drinking water used by residents in Spokane Valley is drawn from the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. Water Quality - Maintaining a clean source of water is vital to the health and livability of the City. Preserving water quality ensures a clean source of drinking water and continued health of the City's streams and lakes. Maintaining water quality is also important for maintaining the health of the aquifer that relies on surface water for recharge. Contamination of an aquifer by contaminated surface water can lead to serious health concerns and/or expensive treatment requirements. To address this concern and impacts of new development, the City has adopted a Stormwater Management Plan. The plan specifies actions to ensure water, quality including the development of detention/retention facilities to control rate and Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 8 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan quality of water runoff. Furthermore, development of a wellhead protection program with the various water providers should provide guidelines to avoid possible contamination. Policies contained in the Natural Environment chapter provide direction for development near wellheads and in aquifer recharge areas. For a complete discussion of water resources and water purveyors in the City of Spokane Valley, refer to the Capital Facilities chapter. 2.3.3 Parks and Open Space One of the most important and valued elements of a high quality living and working environment is a parks and open space system. Providing parks and open spaces contributes to a reduction in environmental impacts such as noise and air pollution; increases the value of adjacent properties; provides areas for passive and active recreation; and helps preserve the natural beauty of the City. 2.3.4 Natural Environment Spokane Valley's natural beauty is apparent. Streams, wetlands, surrounding mountains and the Spokane River provide a scenic backdrop as well as a source for active and passive recreation for the citizens of Spokane Valley. The Land Use chapter seeks to protect Spokane Valley's unique natural resources through policies that support the preservation of these areas for future generations. The Natural Environment chapter also includes a discussion of critical areas as defined by GMA. For a complete discussion, please refer to the Natural Environment chapter. 2.3.5 Housing Housing is a basic human need and a major factor in the quality of life for individuals and families. An adequate supply of affordable, attractive, and functional housing is fundamental to achieving a sense of community. The central issue related to land use is supplying enough land to accommodate projected growth for a range of incomes and households. Presently, housing is provided primarily in single-family subdivisions. This plan sets forth strategies to increase housing options and choices. The Land Use chapter advocates changes to current development codes to increase flexibility in platting land and encourage housing as part of mixed-use developments in commercial areas. The latter provides an opportunity to locate housing closer to employment and shopping, and to create affordable housing. A complete discussion of housing can be found in the Housing chapter. 2.4 Current and Projected Population 2.4.1 Projected Growth Current population is estimated at the city, county and state level by the state's Office of Financial Management (OFM). The most recent OFM estimate for the current population of Spokane Valley (as of April 1, 20122013) is 90,55091 940. The City's estimated population capacity is the current OFM population estimate plus the potential population increase of 15,11814,891 (see Table 2.1 Land Capacity Analysis). The City's estimated population capacity is 105,668106 831. RCW 36.70A requires that at least every ten years the incorporated and unincorporated portions of the designated UGAs and the densities permitted therein, be reviewed and revised to ensure that the UGAs are sufficient to accommodate the urban growth that is projected by OFM to occur in the county for the subsequent 20 year period. On June 9, 2009, the Board of County Commissioners approved via Resolution 09-0531 a population allocation of 18,746 for Spokane Valley for planning purposes. The 2013 City's Land Capacity Analysis estimated a population capacity of 15,11814,891 leaving 3,6281,355 people to be accommodated within the existing County UGA&_ This estimate considers the population increase within the City since 2009, and adjusts the amount remaining to be absorbed within the County UGA. 2.4.2 Land Capacity Analysis The GMA requires a Land Capacity Analysis, or the theoretical holding capacity of the designated Urban Growth Areas, which by definition includes cities. By assigning the expected population Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 9 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan growth to the results of the Land Capacity Analysis, the area required to accommodate the population growth is shaped. Countywide population forecasts are identified by the CWPPs, as one criterion for consideration in developing a regional methodology or countywide population allocation. The countywide growth target is based on the OFM growth management population forecast for Spokane County. The Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County was developed through the efforts of the Land Quantity Technical Committee between March 1995 and October 1995. The Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials adopted that methodology on November 3, 1995. The adopted methodology is patterned after the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development's (CTED) land quantity inventory guidebook entitled Issues in Designating Urban Growth Areas Part I- Providing Adequate Urban Area Land Supply. Use of that document was specified by the adopted Countywide Planning Policies (Policy Topic 1 (Urban Growth Areas Policy#3). However, the step-by-step CTED process was modified somewhat by the Land Quantity Technical Committee to reflect unique circumstances in Spokane County. The following steps of the regional methodology were followed by Spokane Valley in conducting the land capacity analysis: 1. Identify lands that are potential candidates to accommodate future growth - vacant, partially-used and under-utilized land (in other words, subtract all parcels committed to other uses). 2. Subtract all parcels that the community defines as not developable because of physical limitation. 3. Subtract lands that will be needed for other public purposes. 4. Subtract all parcels that the community determines are not suitable for development for social and economic reasons. 5. Subtract that percentage of land that the community assumes will not be available for development within the community plan's 20-year time frame. 6. Build in a safety factor. 7. Determine total capacity. Spokane Valley prepared a land capacity analysis of the city based on the above regional methodology. The results of the land capacity analysis are contained in the table below: Table 2.1 Land Capacity Analysis (updated October 2012December 2013) Vacant and Net Developable Potential New Potential Area Partially Used Population Acres Dwelling Units Land Increase Spokane Valley (Incorporated Area) 3,3782271 12454,26-5 6,9986909 15,11814,891 2.4.3 Potential Annexation Areas As part of the implementation of the Growth Management Act (GMA), Spokane County established the Urban Growth Area (UGA) in 2001. Land inside that boundary is defined as urban, and must have urban densities, and land outside the UGA is to remain rural. UGAs are established by Spokane County, in cooperation with cities and towns, to accommodate projected population growth, both residential and commercial, throughout the County over the next twenty (20) years. These areas are under Spokane County's jurisdiction until they are annexed into an adjacent jurisdiction. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 10 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The purpose of this section is to identify the unincorporated areas within the existing Spokane County UGA that are adjacent to the City of Spokane Valley, which would comprise potential annexation areas for the City. Map 2.2 indicates Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) for the City of Spokane Valley. Several UGAs are contiguous to Spokane Valley and would be logical areas for future annexation to the City of Spokane Valley. When a city annexes new areas, the new residents and businesses may be subject to the same taxes that are in place in the city at the time annexation takes place. If annexation occurs, the City would likely provide a consistent level of service throughout its new boundaries. Subsequently, the city would need to determine the cost of providing the current service levels to the annexation area. This process would include identifying public services and capital improvements that would need to be in place to serve the PAAs current and future land use pattern. 2.4.4 Development of Goals, Policies, and Actions for Annexation The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires counties to designate Urban Growth Area (UGAs) within which urban growth shall be encouraged RCW 36.70A.110 (1). UGAs are to include sufficient land to accommodate the twenty-year population growth projected for the county. The GMA imposes planning requirements to influence the ability of a city to annex UGAs. A city is required by GMA to adopt policies for land use, housing, - capital facilities, utilities, and transportation within the city's UGA. In order to meet this requirement the City of Spokane Valley has developed , policies and goals to provide policy 1 guidance for annexation of territory «► -'''r _--- ; within UGAs. Annexation will have — . °'y: financial impacts on the city; it may be , positive or negative. The City may need • to develop an annexation study to r • `� "'' assess the financial impacts especially Lam` ^ "01‘ , cAl for larger annexations. The Capital . f — - Facilities chapter identifies current service providers within the Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) as a starting point for the detailed analysis that may be needed prior to annexation. 2.5 Land Use Designations The land use designations in the SVCP recognize the relationships between broad patterns of land uses. The designations set forth location criteria for each specific class of uses consistent with the long-term objectives of the SVCP. These designations provide the purpose and intent for specific zoning districts. The location of the comprehensive plan land use designations are shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Map 2.1). 2.5.1 Residential The demand for and development of single-family housing is expected to continue for the foreseeable future. Single-family development will occur as in-fill development of vacant or under developed lots scattered throughout existing neighborhoods, and as subdivisions on vacant tracts of land. To address future housing needs, the Land Use chapter encourages new techniques for developing single-family housing. Such techniques include clustering, planned residential developments, lot size averaging, zero lot line development, accessory dwelling units and special needs housing. Low Density Residential Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 11 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The Low Density Residential (LDR) Comprehensive Plan designation addresses a range of single- family residential densities from one dwelling unit per acre up to and including six dwelling units per acre. This designation would be implemented through a series of zoning designations as described below. Implementing zoning for the LDR designation will include a series of zones allowing a range of minimum lot sizes. Existing lot sizes and community character will be strongly considered when developing the City's zoning map. For 111111111111. example, areas such as Rotchford Acres • ^ '' and Ponderosa will likely require minimum 'i1 f •-.�� lot sizes close to an acre in size. These large lot developments currently allow for !- horses and other large animals and have a distinct character that should be preserved to the greatest extent possible. The majority of the LDR designation will -.441111111111111111111 provide for densities ranging from four to six dwelling units per acre. Typical lot • sizes will range from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet. Some areas designated as LDR still lack necessary urban services and infrastructure, mainly sanitary sewer facilities. Upon provision of urban services, such as water and sewer, and transit services, an increase in density in some areas may be warranted. However, the City will adopt strict criteria to evaluate zone changes to ensure that future development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Medium Density Residential The Medium Density Residential designation represents an opportunity to provide a range of housing types to accommodate anticipated residential growth. The increase in population, decline in average family size, and increased cost of single-family homes have created increased demand for new housing types. The Land Use chapter encourages the development of housing types, such as duplexes, townhouses, and condominiums in existing multi-family areas and within mixed-use development in commercial areas. Multi-family uses, in large part, are in areas currently zoned for multiple-family development. Zoning will allow densities up to 12 dwelling units per acre in the Medium Density Residential designation. Opportunities for new development will occur through redevelopment and build-out of remaining parcels. Multi-family residential zones should be used as transitional zoning between higher intensity land uses such as commercial and office, to lower density single family neighborhoods. Additionally, Medium Density Residential areas should be located near services and high capacity transit facilities or transit routes. Residential design guidelines that address design and appearance of multiple-family developments should be considered. The primary goal of residential design guidelines is to develop multiple-family housing that is reflective of the community's character and appearance. High Density Residential This designation provides for existing multi-family residential development developed at a density in excess of 12 units per acre. Additionally, High Density Residential (HDR) designated areas are also located in areas near higher intensity development, such as a City Center. HDR provides housing opportunities for younger, lower income households in the City who may not yet be able to afford a home of their own. Moreover, this designation provides housing options for people looking to "downsize" from a single family dwelling on an individual lot, or for those known as "empty- nesters" whose children have moved out of the household and a large single family home is no longer needed. Generally, this designation is appropriate for land which is located adjacent to the Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 12 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan arterial street system served by public transit, and is in close proximity to business and commercial centers. Offices are permitted in the High Density Residential areas in order to provide some of the service needs generated by high-intensity land uses and to allow conversion of existing single- family homes into office use. 2.5.2 Commercial Designations Existing commercial areas are auto-oriented and characterized by one-story low intensity development. In the future, these areas will become more intensively developed and pedestrian oriented, and in some designations, accommodate housing. Transforming existing areas into places where people want to live, shop, and work requires changes. Commercial areas should contain street furniture, trees, pedestrian shelters, well marked crosswalks, and buildings oriented to and along the street to provide interest and allow easy pedestrian access. Regional Commercial The Regional Commercial designation encompasses two major retail areas of the City. It covers the "strip" retail areas along Sprague Avenue which includes the0114 automobile dealerships located along the western end of the Sprague Avenue corridor - _ 0 and the "big box" retail area found in thePIO Sullivan Road area from Sprague Avenue - north to the Interstate 90 interchange, and "e, "ter _ ; includes the Valley Mall and Wal-Mart. # i Regional Commercial allows a large range of uses. A wide range of development types, appearance, ages, function, and scale can beMOW found along Sprague Avenue. Older, single- - - story developments provide excellent opportunities for redevelopment. To create retail areas that are aesthetically and functionally attractive, revised development standards should be applied through Regional Commercial zoning, along with the adoption of Community Design Guidelines, which address design quality, mixed-use, and the integration of auto, pedestrian, and transit circulation. Site design, modulation, and setback requirements are also addressed. Community Commercial The community commercial classification designates areas for retail, service and office establishments intended to serve several neighborhoods. Community Commercial areas should not be larger than 15-17 acres in size and should be located as business clusters rather than arterial strip commercial Air development. Community Commercial centers - _ may be designated through the adoption of the comprehensive plan, comprehensive plan amendments or through sub-area planning. Residences in conjunction with business and/or multifamily developments may be allowed with performance standards that ensure compatibility. In addition, light assembly or other unobtrusive uses not traditionally located in commercial zones may be allowed with appropriate performance standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses or zoning districts. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2- Land Use Page 13 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Neighborhood Commercial The neighborhood commercial classification designates areas for small-scale neighborhoods serving retail and office uses. Neighborhood business areas should not be larger than two acres in size, and should be located as business clusters rather than arterial strip commercial developments. Neighborhood business centers may be designated through the adoption of the comprehensive plan, comprehensive plan amendments or through neighborhood plans. Auto-Row Overlay The City of Spokane Valley is home to several major new automobile dealerships. While these land uses provide a positive economic impact on the community, they can also have less positive impacts on the aesthetics of the community. Auto dealerships typically have vast areas of pavement to store new and used vehicles for sale. These land uses also have unique requirements for landscaping and signage. Unlike many commercial uses whose stock in trade is contained within a building, it is necessary for auto dealerships to have their vehicles clearly visible from the street. This makes traditional street side landscaping (consisting of low growing shrubs and bushes, and trees) not viable for these uses. An overlay designation is being suggested rather than a zoning district because the negative effects on the non-auto dealer - • - uses in the area will be minimized or .wary- eliminated. eliminated. _ 2.5.3 City Center The intent of 1111011 ___ Valley is to create a higher density, mixedir j use designation where office, retail, -,—- - atr government uses, and residential uses arc e r concentrated. The City Center will also be region's high capacity transit (HCT) system. The City Center encourages higher intensity land uses. Traditional city centers are places where diverse office, retail, and government uses are concentrated, as well as cultural and civic facilities, community services and housing. Nationally, many cities are advocating mixed use development in city center core areas for a number of reasons, including: on the automobile by bringing work places and residences into close proximity; • Providing retail and service needs II . in close proximity to residential and " •'' ` -- • . - -- 0l9YR:1044t-Ge-Rte rs; • Improving feasibility of a � F � t, " j, _ development project. Theiii "" ;'tt`_ proximity of urban services makes housing projects more desirable „,;_ ' .'�''" - `" '- and a nearby source of consumers - -= jr- 4 help make a commercial project �, more viable. mow Residents choose to live in higher density _ .. _ - housing for a variety of reasons. First, - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2- Land Use Page 14 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan affordable than traditional single family housing. Second, the convenience and proximity to work, - - -5--- - z f.. Z. . MEI NM MI II MI M inimp, . _...,4.1",-, 00 .._ or o.i. .... -1‘ .. .. —st...,,r1 .,-- . .....L.,/ ti ,..t. .....4. Aliw„., . . I, r 001; ,-�' !•dG r fctF.fY97r,..- F� ♦ f Ir ail'' needed services and cultural activities is very desirable for "IM, . 1 h 1 1f manypeople. Finall manpeople find that the do not '' ,t_ff. i� ," need a large, single family detached house. Given their lifestyle, they appreciate the low maintenance and security 9), / 1,711.77- 16„,;,. . r i i i. _ e - e•= a=- e. . Il :-. Folationship between.higher density residential uses and `2 commercial and retail activities. The presence of housing the core area also activates the streets in the city center, day and night. the regional HCT system. Existing low density development does not generate sufficient levels of demand to optimize the return on investment in transit. Promoting higher density uses within walking distance of transit facilities will improve the viability of this significant infrastructure investment. Moreover, concentrating the highest density of development in the City Center, where a significant number of jobs and residences will be within walking distance of a transit station, helps reduce the dependency on the automobile and improves pedestrian mobility. The City Center emphasizes pedestrian, bicycle, and transit mobility but will not be unfriendly to the use of automobiles. whole community can congregate and celebrate. Accordingly, the City Center should include an outdoor square, park, or commons with amenities such as- ntaiw,—s o , landscaping. Other civic amenities or buildings including city hall or a performing arts center could be grouped around the core area square or park. The City currently holds an annual Christmas 1 . throughout the year will enhance the feeling of community in Spokane Valley. An appropriate street network is a critical component of the City Center. The current network of identity in the City. The solution is not necessarily to construct wider streets. Streets become less offisiont as the number of lanes increases. Building now streets versus widening existing streets can be more cost effective, yields greater capacity, and will have a more positive impact on the City Center. Automobiles are likely to continue as a dominant mode of transportation for the foreseeable future. driving choices. To the extent possible, the City should connect streets and construct new streets to form a tighter grid system within the City Center, especially in the core area, by negotiating new public rights of way and building new streets. This "interconnectivity" serves to shorten and disperse trips, and consequently reduce travel on existing congested arterials. Improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists should support increases in transit services and Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 15 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan promote the development of the City Center. As the street system is developed to better bikes should be established. Reducing the size of the street grid, improving auto circulation and creating pedestrian linkages through larger parcels is critical to establish walking patterns that reduce dependency on the auto. pedestrian linkages are provided, the pedestrian system will handle an increasing share of trips. Special street design standards should be developed for the City Center. Special standards for amenities including benches, trash receptacles, and landscaped corner treatments should bo included. Transforming the existing commercial core area into the proposed City Center is an ambitious task. It requires a significant transformation from a low density, automobile oriented, largely retail area, to a higher intensity, more pedestrian oriented Mixed use area. The City Center section of the Plan acknowledges that the City Center will take some time to develop. Tho City can facilitate those changes through a series of small steps taken over time. This is consistent with emerging economic, social and demographic trends. As is the intent of this Plan, the phasing _ _ _._ ,T+ - • scenario presented here accounts for the timing of market projections and 1 • `, f -a future actions. _.r • .f .r ' •e =- -O0 :, ._ '... _.._. _ '.. ' ik ' strategyis keyed to projected trends p».: City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Evergreen Road corridors embody good design and are representative of desired future office development. Office development will provide new job opportunities within the community. This comprehensive plan designation is intended primarily for office development with limited retail or commercial uses. Retail and commercial uses are limited to those that are clearly subordinate to the primary office use, or the retail function - _ primarily serves the office uses in close I .. li proximity to the retail or commercial use. ► - -"' . n Primary uses which are representative of f /. I I this comprehensive plan category, include 1,..!""1--'' .., , " I', i °F 1 7 i medical and dental facilities, education - .._. OW" 17,0 services, insurance, real estate, financial '�` _ ,, institutions, design firms, and legal _ - _ , services. - r Areas designated as Office can serve a variety of functions. They can stand alone as major employment centers. They can also act as buffers or transition areas between higher intensity land uses and lower intensity land uses. For example, Office areas can provide a transition between industrial or commercial uses and residential areas. Office uses work well for this because they tend to generate less traffic and noise, operate shorter hours and are often smaller in scale then industrial or commercial areas. The Office comprehensive plan designation will be implemented through a series of office zoning districts. 2.5.54 Mixed-use The concept of "Mixed-use" has been around for centuries. Prior to the advent of the automobile and the proliferation of the road and highway system, Mixed-use was a predominant urban form. The "rediscovery" of this development type may be due in part to the negative impacts of sprawl, which have resulted in traffic congestion, decline in air quality, and inefficient use of resources and infrastructure. Mixed-use development has several potential benefits: • Land and infrastructure resources are used more efficiently; • Pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods; • Jobs are located near housing; • Opportunities to revitalize commercial corridors; • Opportunities for infill residential development (primarily in corridors); • Encourage new housing and innovative retail that is less auto dependent; and • Compatibility with existing transit access along local corridors. Mixed-use may be either "horizontal Mixed-use" or "vertical Mixed-use." Horizontal Mixed-use means that residential, commercial, office and other uses are adjacent to each other typically as part of an overall master plan for a site. However, not all projects within a "Mixed-use" designated area must be Mixed-use to achieve the goals of this plan. For example, a new residential-only project that is appropriately designed and located adjacent to an older existing commercial building may help stimulate renovation and reuse. This would be a more likely scenario in the Corridor Mixed-use area rather than the Mixed-use area. Vertical Mixed-use means that residential and nonresidential uses are stacked over each other. Typically, residential uses are placed over ground level retail, offices and/or restaurant uses. This Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 17 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan development type would be more likely to occur in the areas designated as Mixed-use. Corridor Mixed-Use Corridor Mixed-use is intended to enhance travel options, encourage development of locally serving commercial uses, multi-family apartments, lodging and offices along major transportation corridors identified on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Map 2.1). Corridor Mixed-use recognizes the historical low-intensity, auto-dependent development pattern, and focuses on a pedestrian orientation with an emphasis on aesthetics and design. The Corridor Mixed-use designation is primarily used along Sprague Avenue in order to space the areas designated commercial. Mixed-Use Center The Mixed-use Center designation would allow for two or more different land uses within developments under this designation. As described above, Mixed-use developments can be either vertical or horizontally mixed, and would include employment uses such as office, retail and/or lodging along with higher density residential uses, and in some cases community or cultural facilities. Mixed-use developments in this designation are characterized by differing land uses which are developed pursuant to a coherent, approved plan of development. Compatibility between uses is achieved through design which integrates certain physical and functional features such as transportation systems, pedestrian ways, open areas or court yards, and common focal points or amenities. 2.5.65 Industrial Designations Providing for industrial land is important for the economic health of Spokane Valley. Industrial businesses help drive the local economy and create an economic multiplier effect throughout the region. Providing an adequate supply of usable land with minimal environmental constraints and infrastructure in place helps ensure that Spokane Valley will be an attractive place for industrial businesses to locate and prosper. (See Chapter 7, Economic Development, for additional policies that encourage recruitment and retention of industrial business.). Heavy Industry Heavy industry is characterized by intense -4191 industrial activities, which include, but are not I. r�;, , limited to, manufacturing, processing, fabrication, , si- assembly/disassembly, freight-handling and similar operations. Heavy industry may have ti 1 ' significant noise, odor or aesthetic impacts to ■ ^ ,1 111" surrounding areas. _• Commercial, residential and most recreational uses should not be allowed in areas designated for heavy industry, except for small-scale ancillary uses serving the industrial area. The conversion of designated industrial lands to other uses should be limited. Limiting incompatible uses ensures a competitive advantage in business recruitment by providing adequate industrial land supply, reducing land use conflicts and preventing inflation of land prices. Moreover, allowing a wide variety of commercial, retail and other uses in the Industrial areas would be in conflict with other portions of this Plan related to concentrating major commercial growth in nodes at the intersection of major streets. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 18 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Light Industry The Light Industry designation is a planned industrial -.914. area with special emphasis and attention given to aesthetics, landscaping, and internal and community ' compatibility. Uses may include high technology and other low-impact industries. Light Industry areas may ' . • incorporate office and commercial uses as ancillary — uses within an overall plan for the industrial area. Non- - industrial uses should be limited and in the majority of M1 - OP" cases be associated with permitted industrial uses. • t The Light Industry category may serve as a transitional 'r category between heavy industrial areas and other less intensive land use categories. The category may also serve as a visual buffer for heavy industrial areas adjacent to aesthetic corridors. 2.5.;6 Parks/Open Space The Parks and Open Space designation is intended to protect parks, open space, and other natural physical assets of the community. 2.6 Development Review Process The Land Use chapter provides the policy foundation for implementing zoning and development regulations. In developing policy concerning future land use regulations, or revisions to existing regulations, every effort has been made to instill certainty and efficiency in the development process. State legislation has focused on developing streamlined and timely permit processing. Through the goals and policies of this Plan, the City will continue to strive to provide an efficient and timely review system. 2.7 Urban Desicln and Form In addition to guiding development, the Land Use chapter also guides the quality and character of the City's future development pattern through goals and policies related to the form, function, and appearance of the built environment. These priorities and implementation strategies, related to quality development, serve and will continue to serve as a basis from which to develop appropriate implementation measures. The design of our urban environment has a significant effect on community identity. Well designed communities contribute to a healthful, safe and sustainable environment that offers a variety of opportunities for housing and employment. An attractive and well planned community is invaluable when recruiting new business and industry to an area. Some of the concepts considered include: Community appearance, including signs and placement of utilities; • Neighborhood considerations in the review of development projects; • Integration and linking of neighborhoods including bicycle and pedestrian facilities; • The effect of traffic patterns and parking on neighborhood character; • Encouragement of high quality development through the appropriate use of planned unit developments; and • Consideration for public art. 2.7.1 Aesthetic Corridors Aesthetic corridors are intended to protect the visual appeal of Spokane Valley along major transportation routes entering and exiting the city. Aesthetic corridors provide special design Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 19 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan standards for aesthetics along major transportation routes to help create a quality image of Spokane Valley. Another component of aesthetic corridors is the "gateways" into the city. There are several entrances into the City of Spokane Valley along major transportation corridors, including Sprague Avenue, Trent Avenue, State Route 27 and a number of interchanges on Interstate 90. Design elements and landscaping treatments should denote a sense of arrival into the City, a neighborhood or other special areas such as the city center. 2.7.2 Planned Unit Developments Building flexibility into the subdivision process is important to allow for new concepts and creative site design. Planned residential developments (PRDs) provide the city a tool for allowing flexibility, while ensuring a design meets overall health and safety standards, and is consistent with neighborhood character. PRDs allow for deviations from the typical zoning standards in exchange for designs that protect the environment, provide usable open space, and exhibit exceptional quality and design. 2.8 Historical and Cultural Resources 2.8.1 Background In many ways, Spokane Valley's historic and cultural resources are #w,i , similar to our rich natural resources. Like wetlands, rivers, lakes, � . : ' • streams and other natural resources, historic properties are a finite and endangered resource. Also like our natural resources, once an historic or archaeological property is destroyed, it is lost forever. - ; Cultural resources such as historic buildings, monuments of historic events and archaeological sites are statements of Spokane Valley'sL�. identity. People especially value our authentic, homegrown cultural '' ':F' _ resources that set us apart from other areas of the state. ;+`„... , t,,,, Aim mph Spokane Valley is the location of several "Firsts" to occur in the _ Spokane Region. The first permanent settler in the Spokane area k_•� was Antoine Plante, a retired French-Canadian trapper. Plante built a cabin near the Spokane River in 1849, from which he operated a small Hudson's Bay Company trading post. Plante also constructed and operated the first ferry on the Spokane River. Other settlers began arriving in this area between 1865 and 1882. "Firsts" to occur in Spokane Valley include the first settler in 1849, first business and ferry in 1850, the first store and bridge in 1862, the first house in 1866 and the first post office in 1867. All of these "firsts" occurred before the arrival in 1873 of James Glover who was considered the "Father of Spokane." A large part of Spokane Valley's identity is derived from its heritage. From the Native Americans who first established trading centers to the continuing waves of newcomers from around the world, all have left their mark. Cultural resources include historic structures and landscapes engineered and built by man: a. Historic buildings - houses, barns, commercial buildings, churches, schools. b. Historic structures- bridges, dams, stone fences. c. Historic districts -a grouping of buildings with related historic character. d. Historic objects -statues, monuments, sculpture. e. Landscapes —gardens, parks, urban and rural. Cultural resources include properties that were held in spiritual or ceremonial honor or by a cultural group or tribe. Cultural resources include properties which may no longer show evidence of man- made structures, but retain an historical association with an event or period. Archaeology sites Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 20 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan include such areas as battlefields, campsites, cemeteries, burial sites, rock carvings, pictographs, trails, village sites, fishing sites, trading sites, religious and ceremonial sites. 2.8.2 Cultural and Historical Resource Issues Documenting Cultural Resources Many historic homes, farms and sites exemplify the history and culture of the Spokane Valley area, but proportionally few have been written in historic register nominations. Designation requires owner consent, does not pose undue restrictions to the property owner, and can be a planning tool for government by identifying significant properties. Archaeological Sites and Security State laws require the protection of archaeological sites on both public and private land by directing that the locations of sites be kept confidential within the assigned office because archaeological sites are highly susceptible to "treasure hunters and grave robbers." Existing lists need to be checked to confirm that evidence of the site/building remains, and a better means to identify and preserve evidence of significant archaeological sites is needed. Cultural resources are deemed important when they are over 50 years old, so identification and evaluation of them is a constant, ongoing process. Moreover, cultural resources are perceived as less important than other immediate, short-term City programs; therefore, funding and support for the preservation program is provided on an annual rather than an ongoing basis. 2.8.3 Spokane Valley Historic and Cultural Resources The Spokane Valley developed as irrigated agricultural tracts in five and ten- acre lots. The apple orchards of Otis _ Orchards were supported by warehouses, VI packing plants, and box manufacturers. - .. The apple industry which thrived in the s'" ► early century was destroyed by killing frost ;M of the 1950s. Newman Lake supplied the water that irrigated these orchards via the m eft Spokane Canal Company. The flow ! 01. R control gate at Newman Lake (a great 00.1 fishing spot) remains as a ruin with its _ story only in fading memory. Open canal ditches, concrete flues, cultivated fields and apple orchards were part of growing up in the valley until the late 1950s. A canal ran behind Otis Orchards High School, neither of which now exists. The picture on page 25 shows an Otis Orchards irrigation canal. The Opportunity Township Hall was designed by Opportunity resident and noted Spokane architect C. Harvey Smith and constructed in 1912 by Opportunity builder and businessman C.E. Johnson. Built as Opportunity's government seat, the Opportunity Township Hall also served as the area's community hall and a meeting place for various philanthropic and other organizations including the Opportunity Moose Lodge, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, church groups, dance studios, and wedding parties. The Opportunity Township Hall is significant as a rare local example of Spanish- Mediterranean style architecture and for its association with the early settlement and development of the Spokane Valley and the town of Opportunity. 2.9 The Land Use/Transportation Connection 2.9.1 Street Connectivity Street design can have a significant impact on community development. It is important that neighborhoods be connected is such a manner that cars, bicycles and pedestrians can pass with Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 21 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan ease from one neighborhood to an adjacent neighborhood via collectors and arterials. Such a pattern promotes a sense of community. All new developments should give special consideration to emergency access routes. 2.9.2 Traffic Calming Traffic calming can be defined as measures that physically alter the operational characteristics of the roadway in an attempt to slow down traffic and reduce the negative effects of the automobile. The theory behind traffic calming is that roads should be multiuse spaces encouraging social links within a community and the harmonious interaction of various modes of travel (i.e., walking, cycling, auto, transit). 2.10 Citizen Participation The City of Spokane Valley adopted a Public Participation Program for the preparation of the comprehensive plan. This program identified actions the city would take to meet the GMA requirements of "early and continuous" public participation in the development of the city's plan. Two of the public participation techniques identified in the Public Participation Program is citizen survey and a series of public meetings hosted by the city's planning commission. In the spring of 2004, the City hired Clearwater Research to conduct a statistically valid survey of Spokane Valley residents on a number of issues. Clearwater Research conducted a telephone survey with a random sample of 400 Spokane Valley adults. Survey data was collected from March 18 to April 7, 2004. The majority of respondents (83%) indicated they thought Spokane Valley was headed in the right direction. However, respondents did identify a number of important issues facing Spokane Valley. Concerns about the economy and planning related matters were among the top issues respondents identified as facing the City. 2.10.1 City Center/Community Identity _ City Center. Sixty-one percent of 100% respondents indicated that having a II n=395 recognizable downtown or city center was 80% important to the future of Spokane Valley € oi (figure right). Female respondents, 35% respondents at lower income levels, and 40% respondents residing in one or two person 17% households were most likely to report that 20°7r+ having a recognizable downtown was important to the future of Spokane Valley. wary Somewhat Neared sem ewhat Vary There was strong support among mimpartantunincvr!ane immanent inwpgrtarK respondents for spending public money to create a city center. Seventy-four percent of respondents either somewhat or strongly supported Spokane Valley officials using public money to develop a city center. Only two percent strongly opposed the use of public money to create a city other ' 5% I center. C�n=233 Most Ideal Location for a City Everygrsen and spraq�, ■ Center Pines and Sprague 16% Over half of the respondents (52%) mu abeam'Prnr.i i85r', felt the University City area would be the most ideal Spokane Valley University Crty area 52% location for a city center. Other - ;- areas considered appropriate for O% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% the City Center included Mirabeau Point, Pines and Sprague, and Evergreen and Sprague. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 22 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Importance of Spokane Valley Having Community Identity Community Identity. Only 26% of respondents thought Spokane Valley had a distinct identity or something that made it unique. Interestingly, almost the same percentage of respondents who said Spokane Valley does not have a community identity (74%), indicated that having a community identity was important to the future of Spokane Valley (76%). While many respondents (47%)felt community identity could be developed through social changes, others believed physical changes (28%) or a combination of both physical and social changes (25%)were the best means for accomplishing the development of community identity. 2.10.2 Community Aesthetics The typical pattern of development along the major streets of Spokane Valley did not appear to be of great concern to respondents. Just 22% expressed dissatisfaction with the current type of development along major streets. Further underscoring the general lack of concern about the typical pattern of development along major streets, only 23% of respondents indicated adding street trees and landscaping to major streets should be a high priority for City officials. Lower income respondents were more apt than higher income respondents to report that making streets pedestrian-friendly should be a high priority for City officials. Support/Opposition to Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to Residential Neighborhoods Respondents' opinions (graph right) regarding the development of small commercial centers close to residential neighborhoods, were also sharply divided. Just under half of the respondents (46%) were supportive of developing small commercial centers close to residential neighborhoods. Priority Level: Stronger Controls on Signs and Billboards in Spokane Valley Opinions regarding the priority City • o officials should place on stronger 180 fm sign and billboard controls were 601© . ■n-3g8 very mixed. However, 67% of respondents indicated that Spokane 6010 Valley officials should place a 33{�o 34% 33% medium or high priority on stronger 40% • sign and billboard control and as such, it is probable that the majority 20% -M] of residents would be supportive of 0°ir, • stronger billboard control and sign regulations. Low priority Medium priority High priority 2.10.3 Results of"Unscientific" Survey During the community meetings held on the comprehensive plan, city staff made available the survey questions contained in the city's community survey. Meeting attendees were asked to complete the survey and either return it before the end of the meeting, or to complete the survey at 100°ro- home and mail it to the city. In many cases the ■n=177 responses to the questions were similar to the 80% responses of the formal survey conducted by 60% Clearwater Research. These question numbers 40% 33% are right of the survey itself. The following are the o 26% 18% 19% results of the "unscientific" survey: 20% ■ 4% ■ 0% How important to the future of Spokane Valley Very Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very is having an area of the City that is recognized important important important unimportant unimportant as the "downtown"? Would you say...? nor unimportant The responses to this question are very similar to Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 23 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan those received during the formal community survey. The results above reflect that out of the total responses of 177 on this issue, 102 or nearly 58 percent felt that Spokane Valley having an identifiable downtown or city center was either somewhat important or very important. This is compared to 40 responses or 22% indicating that an identifiable city center was either somewhat or very unimportant. If you feel a developing a "downtown" is important, which of the following areas of Spokane Valley would be the most ideal location for a downtown? Those respondents who indicated that having an identifiable city center overwhelming (73%) felt that the University City area was the most appropriate location for establishing a city center for Spokane Valley. In your opinion, does Spokane Valley have an identity or something that makes it unique? The result of this survey question is 100% somewhat different from the results of the •n=166 II formal community survey. In the formal 80% survey only 26% of the respondents felt that the City of Spokane Valley has an 60i 48% 52% identity or something that makes it 40% unique. The results in the graph at the right indicate that a majority of those 20% surveyed at the community meetings (52%) felt there was something unique 0% No Yes about Spokane Valley. How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having a "community identity? Would you say...? When asked how important to the future of Spokane Valley is having a distinct community identity, an overwhelming majority of the respondents (73%) felt it is either somewhat important or very important that Spokane Valley have a distinct identity. This is consistent with the results of the formal community survey where 76% of respondents felt it is important for the city to have a community identity. 100% - ■ n=170 I 80% 60% 39% 34% 40% 13% 20% 5% 9% 0% Very Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very important important important nor unimportant unimportant unimportant Would development of a "community identity" best be accomplished through physical changes, such as the development of a city center or the building of gateways at the major points of entry into the city, or through 100%- social changes, such as more •n=160 I community events like Valleyfest? 80% When asked what types of changes 60% 57% would be needed to develop a community Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) 40% 28% e 20% 15% ■ Page 0% Physical Changes Social Changes Both Changes Equally Important City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan identity, a majority (57%) felt that both social and physical changes would be necessary to accomplish developing an identity for the city. This is somewhat different than the formal survey where only 26% of the respondents felt that both physical and social changes were equally important to develop the city's identity. Do you consider adding street trees and landscaping to major streets in Spokane Valley a high, medium, or low priority for city officials? In terms of community aesthetics, a majority of the respondents (59%) felt that adding street trees and landscaping to the major streets in the city should be either a medium or high priority for city officials. This result was identical to the result of the city's formal community 100%- survey where 59% of respondents felt ■n=1661 this should be either a medium or high 80% priority for the city. 60% 41% 41% 40% 18% 20% 0% Low Priority Medium Priority High Priority Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 25 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 2.11 Goals and Policies Residential Goals & Policies Goal LUG-1 Preserve and protect the character of Spokane Valley's residential neighborhoods. Policies LUP-1.1 Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. LUP-1.2 Protect residential areas from impacts of adjacent non-residential uses and/or higher intensity uses through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. LUP-1.3 Review and revise as necessary, existing land use regulations to provide for innovation and flexibility in the design of new residential developments, accessory dwelling units and in-fill development. LUP-1.4 Encourage the development of transportation routes and facilities to serve residential neighborhoods. Special attention should be given to pedestrian circulation. LUP-1.5 Encourage the development of parks and the dedication of open space in and adjacent to residential areas. Open space dedication shall be proportionate to the size of the development. LUP-1.6 Preserve site characteristics that enhance residential development (trees, bodies of water, vistas, and similar features) using site planning techniques such as clustering, planned unit developments, transfer of development rights and lot size averaging. LUP-1.7 Allow zone changes within the Low Density Residential category only when specific criteria are met. Criteria may include: • Substantial changes within zone change area. • Clear mapping errors. • Adequate facilities and services (e.g. sewer, water capacity). • Consistency with densities in the vicinity of the zone change. LUP-1.8 Development agreements in conjunction with comprehensive plan amendments may be used where the project is larger in scope and has potentially larger impacts than normal, or where the city council may desire to place certain restrictions on proposal. LUP-1.9 Development agreements in conjunction with comprehensive plan amendments shall not be used to waive requirements associated with a proposed use. LUP-1.10 Office uses are allowed in the High Density Residential (HDR) category. Office uses must conform to all the development standards established for high density multifamily development. Goal LUG-2 Encourage a wide range of housing types and densities commensurate with the community's needs and preferences. Policies LUP-2.1 Allow and encourage a variety of housing types in designated Mixed-use areas, o pecially in the City Center area. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 26 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan LUP-2.2 Use design and performance standards for residential developments to achieve integration in commercial and Mixed-use developments. Performance standards should focus on scale, appearance, and compatibility. Encourage variations in facades and rooflines to add character and interest to multi-family developments. LUP-2.3 Encourage the development of transportation routes and facilities to serve residential neighborhoods. Special attention should be given to walking, biking and transit uses. LUP-2.4 Residential development should be designed to provide privacy and common open space. Open space areas shall be proportionate to the size of the residential development. LUP-2.5 Consider special development techniques (e.g., zero lot lines, lot size averaging, and planned unit developments) in single-family areas, provided they result in residential development consistent with the quality and character of existing neighborhoods. LUP-2.7 Consider and possibly implement programs facilitating purchase or retention of existing open space lands, such as transfer of development rights (TDR) or purchase of development rights (PDR). Goal LUG-3 Encourage the development of underutilized residential areas to improve connectivity. Policies LUP-3.1 Develop infill regulations that offer incentives when specific infill criteria is met. LUP-3.2 Infill regulations should allow smaller lots and flexibility from other residential zone dimensional standards when development promotes connectivity. LUP-3.3 Allow narrower public street sections that are economically viable for infill development, meet transportation, emergency access, and pedestrian needs while reducing stormwater impacts. LUP-3.4 Promote a public street network that provides connected neighborhoods for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles. . Commercial Goals & Policies Goal LUG-34 Transform various commercial business areas into vital, attractive, easily accessible mixed use areas that appeal to investors, consumers and residents and enhance the community image and economic vitality. Policies LUP-34.1 Encourage transformation of Sprague Avenue Regional/ Community Commercial corridor into a quality mixed-use retail area. Retail development along the corridor, exclusive of the City Center, should be concentrated at arterial intersections and designed to integrate auto, pedestrian, and transit circulation. Integration of public amenities and open space into retail and office development should also be encouraged. LUP-34.2 Encourage large bulk retailers to locate in the designated Regional Commercial nodes around arterial intersections. LUP-34.3 Development agreements in conjunction with comprehensive plan amendments may be used to ensure compatibility between non-residential developments and residential zones by regulating height, scale, setbacks, and buffers. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 27 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Goal LUG- 5 Provide neighborhood and community scale retail centers for the City's neighborhoods. Policies LUP-5-'.1 Integrate retail developments into surrounding residential areas with attention to quality design and function. LUP-45.2 Encourage pedestrian and bicycle access to neighborhood shopping and services. LUP-45.3 Encourage retail and personal services to group together within planned centers to allow for ease of pedestrian movement. LUP-45.4 Encourage Mixed-use residential and commercial and office development in Neighborhood Commercial designations where compatibility with nearby uses can be demonstrated. LUP-54.5 Ensure compatibility between mixed-use developments and residential areas by regulating height, scale, setbacks, and buffers. LUP- 5.6 Develop community design guidelines to promote common open space, public art, and plazas in commercial and office developments. LUP- 5.7 Develop design guidelines that encourage quality design and pedestrian and vehicle circulation in commercial, office and Mixed-use developments. LUP-45.8 Develop design guidelines to encourage commercial development to locate along the street edge (where deemed appropriate) to provide pedestrian street access. LUP-45.9 Identify and designate streets where on-street parking can be safely provided without unduly slowing traffic flow or jeopardizing traffic safety. LUP-45.10 May provide incentives to encourage developers to include housing in mixed-use projects. Goal LUG-`6 Identify appropriate locations for the Auto Row Overlay designation. Policies LUP-56.1 Identify other appropriate automobile related uses within the Auto Row Overlay designation that are complementary to automobile dealerships. LUP-56.2 Develop appropriate development standards for permitted uses within the Auto Row Overlay designated area. City Center Goal LUG 6 Create an identifiable City Center that serves as the social, cultural, Policies LUP 6.1 Define a City Center with distinct boundaries, unique building types, and special features. LUP 6.2 Strengthen existing connections of the City Center area to the region's high capacity transit system. through appropriate development regulations and design standards. LUP 6.1 Develop land use regulations that allow higher intensity development in the City (FAR) and permitted uses. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 28 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan LUP-6.5 Coordinate with urban service providers to ensure sufficient capacity is available for anticipated development. LUP 6.6 Allow for a variety of uses and mixed use development within buildings or complexes. Ensure that mixed use development complements and enhances the character of the surrounding residential and commercial area. LUP 6.7 The City should always consider City Center sites regarding potential civic and cultural uses the City develops, such as a City Hall. LUP 6.8 Provide incentives to attract cultural and civic uses to the City Center over which the City does not have direct control, such as libraries or recreation facilities. LUP 6.9 Develop land use regulations that encourage higher density residential uses on High density housing should be accompanied by residentially oriented retail and service uses. LUP 6.10 Provide amenities such as community services, parks and public spaces to meet the residential needs in the City Center. nearby lower density residential development. Goal LUG-7 Provide a balanced transportation network that accommodates public transportation, high occupancy vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, automobiles and integrated parking. Policies LUP 7.1 Improve traffic circulation around and through the City Center by extending the street network and creating smaller blocks. LUP-7.21 Encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by providing public sidewalks, street trees, street furniture and other amenities. LUP-7.22. Require clear and safe pedestrian paths to enhance the pedestrian network. LUP-7.43 Connect the main entry of buildings to public sidewalks by an identifiable walkway. LUP-7.54 Allow for on-street parking on the internal City Center street network. LUP 7.6 Encourage transit use by improving pedestrian and bicycle linkages to the existing and future transit system. Office Goals & Policies Goal LUG-8 Create appropriate development standards for Office designated areas. Policies LUP-8.1 Allow commercial, residential and recreational uses in conjunction with permitted uses in Office designated areas. LUP-8.2 Integrate sidewalks, bike lanes, landscaping, and area lighting in office areas to provide a safe and attractive working environment. LUP-8.3 Allow office uses in high density residential zones to provide some of the service needs generated from multifamily development. Mixed-use Goals & Policies Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 29 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Goal LUG-9 Encourage the development of Mixed-use areas that foster community identity and are designed to support pedestrian, bicycle and regional transit. Policies LUP-9.1 The characteristics of a Mixed-use area should include: • Housing and employment densities to support regional transit service; • Public transit connections; • Safe, attractive transit stops and pedestrian and bicycle ways; • Buildings that front on wide sidewalks with attractive landscaping, benches and frequent bus stops; • Multi-story buildings oriented to the street rather than parking lots; and • Parking space located behind or to the side of buildings or in parking structures. LUP-9.2 The mix of land uses allowed in either the Corridor Mixed-use or Mixed-use Center designation should include: • A variety of housing types including apartments, condominiums, town houses, two-family and single family dwellings on small lots; • A full range of retail goods and services including grocery stores, theaters/entertainment, restaurants, personal services and specialty shops; • Public/quasi-public uses and/or open space; • Professional Office and other employment oriented uses; and • Commercial uses that require large land areas but have low employment density and are auto-dependant, such as lumber yards, plant nurseries, warehouses, and auto dealerships, should be prohibited from either Mixed- use category. Industrial Goals & Policies Goal LUG-10 Provide for the development of well-planned industrial areas and ensure the long-term holding of appropriate land in parcel sizes adequate to allow for future development as industrial uses. Policies LUP-10.1 Plan capital facility expenditures to assist the development of lands designated for industrial uses. LUP-10.2 Encourage a diverse array of industries to locate in Spokane Valley. LUP-10.3 Encourage shared-use parking, pedestrian access and transit incentive programs in industrial development projects. Goal LUG-11 A variety of strategically located heavy industrial areas should be designated and protected from conflicting land uses. Policies LUP-11.1 Commercial, residential and recreational uses should be limited or not allowed in areas designated for industry, except for small-scale ancillary commercial and recreational uses intended to primarily serve the industrial area. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 30 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan LUP-11.2 Conversion of designated industrial lands to other uses should be strictly limited to ensure an adequate land supply. LUP-11.3 Provide appropriate buffering, landscaping and other development standards for industrial areas. LUP-11.4 Retail outlets shall be allowed for industrial businesses that manufacture and/or assemble products on-site. Goal LUG-12 Designate and protect a variety of strategically located light industry areas. Policies LUP-12.1 Commercial, residential and recreational uses shall be limited or not allowed in areas designated for light industry except for small-scale ancillary commercial and recreational uses primarily to serve the industrial area. LUP-12.2 Light industry areas shall include lighting, sidewalks, bike lanes and landscaping to provide a safe and attractive working environment. LUP-12.3 Retail outlets shall be allowed for industrial businesses that manufacture and/or assemble products on-site. Development Review Goals & Policies Goal LUG-13 Develop and maintain an efficient and timely development review process. Policies LUP-13.1 Maximize efficiency of the development review process by continuously evaluating the permitting process and modifying as appropriate. LUP-13.2 Assist developers with proposals by continuing to offer pre-application meetings in order to produce projects that will be reviewed efficiently. Urban Design and Form Goals & Policies Goals LUG-14 Improve the appearance and function of the built environment. Policies LUP-14.1 Use performance and community design standards to maintain neighborhood character, achieve a greater range of housing options, and to create attractive and desirable commercial and office developments. LUP-14.2 Adopt specific regulations for designated aesthetic corridors that: • Provide incentives for aesthetic design; • Require landscaping buffers adjacent to roadways; • Limit sign height and size; • Provide performance standards to adequately screen intensive land uses that have exterior clutter such as outdoor storage, exterior heavy equipment and/or exterior fabrication/assembly. • Prohibit off-premise signage and billboards. LUP-14.3 Establish standards for the scale and intensity of commercial, retail and industrial signage that protect views and minimize signage clutter while allowing adequate business identification. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 31 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan LUP-14.4 Establish a "cap and replace"system for billboards. LUP-14.5 Designate aesthetic corridors along major transportation routes to provide a positive image of Spokane Valley. Aesthetic corridors shall be located along the following routes: • State Route 27 from 16th south to 32nd and Mansfield to Trent; • Appleway Boulevard (south side from Park to Dishman Mica); • Mirabeau Parkway from Pines to Indiana; • Dishman Mica Road from 8th Avenue, south to City limits • 32nd Ave. within the City limits • Appleway Blvd. from Barker to Hodges Historic and Cultural Resources Goals & Policies Goal LUG-15 Identify and protect archeological and historic sites and structures. Policies LUP-15.1 Continually identify and evaluate archaeological and historic sites to determine which should be preserved. LUP-15.2 Link cultural resource preservation with local economic development strategies. LUP-15.3 Establish and maintain relations with Native American tribes for the preservation of archaeological sites and traditional cultural properties. LUP-15.4 Publicize the community's heritage through interpretive trails, historic plaques, art and other public displays. Land Use/Transportation Connection Goals & Policies Goal LUG-16 Provide a street system that connects neighborhoods. Policies LUP-16.1 Encourage new developments, including multifamily projects, to be arranged in a pattern of connecting streets and blocks to allow people to safely get around easily by foot, bicycle, bus, or car. LUP-16.2 Develop street, pedestrian path and bike path standards that contribute to a system of fully connected routes. LUP-16.3 Require adequate emergency evacuation routes prior to approving new development or redevelopment. LUP-16.4 Connect neighborhood services, public open space and parks with multi-modal paths. Joint Planning Goals and Policies Goal LUG-17 The City of Spokane Valley should continue to coordinate with Spokane County and neighboring cities for adjacent urban growth areas. Policies LUP-17.1 The City should coordinate with Spokane County to ensure appropriate service provision and land development prior to City annexation. Methods to allow for coordination may include, but are not limited to, execution of an interlocal agreement between the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County to: Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 32 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • Establish guidelines for development plan review, impact fees and SEPA mitigation; and • Define service delivery responsibilities, level of service standards and capital facility implementation consistent with the goals and policies of this Plan. LUP-17.2 Through regional planning efforts, the City and County should ensure that planning is compatible with the Cities of Spokane and Liberty Lake. LUP-17.3 The City should continue coordinated planning efforts between Spokane County, appropriate fire districts, school districts, and water service providers to assure managed growth in urban growth areas. Potential Annexation Area Goals and Policies Goal LUG-18 Identify Potential Annexation Areas for the City of Spokane Valley that are consistent with the Spokane County regional urban growth area boundary. Policies LUP-18.1 Within the existing urban growth area, identify potential annexation areas that are contiguous to the city limits and not assigned to another city. LUP-18.2 Coordinate with adjacent cities and Spokane County to review and update the regional urban growth area boundary consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies and RCW 36.70. LUP-18.3 Propose changes to the regional urban growth area boundary necessary to accommodate Spokane Valley's 20-year population allocation. LUP-18.4 The City will not accept requests to annex unincorporated territory located outside the designated urban growth area. LUP-18.5 Complete necessary capital facilities planning for any newly proposed urban growth areas in accordance with the Countywide Planning Policies. Goal LUG-19 Collaborate with adjacent cities, Spokane County, and affected residents. Policies LUP-19.1 Pursue interlocal agreements with Spokane County to support collaborative joint planning within potential annexation areas to ensure consistent development. LUP-19.2 Inform affected residents, property owners, and businesses in the annexation process. LUP-19.3 Include language in an interlocal agreement utilizing the tool of annexation, prior to urban development, to control the type, quality, and location of development in potential annexation areas. LUP-19.4 Coordinate with Spokane County to work with affected neighborhoods upon annexation to provide a smooth transition from Spokane County to the City of Spokane Valley administration. Goal LUG-20 Promote orderly growth within potential annexation areas. Policies LUP-20.1 Perform a fiscal analysis and provide a service plan for all areas proposed for annexation. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 33 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Lup-20.2 Incorporate potential annexation areas in the Capital Facilities Plan including proposed locations for new capital facilities. LUP-20.3 Strive to retain neighborhood integrity in adjusting potential annexation areas boundaries. Goal LUG-21 Develop an annexation process for potential annexation areas Policies LUP-21.1 Evaluate annexations within the potential annexation areas based on the following criteria: • The City's ability, either in house, by contract, or by special purpose district, to provide public services at the City's adopted level of service • The annexation boundary should provide a contiguous and regular boundary with current City limits • The annexation boundary, where appropriate should use physical boundaries, including but not limited to, bodies of water, existing or future right-of-way, roads, and topography • Assessment of staff time and expense involved in processing the annexation request • Review right-of-way issues prior to defining boundaries of individual annexations to determine logical inclusions or exclusions • The annexation boundary, where appropriate, should adjust any impractical or irregular boundaries • When the proposed annexation is located in the vicinity of a public facility, the City should evaluate the feasibility of modifying the annexation boundary to include the public facility LUP-21.2 Process annexations in accordance with State annexation laws in a timely and efficient manner. LUP-21.3 Generally, the City of Spokane Valley prefers the Petition Method of Annexation. LUP-21.4 Ensure that newly annexed territory accepts its equitable share of the City's bonded indebtedness. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 2— Land Use Page 34 of 34 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 3 — TRANSPORTATION 3'0 Introduction Transportation systems should provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. Modes of transportation which impact Spokane Valley include roadway, transit, air, rail, bicycle and pedestrian. Each of these modes is addressed independently, although the development of an efficient and truly multimodal transportation system requires an evaluation of the interaction and interdependency of each mode in relationship to others Airport, rail and arterial roadways have implications for regional freight mobility. Transit, pedestrian and bicycle systems form part of larger systems with localized implications for the movement of people. Citizens should have a variety of viable transportation choices and the plan focuses on providing citizens with transportation options and reducing dependency on driving because: • The transportation preferences and needs of all people should be respected. All citizens, including those who cannot or choose not to drive, should have viable transportation options; • In the future, increasing numbers of people may not physically or financially be able to drive; • All people are pedestrians at some point; and • Continued dependency on driving may not be sustainable in the future, either economically and/or environmentally. Alternatives to driving must be truly viable. All transportation options must be safe, accessible, convenient and attractive. For instance, people might be more likely to use public transportation if service is frequent, routes to transit stops are pedestrian friendly and shops and services are located near stops. Safety is a critical factor; people will not choose transportation options they perceive to be unsafe. Safety is similarly important in the efficient movement of goods since they share road and rail transportation corridors. System design, direct routes and conflict reduction are key considerations in establishing a multimodal transportation system which provides mobility choices, moves people and goods effectively and safely, is coordinated with land use, maintains or improves air quality and mitigates impacts to the environment. 3.1 Planninci Context The Transportation Element of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (SVCP) establishes the framework for providing a transportation system (facilities and services), and focuses on actions needed to create and manage the transportation infrastructure and services. 3.1.1 Growth Management Act The Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A.020 [3]) "...encourages efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans." In addition, the act outlines guidelines for the preparation of the transportation plan, which is a mandatory element of the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, these guidelines (RCW 36.70A.070 [6]) include: • The land use assumptions used in the plan; • Facility and service needs, including: 1. An inventory of existing facilities; Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 1 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 2. Level of service standards for all facilities and services; 3. An action plan for brining system deficits up to standard; 4. Forecasts of future traffic growth; and 5. Identification of system expansion and transportation system management needs. • A financing plan which includes: 1. A comparison of funding needs versus available resources; 2. A six-year financing strategy; and 3. An assessment of how funding deficits will be managed. • Intergovernmental coordination efforts; • A demand management strategy; and • A concurrency management strategy. Moreover, the GMA requires that the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) certify the transportation elements of local comprehensive plans. Certification is based upon conformity with state legislation related to transportation elements, and consistency of the City's element with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan. 3.1.2 County Wide Planning Policies Regional transportation planning services are provided by the SRTC, and coordinated by the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) and local jurisdictions, in accordance with federal and state planning requirements, and the Countywide Planning Policies for Spokane County (CWPPs). The CWPPs provide a policy framework for the County and its respective cities. Adherence to these policies ensures that plans within the County are consistent with one another. These policies address such issues as the designation of urban growth areas, land use, affordable housing, provision of urban services for future development, transportation, and contiguous and orderly development. The following are specific CWPPs that relate to the Transportation Element:1 Policy Topic 3 — Promotion of Contiguous and Orderly Development and Provision of Urban Services Policies a. Each jurisdiction shall include policies in its comprehensive plan to address how urban development will be managed to promote efficiency in the use of land and the provision of urban governmental services and public facilities. The [GMA] Steering Committee has accepted a regional minimum level of service standards for urban governmental services with the exception of police protection within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). Local jurisdictions may choose higher standards. In its comprehensive plan, each jurisdiction shall include, but not be limited to, level of service standards for: a. fire protection; b. police protection; c. parks and recreation; d. libraries; e. public sewer; f. public water; g. solid waste disposal and recycling; h. transportation; and Note to reader: The following policies are numbered according to the policy number in the CWPPs, resulting in non- sequential numbering in this document. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 2 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan i. schools2 3. Each jurisdiction shall include policies in its comprehensive plan to ensure that obstructions to regional transportation or utility corridors are not created. In addition, each jurisdiction should include policies in its comprehensive plan to ensure sustainable growth beyond the 20-year planning horizon. Policy Topic 5—Transportation 1. Regional transportation planning shall be conducted by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC). The SRTC shall coordinate with local jurisdictions and the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) to ensure that the regional transportation plan and local jurisdiction's land use plans are compatible and consistent with one another. 4. Comprehensive plans shall include, where applicable, the master plans of identified major transportation facilities to ensure that they are reasonably accommodated and compatible with surrounding land uses. Such facilities shall include, but not be limited to, airports, state highways, railroads and major freight terminals. 5. Local jurisdictions shall develop and adopt land use plans that have been coordinated through the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC)to ensure that they preserve and enhance the regional transportation system. These plans may include high-capacity transportation corridors, and shall fulfill air quality conformity and financial requirements of the Federal Transportation Laws and Regulations, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and the Growth Management Act (GMA). 7. In the long term, growth and change will necessitate the designation of specific transportation corridors which can support high capacity transportation. These corridors shall: a. be identified for the specific purpose of preserving the right-of-way necessary to implement a high-capacity transportation system and to provide a development density that will support such a system; b. be recognized in each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan and development regulations. These plans and codes should provide the authority to establish high- capacity transportation activity centers and urban villages having a land use pattern of mixed use density and intensities; c. be incorporated into capital facilities programs to provide a unified approach for preserving the character and quality of neighborhoods; d. be evaluated to identify both interim and ultimate transportation strategies for each corridor; e. encourage capital infrastructure investment to facilitate high-capacity transportation and supporting land uses; and f. be supported through a public education process. 8. The regional transportation plan and comprehensive plan of each jurisdiction shall include roads, air and rail service that accommodates the need for freight and goods movement. 9. Recognizing the need to maintain existing rail lines for shipments of commodities, which reduces the impacts of shipping commodities by roads, local jurisdictions should protect rail facilities to the extent possible. 2 (Spokane County has not proposed a level of service for school districts to be adopted as part of the comprehensive plan. Individual school districts determine their own level of service standards. However, if any jurisdiction within Spokane County [itself]chooses to implement impact fees for schools at any future time,each school district must develop a capital facilities plan consistent with the GMA). Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 3 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 10. Each jurisdiction should coordinate its housing and transportation strategies to support existing, or develop new, public multimodal transportation systems. 11. Each jurisdiction shall address land use designations and site design requirements that are supportive of and compatible with public transportation, for example: a. pedestrian scale neighborhoods and activity centers; b. mixed use development; and c. pedestrian friendly and non-motorized design. 13. Each jurisdiction's transportation facilities shall be planned within the context of countywide, multi-county and bi-state air, land and water resources and shall not cause or contribute to exceeding federal or state environmental quality standards. 14. Each jurisdiction shall strive, through transportation system strategies, to optimize the use of and maintain existing roads to minimize the construction costs and impacts associated with roadway facility expansion. 15. In accordance with regional minimum level of service standards specified by the Steering Committee, each jurisdiction shall establish roadway standards, level of service standards and methodologies and functional road classification schemes to ensure consistency throughout the region and to support the use of alternative transportation modes. 16. Each jurisdiction shall address energy consumption/conservation by: a. designing transportation improvements for alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle; b. locating and adopting design standards for new development to support pedestrian or non-motorized travel; c. providing regulatory and financial incentives to promote efforts of the public and private sector to conserve energy; and d. reducing the number of vehicle miles traveled and number of vehicle trips. 17. The transportation element of each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, where transit service exists, will include level of service standards for transit routes and services. Each jurisdiction will coordinate the level of service standards with all adjacent jurisdictions and appropriate agencies. 18. Each jurisdiction shall use its adopted level of service standards to evaluate concurrence for long-range transportation planning, development review and programming of transportation investments. 20. Transportation elements of comprehensive plans shall reflect the preservation and maintenance of transportation facilities as a high priority to avoid costly replacement and to meet public safety objectives in a cost-effective manner. 21. Each jurisdiction, Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) and other transportation agencies shall identify significant regional and/or countywide land acquisition needs for transportation and establish a process for prioritizing and siting the location of transportation corridors and facilities. 3.1.3 Concurrency and Level of Service Concurrency as defined in the GMA3 means: 3 RCW 36.70A070(6) Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 4 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan ".."local jurisdiction must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on a locally owned transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with development. These strategies may include increased public transportation service, ride share programs, demand management, and other transportation system management strategies. For purposes of this subsection (6) "concurrent with development" shall mean that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. (emphasis added) SRTC has been appointed by the Spokane County Growth Management Steering Committee to coordinate the development of regional transportation Concurrency Management Systems (CMS). Spokane County's CMS consists of regional and local concurrency reviews as described below. Regional: SRTC is responsible for monitoring and evaluating the performance of regional transportation facilities as affected by land use and transportation improvement decisions. SRTC uses travel times to assess performance or regional transportation corridors. A review of regional concurrency occurs on an annual basis. Local: Local jurisdictions are responsible for reviewing land use proposals within their jurisdiction and making determinations as to whether concurrency requirements are met as specified by their ordinance. The state is responsible for establishing performance standards on all highways of statewide significance, which are not subject to local concurrency requirements. Additional discussion of roadway concurrency is included in Section 3.2 below and in Chapter 4 Capital Facilities. 3.2 Streets & Roadways 3.2.1 Highways of Statewide Significance & Connectivity Spokane Valley is served by a network of publicly maintained streets and highways connecting local communities and urban centers in the greater Spokane region. Interstate 90 runs east/west through the city and provides direct linkages from the Spokane region west to the Seattle/Puget Sound region and east across the country. Spokane Valley also has two (2) state highways, State Route 27 (Pines Road) and State Route 290 (Trent Avenue). SR-27 provides access from Spokane Valley south into southeastern Spokane County and Whitman County. SR-290 provides Spokane Valley access to the east into areas around Rathdrum, Idaho. Both of the roadways provide important regional access to Spokane Valley. 3.2.2 Roadway Inventory and Functional Classification Functional classification is the grouping of highways, roads and streets by the character of service they provide, and was developed for transportation planning purposes. Basic to this process is the recognition that individual routes do not serve travel independently. Rather, most travel involves movement through a network of roads. Comprehensive transportation planning, an integral part of total economic and social development, uses functional classification to determine how travel can be channelized within the network in a logical and efficient manner. The Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has the primary responsibility for developing and updating the statewide highway functional classification in rural and urban areas to determine functional usage of the existing roads and streets, and must cooperate with responsible local officials in developing and updating the functional classification. The results of the functional classification are mapped and submitted to FHWA for approval. Once approved, the map serves as the official record for Federal- aid highways and is the basis for designation of the National Highway System.4 423 CFR 470 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 5 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 044. 0:44 A ROAD RIGHT OF WAY DIKE LEFT TURN _ BIKE LANE P. =gym LANE = ? LANE ft -i-1.1-0 SIDEWALK\ > -\ SIDEWALK / LANDSCAPING/ \LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE AND DRAINAGE COLLECTOR ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTION - N.T.S Interstate Freeway: The interstate is a controlled access, multi-lane, high speed, high- capacity roadway intended exclusively for motorized traffic. All access is controlled by interchanges and bridges separating local road crossings. Interstate 90 is the only freeway within the Spokane Valley city limits. Principal Arterials: Principal arterials serve the major centers of activity in urbanized areas and include the highest traffic volume corridors, serve the longest trips and carry a high proportion of the total urban travel, even though they constitute a relatively small percentage of the total roadway network. The principal arterial system carries most of the trips entering and leaving the urban area, as well significant intra-area travel, such as between central business districts and outlying residential areas. The system also carries important intra-urban and inter-city bus routes. Service to abutting land is subordinate to travel service to major traffic movements.5 044 • A.10 ROAD RIGHT OF WAY A‘11; Ivi 8E LEFT TURN � 81KE LANEKLANE LANE ft SIDEWALK SIDEWALK LANDSCAPING LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE AND DRAINAGE PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTION - N.T.S Minor Arterials: The minor arterial street system interconnects with and augments the principal arterial system. It accommodates trips of moderate length at a lower level of travel mobility than principal arterials. This system places more emphasis on land access than the principal arterial system. Such a facility may carry local bus routes and provide intra- community continuity, but ideally does not penetrate identifiable neighborhoods. The spacing of minor arterials may vary from one tenth to one half mil (1/10 — 1/2) in central business districts, and two (2)to three (3) miles in suburban fringes, but is normally not more than one (1) mile in fully developed areas. Collector Streets: The collector provides both land access and traffic circulation within residential neighborhoods and commercial and industrial areas. It differs from the arterial system in that facilities from the collector system may penetrate residential neighborhoods, distributing trips from arterials through the area to their ultimate destinations. Conversely, the collector system also collects traffic from the local streets in residential neighborhoods and 5 FHWA Functional Classifications Guidelines Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 6 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan channels it into the arterial system. In a central business district or other area of similar development and traffic density, the collector system may include the entire street grid. The collector street system may also carry local bus routes. Collectors may be separated into principal and minor designations, or into industrial or neighborhood classifications. Local Access Streets: The local access street system includes all facilities not designated as either an arterial or collector. It primarily permits direct access to abutting lands and connections to higher order systems. It offers the lowest level of mobility and usually contains no bus routes. Service to through-traffic movement is usually deliberately discouraged. Table 3.1 Roadway Mileage Summary for Spokane Valley STATE CITY TOTAL Functional Class Miles % Miles % Miles cyo 11 Urban Interstate 10.11 2.22% 10.11 2.22% 14 Urban Principal Arterial 11.46 2.52% 29.37 6.46% 40.83 8.98 All Principal Arterials 21.57 4.74% 29.37 6.46% 50.94 11.20% 16 Urban Minor Arterial 1.60 0.35% 59.53 13.09% 61.13 13.44% All Arterials 23.17 5.10% 88.90 19.55% 112.07 24.65% 17 Urban Collector 43.81 9.63% 43.81 9.63 All Collectors 43.81 9.63% 43.81 9.63 19 Urban Local Access 298.85 65.72% 298.85 65.72% All Local Access 298.85 65.72% 298.85 65.72% Totals 23.17 5.10% 431.56 94.90% 454.73 100.00% Source: Spokane Valley Public Works Department The procedures for classifying all roads and streets into functional systems are based on the most logical use of the existing facilities to serve present travel. A "future year" functional classification plan is based on projected "future year" population, land use and travel and will include, in addition to existing facilities, such new facilities as will be needed to serve "future year" land use and travel. Some of this new mileage will consist of new streets in expanding urban areas. Additional "new streets" may be identified in cases where adequate standards cannot be provided on the original location, or where an existing routing is excessively circuitous. In developing a "future year" classification, consideration has been given to the impact of foreseeable developments in other modes of transportation including high-speed rail service and improved air service. Population estimates for 2025 were made using the SRTC Visum model. The base for the Spokane Valley"future year" population is the 2000 Decennial Census. A basic assumption in assigning facilities to logical functional groupings is that higher order systems should generally serve the longest trips. Only comparatively few miles or urban streets and highways serve trips of any great length; a somewhat greater mileage serves trips of moderate length; and a substantial mileage serves comparatively short trips. Facilities which serve relatively long trips (including trips passing through urban area, trips between the suburbs and central city, trips between outlying communities, and long trips occurring within the central city) are likely to be functioning as arterials and should be considered for inclusion in the preliminary arterial system. The mileage for the functional classification is summarized on Table 3.4: The functional classification system is illustrated on Map 3.1. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 7 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 3.2.3 Safety Street design and construction standards should accommodate the characteristics of vehicles utilizing the roadway, making adequate provision for weight, size and turning radius requirements. The four (4) general classes of design vehicles include passenger cars and light trucks, buses, large trucks and recreational vehicles. Bicycles are to be considered a design vehicle where bicycle use is allowed on the roadway. Traffic safety must consider roadway capacity, the type of traffic utilizing the roadway, terrain, access management, traffic volumes and congestion. Access management requires the management of access to land development while simultaneously preserving the flow of traffic on surrounding road systems in terms of safety, capacity and speed. The capacity of an arterial is often dominated by the capacity of individual signalized intersections. Intersection design improvements and signalization modifications should be considered as cost effective alternatives to the addition of additional travel lanes. Intersections must be designed to maintain visibility for the safety of motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians. Particular care is exercised at school crossings and in areas frequented by the elderly and disabled. 3.2.4 Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Transportation Systems Management (TSM) focuses on maximizing use of the existing systems travel capacity. The concept was first originated in the mid-1970s by the U.S. Department of Transportation. Since that time, it has been applied in a host of different ways in cities and metropolitan areas around the country. More recently, the 199 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) expanded the vision of TSM, introducing the term Congestion Management Systems (CMS). TSM options can be grouped into the following categories: • Geometric Improvements • Signalization Improvements (including synchronization) • Access Management • Capacity Enhancements • Circulation 3.2.4.1 Geometric Improvements The term Geometric Improvements refers to projects intended to "re-shape" the physical layout of roads. Through reported problems and periodic monitoring, isolated improvements can be defined which will improve the operation of traffic and increase safety. Such improvements are under the City's control. While there are national and state level guidelines, the City's adopted design standards guide the design of these improvements. Sometimes called Spot Improvements, their low cost and net increase in efficiency make them particularly popular. 3.2.4.2 Signalization Improvements Signalization Improvements include traffic signal installation or removal, and operational strategies. To date, the City has relied on other agencies to service its traffic signals. Spokane County has maintained all signals that were previously under County control, while the state has operated those on certain state routes. This has produced a fragmented approach to traffic control. Traffic along Spokane Valley's major transportation corridors such as Sprague, Broadway, Argonne/Mullan and Sullivan would benefit from synchronization and improvement to signal timing and phasing. The cost of such improvements would likely be recovered by reduction in delay to drivers. Air quality would also be enhanced due to fewer unnecessary stops. In addition, Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 8 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan transit reliability would increase as a result of these actions. Map 3.3 shows existing signalized intersections. 3.2.4.3 Access Management Access Management is another means to manage traffic flow efficiency, controlling intersection and driveway spacing to improve the safety and preserve capacity of major streets. Traffic conflicts are responsible for a high percentage of roadway crashes. By reducing the number of driveways and turning movements through shared access to multiple parcels, and restricting turning movements in congested areas, the safety and efficiency of the City's streets can be maintained. Access to adjacent property is one (1) of the major factors influencing functional classification. The State of Washington requires that access onto state facilities be granted by permit, and that such access conform to an access management classification system.6 Access management may reduce the number of driveways, the allowable movements or modify existing access points where recurrent problems have been observed, including those related to safety, traffic flow and maintenance of roadway capacity. 3.2.4.4 Capacity Enhancements Capacity Enhancements typically include road widening and/or redesign to assure an existing road segment operates as efficiently as nearby segments. For example, where a section of freeway carries more local, short tips than long distance through trips by adding a parallel frontage road, the freeway might operate more efficiently. Another example might consist of two (2) heavily-used streets being grade-separated at their intersection point to accommodate flow. Capacity enhancements typically are higher in cost than other TSM strategies. Funding from outside sources is limited. Therefore, such projects must be carefully justified. 3.2.5 Transportation Demand Management(TDM) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is an approach to solving transportation problems that focuses on reducing the demand for automobile travel rather than increasing the system capacity (supply) for automobile travel. TDM strategies should be particularly aimed at reducing the volume of single-operator vehicles. TDM is a valuable tool with which to address transportation problems because it generally avoids the high environmental, financial, and human costs associated with capacity-oriented solutions, such as road construction. The Commute Trip Reduction Program provides TDM techniques locally. TDM involves two (2) types of strategies. One (1) strategy reduces the demand for single- operator vehicles (SOVs). This is accomplished through programs such as: • Employer-subsidized bus passes and other financial incentives for transit use; • Infrastructure changes, such as providing safe and convenient bicycle parking and safe and convenient bikeways from residential to work locations, or increasing the use of non- motorized modes of transportation; • Parking management that reduces the amount of easy and inexpensive parking for employees, provided this does not lead to an unacceptable reduction in available parking for residents in adjacent areas; • Preferential parking for car pools and vanpools; • Park and Ride facilities convenient to Interstate 90; • Construction of shelters at transit stops; 6 RCW 47.50,WAC 468.51 and 468.52 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 9 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • The building of lockers, change rooms, and shower facilities for bicyclists; and • Ride match services. The other TDM strategy reduces the overall need for travel by any means. This is accomplished through programs, such as: • Flexible work schedules, including four (4)-day work week; and • Tele-working (using telecommunications and computer technology to work from home to another location). Several pieces of legislation have led the City into the realm of TDM. These include the State GMA, Commute Trip Reduction Act (CTRA), and federal level requirements under both TEA-21 and Clean Air Act Amendments as reflected in the State Implementation Plan. The GMA cites the need for a variety of "management actions" including the requirement that the transportation chapter of each plan include an identification of system expansion needs and TSM needs to meet current and future demands. The Act goes on to note: "After adoption of the Comprehensive Plan...local jurisdictions must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on transportation element of the comprehensive plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development. These strategies may include ...demand management and other transportation systems management strategies (emphasis added)." While TDM actions are aimed at reducing travel demand or, at least, shifting it to more opportune travel times, several focus on consolidating person trips to fewer vehicles. The City views transit/HCT use as key to reducing travel demand over the time horizon of this plan. 3.2.5.1 Commute Trip Reduction Act The Commute Trip Reduction Act (CTR)was passed by the State Legislature in 1991, and revised in 1997. It is also a part of the State Clean Air Act. The intention of the law is to improve air quality, reduce traffic congestion, and decrease fuel consumption. It focuses attention on larger employers with the intent or reaching concentrations of workers who might use shared-ride and non-motorized modes to travel to and from work. Working from 1992, or employer's survey year data as the base year, employers are encouraged to reduce SOV use and vehicle miles of travel (VMT) by 15 percent (15%) in the first two (2) years, 20 percent (20%) in four years, 25 percent (25%) in six (6) years and 35 percent(35%) in twelve (12)years. The City adopted Ordinance 03-087 in November of 2003, to address the requirements of CTR. The ordinance establishes the requirements for employers with over 100 employees (affect employers) under CTR. 3.2.6 Roadway Concurrency Level of service (LOS) is a quantitative standard for the operating characteristics of the transportation system. The definitions for each level of service and methodologies for calculating LOS are contained in the Transportation Research Board Special Report 209, Highway Capacity Manual (2000). The GMA requires LOS standards for all arterials and transit routes and also requires that the standards be coordinated regionally. GMA does not define the procedure for measuring LOS. Many communities rely upon Highway Capacity Manual procedures, measuring LOS in terms of vehicle delay at intersections. This methodology does not account for the impact of mid-block left-turn lanes, curbs and gutters, sidewalks and other facilities. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 10 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Levels of Service for Roadways are defined below: Level of Service Flow Characteristics A -: Free flow operations at average travel speeds, usually about 90% of the free-flow speed for the arterial class. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Stopped delay at signalized intersections is minimal. B Reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds usually about 70% of the free - flow speed for the arterial class. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not bothersome. Drivers are not subjected to appreciable tension. C Stable operations. The ability to change lanes and maneuver in mid-block locations may be more restricted than in LOS B, and longer queues and/or adverse signal coordination may contribute to lower average travel speeds of about 50%of the average free-flow for the arterial class. Motorists will experience appreciable tension while driving. D Small increases in flow may cause substantial increases in approach delay and decreases in arterial speed. This may be due to adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing, high volumes, or some combination of theses. Average travel times are about 40% of free- flow speeds. E F c.:74 Characterized by significant approach delays and average travel speeds of one-third(1/3)the free-flow speed or lower, cause by adverse signal progression, high signal density, extensive queuing at critical intersections and inappropriate signal timing or some combination of these. F .2Arterial flow at extremely low speeds below one-third to one-quarter (1/3 — 1/4) of free-flow speed. Intersection congestion is likely at critical signalized locations, with high approach delays resulting. Adverse progression is frequently a contributor to this condition. Many of the roadways in Spokane Valley were built as rural facilities. Some have been improved using rural road design standards to carry higher traffic volumes, but are not supporting of the character and desires of an urban community. Therefore, the City will pursue a two (2)-tiered LOS standard: • Intersections. Intersection LOS is calculated using standard Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) analysis procedures for the AM or PM peak hour, whichever is worse. • Roadway Segments. Roadway segment LOS will be based on allowable average daily traffic (ADT) on a roadway segment as a function of roadway characteristics. The allowable volumes will be developed following completion of the Comprehensive Plan. SRTC is tasked in the adopted countywide planning policies with establishing level of service standards for the regional street network. SRTC establishes travel time standards in the principal travel corridors. Table 3.2 indicates the corridors within the City of Spokane Valley for which travel time LOS has been established. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 11 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 3.2 SRTC Congestion Management System travel Times 1999 TModel2 2020 Roadway AVI From To Average SB NB EB WB Sullivan Havana 7:45 8:41 1-90 Havana Sullivan 8:03 10:46 Sprague 1-90 2:23 2:13 Argonne/Dishman/Mica 1-90 Upriver Dr 5:59 6:34 Sullivan Argonne 7:00 6:37 Sprague Avenue Argonne Sullivan 6:45 7:10 University Road Sprague 32nd Ave 3:34 3:46 Sprague 1-90 2:41 2:23 Pines Road 1-90 SR 290 2:28 3:11 Sprague 1-90 2:03 1:40 Sullivan Road 1-90 SR 290 4:12 4:25 Upriver Drive Frederick Sullivan 12:46 12:17 Source: Spokane Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan, November 1999. Updated 2002. The Washington State Transportation Commission sets the level of service standards for highways of statewide significance. The Commission coordinates the SRTC to establish level of service standards for state routes not on the highways of statewide significance system. Table 3.3 Roadways Exceeding 80% of Capacity 2025 Roadway From To Functional V/C Ratio Class 1-90 Sullivan Barker Freeway 0.83 1-90 Havana Carnahan Freeway 0.84 1-90 Sprague Argonne Freeway 0.84 1-90 Broadway Argonne Freeway 0.84 SR 27 Urban Boundary 32nd Ave Collector 0.97 Barker Road Sprague 4th Ave Minor Arterial 0.99 Source: SRTC 2025 Forecast 11/2004 The specific levels of service and resulting capital facilities plans are included in the Capital Facilities Element of this plan. Please refer to the Capital Facilities Element for a more detailed discussion of level of service, concurrency and the city's transportation facilities plan. SRTC has identified roadway segments expected to exceed 80% of volume/capacity ratio by 2025 (Table 3.3). Planning for additional capacity should be considered when traffic volumes reach this level. The SRTC Metropolitan Transportation Plan notes that intersection deficiencies impede the flow of traffic, even when sufficient capacity is otherwise available. Table 3.4 shows intersections expected to exceed 90%of capacity by 2025. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 12 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 3.4 2025 Intersection Deficiencies Exceeding 90%of Capacity Roadway Cross Street Functional Class V/C Ratio 1-90 Sprague Expressway 0.91 1-90 Argonne EB On-ramp 1.01 1-90 Pines EB On-ramp 092 1-90 Pines EB Off-ramp 096 1-90 Evergreen EB On-ramp 096 1-90 Sullivan EB Off-ramp 091 Sprague University Principal 0.91 Barker Sprague Minor Arterial 1.04 SR 27 Belle Terre Collector 1.22 Appleway Park Principal Arterial 0.96 Appleway Thierman Principal Arterial 1.01 Source: SRTC 2025 Forecast 11/2004 3.2.7.1 Land Use The transportation system should be adequate to serve existing land uses and planned to meet future transportation demand. The adequacy of the system to meet local circulation needs, as well as regional transportation objectives, will be determined by existing and future land uses. The City of Spokane Valley street system is primarily a traditional grid with principal arterials laid out at approximately one (1) mile intervals, and minor arterials located approximately midway between principal arterials. Deviations from the grid result primarily from topographical limitations. Except in these areas, the grid distributes local residential traffic relatively evenly to the arterial network, although there is more direct access (properties fronting arterial roadways) than is desirable for the functional classification. The roadway network in non-residential areas is well developed, with little or no segregation of freight and passenger traffic. As the city grows, it should be anticipated that conflicts between the two (2)will increase. In commercial areas, the lack of access management on arterials has reduced roadway capacity significantly. At intersections in particular, placement of driveways may limit the effectiveness of design or signalization improvements. Local circulation and access along commercial corridors such as Sprague Avenue will be improved substantially by requiring shared and cross access between commercial properties as part of redevelopment. Changes in residential densities will increase the demand for transportation services. Encouraging higher densities along transit corridors will expand the mode choice, provided that pedestrian connections are planned appropriately. Safety and accessibility are primary concerns in providing access to schools and in providing for the elderly and the disabled. Expediting the flow of freight traffic and improving intermodal connectivity are important in creating attractive venues for business and industrial development. Land use plans should consider strategies for segregating freight movement from passenger traffic where possible. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 13 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 3.2.7.2 Neighborhood/Sub-area Circulation Plans: Much of the future growth within Spokane Valley will occur as infill development or redevelopment. As neighborhoods make a transition from large lots and a rural character to smaller lots and higher density, it will be important to ensure connectivity of local roads and neighborhood collector streets. The purpose of developing neighborhood circulation plans is to determine the location of future local roads while the properties are undeveloped or underdeveloped. 3.2.7.3 City Center Through the public participation process, a "Preferred Land Use Alternative" was developed that includes the development of an identifiable city center in Spokane Valley. A major component of the City Center Alternative is the development of a grid IMO street pattern within tho city contor. Ac the II, II.' illustration indicates, a possible grid pattern - of approximately 300 /100 feet would be • ideal for the development of a city center. Pedestrian and bicycle mobility is a vital part .,. -OAD RIGHT OF BUILDING '40,Q A BUILDING FACADE - FACADE Ti. I DN STREET WQ _ III' ON STREET ' PARKING - - PARKING n I f LA A SIDEWALK/ },\\\ SIDEWALK TREE WELL \TREE WELL CITY CENTER TYPICAL SECTION — N.T.S of the future City Center transportation system. Improvements for . pedestrians and bicyclists should support increases in transit .c = = •==e e services and promote the development of the City Center. As the• ececce e ---e••••ee- 44(4 pedestrians and bicyclists, a network of facilities for people on foot s x::; and bikes should be established. ux Reducing the size of the street grid, improving auto circulation and creating pedestrian linkages through larger parcels is critical to establish walking patterns that reduce dependency on the auto. As pedestrian linkages are provided, the pedestrian system will handle an increasing share of the trips. On-street parking and wide sidewalks, with street trooc and other pedestrian amenities aro- important assets in promoting a pleasant shopping experience. Landscaped medians should be movements. Block lengths within the City Center should be relatively short. Intersections should be landscaped with decorative pavement treatment to create a sense of place. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 14 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Special street design standards should be developed for the City Center. Special standards for oxtra wide sidewalks (12 to 20 feet in width), pedestrian scale street lighting, and additional amonitios including benches, trash receptacles and landscaped corner treatment are typically included. 3.2.7.43 Freight& Goods Roadways should be designed for the type of traffic they serve. Designation of truck routes will expedite the flow of commercial traffic in other areas of the City and limit adverse impacts on residential neighborhoods. In order to prolong pavement life, minimizing the number of stops and starts along these routes and interconnecting signals for progressive movement should be considered. An important consideration in the establishment of truck routes is connectivity with sources of supply and distribution located outside the City, as well as major freight terminals and intermodal connections. Map 3.2 identifies truck routes within the City of Spokane Valley. The Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) classifies state highways, county roads and city streets according to the tons of freight that are transported each year. The freight and goods transportation system (FGTS) identifies the highways and roadways most heavily used by trucks and provides factual data to support funding for projects that improve conditions for freight transportation. The information is updated every two (2) years, and inclusion of data may be requested by the City Engineer. The tonnage classifications used for designating the FGTS are as follows: T-1: More than 1 million tons per year T-2: 4 million to 10 million tons per year T-3: 300,000 to 4 million tons per year T-4: 100,000 to 300,000 tons per year T-5: At least 20,000 tons in 60 days For purposes of this analysis, trucks are defined to include all trucks with two (2) rear-axles (six (6) tires) or larger. They also include larger two (2) rear-axle (four (4) tires) delivery vehicles such as express package delivery vans, bread trucks or any commercial vehicle. Private pickups, vans or recreational vehicles are not included. To aid in calculating annual tonnage, trucks are divided into categories, as shown below: 'ms's Single Units—A single vehicle including dump trucks and mixers, regardless of the number of axles. Double Units — A two (2)-unit vehicle, normally a u truck and trailer, generally with four (4) to six (6) axles. This category is basically any truck up to _ 80,000 lbs.; older double trailers can be included in F ' this category. i Trains — Normally a tractor and two (2) trailers. Trucks rated from 80,000 lbs. to 105,000 lbs.; except gasoline tankers. In calculating the approximate freight tonnage, the following average weights were used: Singles: 7 tons Doubles: 27 tons Trains: 42 tons Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 15 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Truck routes regulate through truck traffic and do not apply to freight movements with origination or destination on any roadway. The designation of truck routes is intended to direct through-truck movements to arterials designed for such traffic, and to limit the adverse impact of such traffic on adjacent land uses. Residential land uses are particularly sensitive to heavy truck usage. The designation of freight corridors generally improves traffic flow and freight mobility. 3.3 Non-Motorized Transportation (See Chapter 11 — Bike and Pedestrian Element) 3.4 Transit Spokane Valley is located in the East Planning Region of the STA. The STA currently provides local bus and express bus to downtown Spokane, as well as paratransit service within the City of Spokane Valley. In the spring of 2004, a local option election authorized an additional three tenths of 1% sales tax for transit, with a sunset clause of June 2009. The STA currently operates two (2) Park & Ride facilities within Spokane Valley; one (1) located at University Road and Appleway Boulevard and the other on Indiana Avenue at Mirabeau Parkway. Facilities and routes are shown on the diagram below. STA Transit Routes in effect January 2007 Schedules (Levels of Service) for Spokane Valley fixed routes presently vary between 30 to 60 minutes as shown in Table 3.4-1: The STA evaluates its system on a regular basis to consider more direct routing, better connectivity and improved travel times to increase ridership. Table 3.4-1 Transit Levels of Service Sunday/holiday service is operated 8 a.m.to 8 p.m. No. Route Name Weekday Saturday Sunday — 31/32 Garland/Trent/Indiana 30 60 60 New Year's Day — New Year's Federal/State Holiday 72 Liberty Lake Express 30 None None Observed(January 1.) — 73 VTC Express 30 None None Memorial Day — Labor Day 74 Valley Limited 30 None None — Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day 91 Mission 60 60 60 — Christmas Federal/State Holiday Observed(December 25) 94 E.5th Street 30 30 60 — A special schedule is in effect for 95 Millwood 30 60 60 Independence Day 8:00 AM to approximately 10:30 p.m. (Service 96 Pines 30 60 None after the fireworks). 97 South Valley 30 60 60 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 16 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The STA evaluates its system on a regular basis to consider more direct routing, better connectivity and improved travel times to increase ridership. Paratransit van service is for individuals whose disability prevents them from using the regular fixed route buses. This means that a person must be unable, due to a disability, to get to or from the bus stop, get on or off the bus, or successfully travel by bus to or from the destination. Currently, paratransit service is provided Monday through Saturday from 6 a.m. to 12 a.m., with service on Sundays and holidays from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. (last pickup at 7:00 p.m.)throughout the paratransit service area. All paratransit trips must begin and end within the Public Transportation Benefit Area (PTBA). Currently, all of the area within the corporate limits of the City of Spokane Valley is within the PBTA. This area also includes Cheney, Medical Lake, Airway Heights, Millwood, Fairchild Air Force Base, Liberty Lake and the City of Spokane. STA provides bike racks on all their buses with the exception of the streetcars used on the Plaza/Arena Shuttle. The racks hold two (2), single-seat, two (2)-wheeled, non-motorized bicycles. . U, e .. a 5 MlllWOod4:" kirer c F1 .:`m. a 8 .., ur a c. 44M . ..: '"`°ate. Spokane{Valley m ar cry 6a Lu F..-3 e.. , ,,:u< .2a....2. arm s o.�a ... $ owi.r •n I .. I 1p 9 g 5 a + M u yi— w an u U W� •.; a Qeg i� tl an•.11. f .roe g ¢ra, elwY g� qK l''''td°:. Each bicycle can be secured independently. The Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) provides for a high capacity transportation (HCT) system to be developed in the future, that would extend from the City of Spokane's central business district through Spokane Valley to Liberty Lake. "High-capacity transportation system" means a system of public transportation services within an urbanized region operating principally on exclusive rights or way, and the supporting services and facilities necessary to implement such a system, including interim express services and high occupancy vehicle lanes, which taken as a whole, provides a substantially higher level of passenger capacity, speed and service frequency than traditional public transportation systems operating principally in general purpose roadways. RCW 81.104.015(1). The future route begins at the STA Plaza and the downtown alignment runs less than a mile along Riverside Avenue. The Convention Center and the Spokane Intermodal Center are within walking distance to the nearest station. East of Downtown, the alignment shares approximately six (6) miles of existing railroad right-of-way (BNSF and UPRR) to Dishman Mica Road. The route continues east from Dishman Mica Road the alignment is along the existing Appleway Boulevard right-of-way to its terminus in Liberty Lake. Appleway Boulevard is improved east to University Road where unimproved right-of-way exists to Tschirley Road. Portions of the Appleway right-of- way east or University Road is not of sufficient width required to accommodate both the future HCT facilities and planned improvements by the City. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 17 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 121 -~ Along south side of ��' t lsway Blvd �vv gipuorft Pp _'4UC R4E — --. 451 1__iodLommmnddo $ Laf recowsnonded Sharing settrnentsof UPRR Tracks] LEGEND Light Rai Stakons Ca),oe Wacky Lake • M Rani Seekers with Park&Ride City of Spokane City o}Spoakane Valley tb bpi i1 Raiff Aegnrro d 0 HCT Stations and Preliminary Alignment through Spokane Valley If approved, the long range success of HCT will depend on redevelopment of commercial corridors and location of higher density housing in close proximity to transit routes. There are new park and ride facilities proposed within Spokane Valley at the Fairgrounds, Argonne, Pines, Sullivan and the Appleway/I-90 Interchange. They range in size from 50 to 200 spaces. The Appleway Park and Ride could eventually be expanded to accommodate up to 1,000 cars. 3.5 Aviation Spokane International Airport, the Airport Business Park, and Felts Field Airport are owned by the city and county of Spokane, and are operated and maintained by the Spokane Airport Board. Felts Field Airport's history traces back more than 85 years with its beginning as a landing field in a park area next to the Spokane River in the Spokane Valley. The airport's heritage includes the original site of the Washington Air National Guard. In the 1930's and 1940's, Felts Field served as Spokane's municipal airport with scheduled airline service from the airport terminal. That building, along with others at the airport is now on the National Register of Historic Places. All but approximately 10 acres of the 410-acre Felts Field is located in the City of Spokane. Ten acres are located within the City of Spokane Valley. The airport is located at the North end of Fancher Road in the western Spokane Valley, and is now an active General Aviation airport with 320 based aircraft and more than 72,000 annual aircraft operations. Information for the combined Spokane Airport System is summarized in the table below: Table 3.5 Spokane Airports Data Dec-06 Dec-05 %Change YTD 2006 YTD 2005 Change Total Passengers 283,078 278,986 1.47% 3,224,423 3,197,440 0.84% Enplaned Passengers 141,283 140,147 0.81% 1,612,457 1,600,258 0.76% Deplaned 141,795 138,839 2.13% 1,611,966 1,597,182 0.93% Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 18 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Passengers Total Cargo(U.S Tons) 4,913.20 5,918.50 -16.99% 57,369.30 57,623.00 -0.44% Total Freight 4,891.30 5,080.10 -3.72% 49,947.50 50,459.00 -1.01% Freight On 1,970.00 2,212.10 -10.94% 20,867.20 21,768.00 -4.14% Freight Off 2,921.30 2,868.00 1.86% 29,080.30 28,691.00 1.36% Total Mail 21.9 838.4 -97.39% 7,421.80 7,164.00 3.60% Mail On 5.3 311.4 -98.30% 2,495.90 2,919.00 -14.49% Mail Off 16.6 527 -96.85% 4,925.90 4,245.00 16.04% Total Operations 7,036 6,588 6.80% 95,168 98,545 -3.43% Air Carrier Operations 3,315 3,589 -7.63% 39,539 42,081 -6.04% Air Taxi Operations 1,467 1,620 -9.44% 19,417 19,580 -0.83% Itinerant General Aviation 1,010 859 17.58% 19,419 18,958 2.43% Local General Aviation 1,168 450 159.56% 15,508 16,019 -3.19% Military Operations 76 70 8.57% 1,285 1,907 -32.62% As of September 2001, FedEx began carrying mail,which is reported as freight. Freight,mail and cargo are reported in U.S.tons Source: Spokane Airports-Updated February 5,2007 Felts Field is classified as a reliever airport in the Washington State Aviation System Plan. The airport is located adjacent to the city boundary; a portion of the southeast corner lies within Spokane Valley city limits. Felts Field has 361 based aircraft, including 289 single-engine aircraft and 24 multi-engine piston-powered aircraft. Annual general aviation operations totaled 29,000 in 2002. Airport facilities and affiliated properties support the local economy through a variety of activities. For example, a recent study estimated that the average general aviation trip generates approximately $700 in food, lodging and entertainment spending. According to the 2001 WSDOT Aviation Forecast and Economic Analysis study, the airport generated about 250 jobs with an annual payroll of$4.5 million, and 16.5 million in total annual sales output. Felts Field has two (2) runways, Runway 3R/21 L. Information about each runway is shown in Table 3.6. Table 3.6 Runway Attributes 3L/21R 3R/21 L Length 4,500 3,059 Width 150 75 Elevation 1,952.9 1,946.5 Surface concrete asphalt Runway, 3L has runway end indicator lights, visual approach slope indicators (VASI) providing vertical guidance, and VOR and GPS and NDB non-precision approaches. Runway 21R is equipped with VASI's, as well as a medium density approach lighting system with runway alignment indicator lights (MALSR), which, in conjunction with an instrument landing system, provides a CAT I precision approach to this runway end. The MALSR is pilot controlled when the tower is not in Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 19 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan operation. There is a published non-precision approach to Runway 3R/21L rather than a specific runway end. The Felts Field Airport Master Plan, adopted in October 2005, is a 20-year needs assessment providing recommendations for improvements. The major recommendations of the master plan include construction of new taxiways, new development to the north along the river, and an extension of 550'to the main runway in the next 15 years to accommodate larger aircraft. The master plan also provides recommendations for the seaplane base located on the river adjacent to Felts Field. It is the only one (1) of its kind in Eastern Washington. The water landing is 6,000' long and 100' wide and accommodates approximately 450 landings annually. The Felts Field Master Plan calls for expansion of the airport's seaplane facilities over the next 20 years, including the construction of an additional dock, upgrades to existing docks, and improvements to the ramp. Map 3.4 Airport Hazards identifies regulated airspace pursuant to the Felts Field Airport Master Plan and 14 CFR Part 77 Subchapter E, Objects affecting Navigable Airspace and RCW 36.70A.510, RCW 36.70.547 within which structures exceeding specified heights and incompatible land uses may represent a threat to airport operations and the safe operation of aircraft utilizing Felts Field. Map 3.5 Land Use Compatibility identifies areas where restrictions on incompatible land use serve to protect persons and property adjacent to the airport. 3.6 Rail 3.6.1 Freight Freight rail service is provided by Burlington Northern Santa Fe ! -. (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). BNSF services T = an east-west route from Chicago �_ _L`, to Seattle and Portland. The N,11 ose } UPRR provides service to — I 4F lw � Canada, the Yakima Valley and "_ Portland. j-- rel :� 3.6.2 Bridging the Valley I_ �, -- ..'� The Bridging the Valley (BTV) _ • �_ - .-W • project is a community-initiated ,� s _ project to explore the creation of ` - a L wj - L one (1) common railroad corridors from which BNSF and UPRR WASHINGTON STATE would operate between Spokane RAIL SYSTEM Washington and Athol, Idaho. This 42 mile corridor presently has 72 railroad crossings (46 SPOKANE VALLEY AREA RAILROAD NETWORK in Washington) with over 494 trains in operation per week. o antlaolnl'. Growth in train traffic is forecast to increase annually by 3.4% over the next 20 years. Traffic accidents, traffic I °°` congestion from roadway closures, increased carbon monoxide emissions in the serious non-attainment area and -r-5andppn18-- noise significantly affect the economy, health, safety and a�!mCle°I°°i 721.,,rade hin general welfare of the public in Spokane and Kootenai Ale pol°";es 63P' Counties, and therefore, the Inland Northwest. Fall, C°eue 11 d'Alene --H°- ',Napa The BTV project would eliminate approximately 51 at-grade °' "° crossings through closure (35 in Washington), and Off we in relocation of the Union Pacific Railroad mainline into the _eaN°ym°N°rtnen,soma Fe Nary°atl unl°n Paeiflc°n eunlnton Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway corridor. The _ -l;°Ra�atladhere 5anis Fe Rzflr Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3-Transportation Page 20 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan remaining twenty-one (21) crossings are wither currently grade separated (five existing grade separations in Washington) or would be grade separated (six in Washington) as part of this project. This approach would concentrate public investment into eight (8) railroad grade separations within Washington State into one (1) corridor to cross two (2) railroads rather than spread out public investment into 61 railroad crossings spread across 87 miles or railroad track. With an estimated total project cost of $252 million in 2001 dollars ($165 million in Washington/$87 million in Idaho), the Benefit/Cost ration of 1:4 indicates that the project makes economic sense and has benefits far exceeding its cost to the public ($80 million in net present value). Ultimately, by 2008 this project will create a triple track railroad corridor with a completely grade- separated roadway system. Both railway and roadway systems will be able to operate more efficiently and effectively throughout the corridor. The public can expect a significantly safer transportation system with less congestion and delay, as well as an environment with less carbon monoxide and substantially less noise pollution from train whistle blowing at the 35 at-grade crossings that currently exist in Washington. A summary of the crossings within the City of Spokane Valley affected by this project are shown in Table 3.7. Table 3.7 Bridging the Valley BNSF Crossing Proposal Current Proposed Havana At Grade Grade Separated Park At Grade Grade Separated Vista At Grade Close Argonne Grade Separated Modify Grade Separation University At Grade Close Pines At Grade Grade Separated Evergreen At Grade Close Sullivan Grade Separated Modify Grade Separation Flora At Grade Close Barker At Grade Grade Separated Wellesley Grade Separated Remove Grade Separation Passenger rail service is provided daily by the Amtrak Empire Builder, with service to Seattle and Portland to the west and Chicago and Minneapolis to the east, as shown in the graphic below. Empire Buifc#er • a `,� • t T- • • • • . • Wolf Point,MT Seattle,WA • Spokane„WA Fargo,HD' • s •„ • Portland,OR i - Minneapolis-St Paul,MN ^• • Empire Builder Route Chicago,IL Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 21 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 3.7 Pipelines Pipelines are an integral part of the overall transportation picture. A number of pipelines are located within Spokane County and the metropolitan area. Yellowstone Pipeline Company (operated by Conoco/Phillips) maintains a high pressure petroleum pipeline and intermodal facilities located within Spokane Valley. Williams Pipeline and Pacific Gas & Electric transmission natural gas pipelines are located in within the unincorporated area of Spokane County. (See Map 6.14). 3.8 Multimodal/Intermodal Transportation The CWPPs, Policy Topic 5, Policy 3 states that "alternative modes of transportation to the automobile, including public transportation, pedestrian facilities, bikeways and air and rail facilities" shall be included in the regional transportation plan. "Multimodal transportation planning focuses on system choices, and adapts a generic, non-mode specific approach to defining and evaluating transportation problems. It then attempts to provide an unbiased estimate of each mode's contribution, singly or in combination, to solve the problem. Intermodal transportation planning, on the other hand, examines the policy and service interactions between modes, focusing on ensuring ease of movement for both people and goods when transferring from one (1)mode to another".' 1. Multimodal Transportation: a. Market preferences for low density residential development results in increased amounts of auto-dependency, particularly in suburban areas with a large number of commuters. The lack of transportation system connectivity in many residential areas often obviates alternative transportation options available to individuals, including walking, bicycle and public transit. This is particularly the case where the lack of infrastructure for such alternatives is limited or non-existent. b. Public transit depends on ridership to remain a viable option, since systems depend on revenues generated by fares. Low density development and access limitation impede the attractiveness of transit in many suburban areas, both for the individual and the service provider. Bus transit utilizes the same street system utilized by automobiles, and the location of transit stops is an important consideration in evaluating mobility within the street network, particularly on two (2)-lane roads without bus pull-outs. HCT overcomes the adverse impact on the roadway system where located within a dedicated right-of-way. c. Bicycles also utilize the street network, although bicycle access can be supplemented with trails and shared pathways. Both bicycle routes and pedestrian ways should be separated from roadways designed for heavy commercial traffic as a safety measure. Regulations which prohibit parking in bicycle lanes is necessary to maintain the functionality of a bicycle system. d. Pedestrian mobility depends on the availability of well-maintained sidewalks and/or linked trails to destinations such as schools, employment and shopping. The utility of both pedestrian ways and bicycle routes may be compromised by inclement weather, particularly in areas of snow accumulation. Distance from schools, shopping and employment again is a significant factor in the effectiveness of the pedestrian network, as are pedestrian comfort and perception of safety. e. Truck acceleration and movement differs significantly from that of passenger cars and light trucks using the roadway. Truck acceleration/deceleration is generally slower, SEE CHAPTER 6-UTILITIES Technical Assistance Report, MULTI MODAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING IN VIRGINIA:, PAST PRACTICES AND NEW OPPORTUNITIES, Stephen C. Brich and Lester A. Hoel. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 22 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan particularly in hilly terrain, and turning movements require additional space. It is advisable to segregate freight movement on the roadways from commuter routes on arterials with numerous stops or those without carefully synchronized signals. Trucks are usually the only alternative for the local delivery of commodities, and unlike passenger vehicles, are especially dependent on intermodal facilities such as airports, rail hubs or pipeline terminals. Adequate roadway access to these modes of freight transportation is a key consideration in improving overall mobility. f. Rail and pipelines operate within dedicated rights-of-way. Both modes are best suited to the movement of large quantities of particular types of goods. They necessarily rely on efficient linkages with other modes to make local deliveries. They generally represent conflict with other modes of transportation at the point on intersection, such as in the case with at-grade railroad crossings. These conflicts can occasionally cause serious issues of both mobility and safety. g. Aviation relies on successful and efficient links with other modes of transportation serving both passenger traffic and freight movement. The nature of aviation is such that flight corridors have significant effects on adjacent land uses and the transportation serving those uses. 2. Intermodal Transportation The importance of the various types of intermodal transportation depends to a high degree on the service required and the land uses served, and the length of trips involved. a. In residential areas, a choice of mode favoring the individual is of greater importance. Transportation system choices for individuals will depend on the relative convenience, access and pricing of the alternatives. Public policy may seek to change the relative value of individual choices. They could no this by various means, including public improvement, offering financial/non-financial incentives, or adopting regulations. i. Public improvements. Improved pedestrian access to transit corridors, shopping and schools makes walking and public transportation more attractive to individuals using those facilities. Planning for higher density land uses adjacent these mode alternatives. Similarly, bus shelters and similar amenities which increase individual comfort and convenience will encourage additional utilization of alternative modes of transportation. ii. Incentives. The Commuter Trip Reduction (CTR) program encourages car and van- pooling through corporate sponsorship. Additional incentives include telecommuting, company sponsored bus passes, and flexible work scheduling, which allows workers to avoid peak traffic periods. Where High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes are in place, vehicles with at least two (2)occupants benefit from reduced travel time. iii. Regulation. Local governments adopt regulations which have the affect of encouraging alternative modes of transportation. a. Decisions concerning freight movements are determined almost exclusively by the needs of suppliers and markets, but competitive pricing is probably the most significant factor in mode choice. "Just in time" delivery has replaced warehousing in most commodity markets, where delay is a cost factor. The efficiency of intermodal connections, loosely defined as that point where two (2) or more modes of transportation come together, e.g. roadways connecting airports, railroad loading facilities and freight terminals, pipelines and terminal facilities, depend more on the availability and adequacy of infrastructure and linkages. Through freight traffic should be segregated from origination/destination traffic to improve flow. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 23 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan iv. Signalization on roadways should be synchronized for commercial trucks to limit stopping and starting. v. Infrastructure in commercial and industrial areas should be designed to facilitate freight movement, including wide radii at intersections. vi. For goods moving on dedicated rights-of-way; reducing or eliminating points of conflict with other modes will facilitate mobility. 3.9 Citizen Participation The City conducted a citizen survey in the spring of 2004 to solicit community opinion on several general and other more specific transportation issues. The survey was a telephone survey conducted by Clearwater Research and was a statistically valid survey contacting over 400 households within the City of Spokane Valley. The majority of survey respondents (92%) traveled less than fifteen minutes 100% to work and nine out of ten drove to ° The Sprague/Appleway ■n=393 work. A majority of the respondents 80/o couplet has been a useful (69%) believed that the construction of 60% improvement to the overall roadway system. the Sprague/Appleway Couplet had 44% been a useful transportation 40% 25% improvement and should not be returned to two (2)-way traffic. The 20% o 0 graph right indicates responses rating ° the statement "Sprague/Appleway 0/ Couplet has been a useful improvement Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly to overall roadway system." disagree disagree agree agree Further, 69% of the respondents indicated either strong support or somewhat supported extending Appleway Boulevard east beyond its current terminus at University Road. 10070 Although 56% of the respondents •n=399 indicated that theyeither strongly or ° Should making the streets the extension of $0/° friendlier for pedestrians and somewhat supported bicyclists a low,medium,or the Couplet to Evergreen Road, fi0% high nrinrity for the c;tv9 44% another 35% were either strongly or 34% 40% somewhat opposed to this 22% proposition. 20% Surveyors also asked citizens about 070 the priority level for making major streets friendlier for pedestrians and Low priority Medium priority High priority bicyclists. Forty-four percent of the respondents said that the City should make this a high priority, while 22% stated that this should be a low priority for the City as indicated in the graph above. At the eight community workshops that were conducted during the spring and fall of 2004, an informal survey was taken which was based on the survey discussed above. The results from this informal survey generally supported the results of the statistically valid survey conducted by the Clearwater Research. The Spokane Valley Planning Commission held five (5) public hearings in June, July and September 2005. The Spokane Valley City Council held eight (8) public hearings on the Comprehensive Plan, concluding their deliberation on April 25, 2006. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 24 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 3.10 Goals and Policies Streets and Roadways Goals & Policies Goal TG-1 Establish appropriate design standards for transportation facilities. Policies TP-1.1 Street design should provide for connectivity between residential neighborhoods and collectors. Discourage cut-through traffic. TP-1.2 Develop access management standards for each functional classification of roadway. Work to consolidate or remove existing access points when a roadway does not meet appropriate standards. Goal TG-2 Ensure that roadway systems are designed to preserve and are consistent with community character. Policies TP-2.1 Street design should complement adjacent development. TP-2.2 Discourage private roads as a principal means or access to developments. Private roads should be designed and constructed to public street standards. TP-2.3 Encourage landscaping, street lighting and beautification in the design standards for local access streets, collectors and arterials. TP-2.4 Ensure that Appleway Boulevard right of way is the minimum width necessary to accommodate future street and regional high capacity transit improvements. Goal TG-3 Improve local circulation and emergency access consistent with community character and safety. Policies TP-3.1 As funding allows, bring unimproved and rural cross sections up to adopted street standards. TP-3.2 As funding allows, make intersection improvements and increase storage capacity where appropriate. Goal TG-4 Minimize the negative impact from transportation systems on the natural environment, air quality, noise levels and fuel consumption. Policies TP-4.1 Restrict high-speed traffic from residential neighborhoods and utilize traffic calming strategies to reduce vehicular speeds where appropriate. TP-4.2 Complete local traffic circulation plans for areas experiencing new development. TP-4.3 Continue the retrofit of signal lights to lower-energy LEDs. TP-4.5 Reduce the amount of vehicle idling within the City through implementation of signal synchronization and driver awareness. Transportation System Management (TSM) Goals & Policies Goal TG-5 Extend the functional life of the existing transportation system and increase its safe and efficient operation through the application of TSM strategies. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 25 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Policies TP-5.1 Implement traffic signal synchronization projects as the primary component of a TSM program. As funding permits, monitoring or traffic operation should be carried out to assure efficient timing of traffic signals. TP-5.2 Use Access Management measures, such as placing restriction on left turns across major arterial streets to reduce accident rates and extend capacity of major arterials. TP-5.3 Consider grade-separated railroad crossings where appropriate. TP-5.4 Ensure that pedestrians, bicyclists and the physically handicapped are taken into account when developing signalized intersections. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Goals & Policies Goal TG-6 Encourage all Commute Trip Reduction affected and voluntary employers in Spokane Valley to achieve the CTR Act travel reduction goals. Policies TP-6.1 Encourage car-and van-pooling, telecommuting, flexible work schedules and other strategies identified in the CTR to reduce overall travel demand. TP-6.2 Use video-conferencing and conference calling for off-site meetings where feasible. Freight & Goods Goals & Policies Goal TG-7 Provide for safe and efficient freight mobility. Policies TP-7.1 Discourage development of low-density residential development in close proximity to designated freight corridors and intermodal freight facilities. TP-7.2 Designate appropriate truck routes in the City of Spokane Valley. TP-7.3 Design designated freight corridors to improve traffic flow and freight mobility. TP-7.4 Disperse traffic throughout commercial districts rather than concentrating it on a single arterial. Goal TG-8 Adapt street and roadway design and facilities to manage traffic demand, address the need for freight movement, resolve traffic conflicts, and complement land use and urban features. Policies TP-8.1 Use the City's transportation system and infrastructure to support desired land uses and development patterns. TP-8.2 Allow for variety of services within neighborhoods that are convenient to and meet the needs of neighborhood residents, decreasing the need for driving. Non-motorized Transportation Goals & Policies (See Chapter 11- Bike and Pedestrian Element) Transit Goals & Policies Goal TG-10 Support the provision of a safe, efficient, and cost-effective public transportation system. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 26 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan TP-10.1 Work with STA to ensure that transit shelters, bus benches and other amenities that support transit use are provided in appropriate locations for users of the system. TP-10.2 Work with STA in planning and developing safe and efficient bus loading and unloading points. TP-10.3 Support the continued planning and development of other transit options, including but not limited to a high-capacity transit system. TP-10.4 Encourage use of fuel-efficient vehicles in the public transportation system. Goal TG-11 Encourage land uses that will support a high-capacity transportation system. Policies TP-11.1 Ensure that street standards, land uses, densities and building placement support the facilities and services needed along transit routes to make transit viable. TP-11.2 Work with STA to facilitate neighborhood business areas are served by transit. TP-11.3 Ensure that Appleway Boulevard right-of-way is the minimum width necessary to accommodate future street and high-capacity transit improvements. Aviation Goals & Policies Goal TG-12 Support the expansion of general aviation and freight uses at Felts Field in accordance with the approved Airport Master Plan. Policies TP-12.1 Encourage the full development and utilization of airport properties at Felts Field. TP-12.2 Encourage commercial, educational and logistical support industry in close proximity to the airport. Goal TG-13 Encourage land use and development compatible with airport uses and regulated airspace. Policies TP-13.1 Enforce regulations protecting airspace from encroachment. TP-13.2 Discourage incompatible land uses and residential densities adjacent to the airport. Rail Goals & Policies Goal TG-14 Support and encourage the continued viability of the passenger and freight rail system in the region. Policies TP-14.1 Participate with other jurisdictions to facilitate safe and efficient rail systems. TP-14.2 Support the "Bridging the Valley" project to reduce the number of at-grade railroad crossings in the City of Spokane Valley and to reduce the adverse noise impact on adjacent properties of railroad operations. TP-14.3 Discourage incompatible land uses and residential densities along rail corridors. Pipeline Goals & Policies Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 27 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Goal TG-15 Cooperate with pipeline operators to maintain safe operating conditions at intermodal facilities and along pipeline easements. Policies TP-15.1 Establish guidelines for the development/redevelopment of properties adjacent to pipeline corridors. TP-15.2 Develop regulations governing the use, handling and transportation of pipeline products. TP-15.3 Evaluate the need for designation of hazardous cargo routes associated with pipeline products as well as other hazardous materials. TP-15.4 Include provisions in the Hazard Mitigation Plan for mitigation of and response to product leakage, spillage and explosion. Intermodal/Multimodal Goals & Policies Goal TG-16 Encourage improved intermodal connections to facilitate freight movements in and between strategic commercial and industrial locations, and to provide mode choice for citizens and businesses. Policies TP-16.1 Remove obstructions and conflicts between roadway corridors and bicycle/pedestrian/transit modes. TP-16.2 Encourage freight intensive operations to locate along designated truck routes and intermodal terminals. TP-16.3 Evaluate the need for public improvements, incentives and regulation to increase intermodal fluidity. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Chapter 3—Transportation Page 28 of 28 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 4 — CAPITAL FACILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICES 4.0 Introduction The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires new development to be directed to areas that either currently have adequate public facilities and services, or to areas where facilities and services can be delivered within the 20-year time frame of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (SVCP). Facilities and services that are required for new development must be adequate and available at adopted levels of service (LOS). Locally established LOS help to define and contribute to Spokane Valley's quality of life. 4.1 Planning Context This section provides a review of the policy directives included in the State's Growth Management Act (GMA)and the Countywide Planning Policies relating to capital facilities planning. 4.1.1 Growth Management Act The GMA refers to capital facilities planning in two (2) of the thirteen (13) statewide planning goals. The two relevant goals are: • Urban Growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. • Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. More specifically, the GMA mandates that the City prepare a capital facilities plan which contains the following components: • An inventory of existing facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the facilities. • A forecast of the future needs for such facilities. • The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new facilities. • At least a six-year financing plan that will finance such facilities and clearly identify sources of public money for such purposes. • A requirement to reassess the Land Use chapter if probable funding falls short. 4.1.2 Countywide Planning Policies The Countywide Planning Policies (CWPP), originally adopted in 1994, contain a number of goals and policies regarding capital facilities and the provision of urban services. Those CWPP relevant to capital facilities planning are as follows:1 Policy Topic 1 — Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) Urban Growth Area Designation Process for New Incorporated Cities: 1. The Steering Committee of Elected Officials will assign new incorporated cities an interim population allocation based on the Office of Financial Management population forecasts and previous allocations to the former unincorporated area. Note to reader: The following policies are numbered according to the policy number in the CWPPs, resulting in non-sequential numbering in this document. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 1 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 2. The new city will conduct a land capacity analysis using the Land Quantity Methodology adopted by the Steering Committee. a. The city will first determine land capacity inside its limits and then will examine the capacity of unincorporated UGAs adjoining the jurisdiction's boundary. 3. The new city will develop the Urban Growth Area proposal as part of its comprehensive planning process. a. The proposed UGA shall be presented to the Steering Committee at a public meeting. The new city must justify its UGA proposal, showing how the interim population allocation will be accommodated. b. The city must show how the area will be providing a full range of urban services within the 20-year timeframe of the comprehensive plan. c. All Urban Growth Areas lying adjacent to the new city should be analyzed and either proposed as the jurisdiction's UGA, a Joint Planning Area (JPA), or proposed to be removed from the UGA and converted to rural land. d. The city will show its work by presenting its land capacity analysis, urban service analysis and other information as appropriate. 4. The Steering Committee will conduct a public hearing on the population allocation and the Urban Growth Area and/or the (or Joint Planning Area) proposal. The Steering Committee will vote on the proposal and will forward a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners via minutes from the public hearing. 5. The Board of County Commissioners may conduct a public hearing on the proposed Urban Growth Area, and/or the proposed Joint Planning Area, and population allocation. After the hearing, the Board will approve and adopt, modify or return the proposal to the city for revision and/or adoption. a. The new city shall include the approved or modified UGA and/or the JPA in its comprehensive plan. b. The new UGA or JPA will become an amendment to the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan by incorporation. Policies 1. Urban Growth should be located first in areas already characterized by urban growth that have existing public facility and service capacities to serve such development, and second in areas already characterized by urban growth that will be served by a combination of both existing public facilities and services and any additional needed public facilities and services that are provided by either public or private sources. Further, it is appropriate that urban government services be provided by cities, and urban government services should not be provided in rural areas. Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) include all lands within existing cities, including cities in rural areas. 2. The determination and proposal of an Urban Growth Area (UGA) outside existing incorporated limits shall be based on a jurisdiction's ability to provide urban governmental services at the minimum level of service specified by the Steering Committee. Jurisdictions may establish higher level of service standards in their respective comprehensive plans. 5. Each jurisdiction shall submit proposed interim and final Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundaries to the Steering Committee, including: a. Justification in the form of its land capacity analysis and the ability to provide urban governmental services and public facilities; b. The amount of population growth which could be accommodated and the analytical basis by which this growth figure was derived; and Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 2 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan c. How much unincorporated land is required to accommodate growth, including maps indicating the additional areas? 8. Each municipality must document its ability to provide urban governmental services within its existing city limits prior to the designation of an Urban Growth Area (UGA) designation outside of existing city limits. To propose an Urban Growth Area (UGA) designation outside of their existing city limits, municipalities must provide a full range of urban governmental services based on each municipality's capital facilities element of their Comprehensive Plan. 11. Each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall, at a minimum, demonstrate the ability to provide necessary domestic water, sanitary sewer and transportation improvements concurrent with development. Small municipalities (those with a population of 1,000 or less) may utilize approved interim ground disposal methods inside of Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) until such time as full sanitary sewer services can be made available. Each jurisdiction should consider long-term service and maintenance requirements when delineating Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) and making future land use decisions. 12. Within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs), new developments should be responsible for infrastructure improvements attributable to those developments. 18. Extension of urban governmental services outside of Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) should only be provided to maintain existing levels of service in existing urban like areas or for health and safety reasons, provided that such extensions are not an inducement to growth. Policy Topic 2—Joint Planning within Urban Growth Areas Policies 1. The joint planning process should: a. Include all jurisdictions adjacent to the Urban Growth Area and Special Purpose Districts that will be affected by the eventual transference of governmental services. b. Recognize that Urban Growth Areas are potential annexation areas for cities. c. Ensure a smooth transition of services amongst existing municipalities and emerging communities. d. Ensure the ability to expand urban governmental services and avoid land use barriers to expansion; and e. Resolve issues regarding how zoning, subdivision and other land use approvals in designated joint planning areas will be coordinated. 2. Joint planning may be accomplished pursuant to an interlocal agreement entered into between and/or among jurisdictions and/or special purpose districts. Policy Topic 3 — Promotion of Contiguous and Orderly Development and Provision of Urban Services Policies 1. Each jurisdiction shall include policies in its comprehensive plan to address how urban development will be managed to promote efficiency in the use of land and the provision of urban governmental services and public facilities. The Steering Committee shall specify regional minimum level of service standards (see Table 4.1) for urban governmental services with the exception of police protection within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). Local jurisdictions may choose higher standards. In its comprehensive plan, each jurisdiction shall include, but not be limited to, level of service standards for: Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 3 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan a. fire protection; b. police protection; c. parks and recreation d. libraries; e. public sewer; f. public water; g. solid waste disposal and recycling; h. transportation; i. schools. Table 4.1 Regional Level of Service Standards FACILITY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD(LOS) Domestic Water Supply - Minimum Levels of Service for storage capacity and flow shall be consistent with the Washington State Department of Health requirements and the Spokane County Coordinated Water System Plan requirements(where applicable). System Design — Minimum Levels of Service for pipe sizing, flow rate, and systematic grid Domestic Water development shall be consistent with the Washington State Department of Health requirements and the Coordinated Water System Plan requirements(where applicable). Fire Flow—Fire flow rate and duration as well as fire hydrant specifications and spacing shall be consistent with local fire authority requirements or the Fire Code,whichever is more stringent. Incorporated areas will be provided with wastewater collection and transport systems in accordance with the adopted sewer concurrency requirements of the jurisdiction. Unincorporated urban growth areas will be provided with wastewater collection and transport systems in accordance with the requirements for sewer concurrency as set forth in Spokane County's Development Regulations. Collection systems and transport systems will be designed for peak flow conditions so that overflows, backups, and discharges from the system do not occur under normal operating situations. Specific design criteria shall conform to the requirements of the Washington State Department of Ecology and local regulations. Wastewater collection and transport systems will convey wastewater to centralized wastewater treatment facilities. Centralized wastewater treatment and effluent disposal facilities will be planned, designed, and Sanitary Sewer constructed to provide effluent that does not adversely impact the quality of surface or ground water of the State of Washington. Planning and design for wastewater treatment and effluent disposal facilities will be based on 20 year projections of population growth and current water quality criteria as established by the Washington State Department of Ecology. (Centralized wastewater treatment facilities shall be a part of a sewage system owned or operated by a city, town, municipal corporation, county, political subdivision of the state or other approved ownership consisting of a collection system and necessary trunks,pumping facilities and means of final treatment and disposal and approved or under permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology.) Transportation Maintain travel corridor time as established by Spokane Regional Transportation Council. Flooding of property outside designated drainage-ways, de-facto drainage-ways, easements,flood zones or other approved drainage facilities, during the design precipitation or runoff event prescribed in the standards of the governing local agency or jurisdiction, shall be prevented within the reasonable probability afforded by such standards. Impact to buildings and accessory Stormwater structures shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable by evaluating the effects of a 100- year rain event, and implementing measures to ensure that the runoff attendant to such event is directed away from such buildings and accessory structures. Any stormwater discharge to surface or ground waters must meet federal, state, and local requirements for water quality treatment, stormwater runoff and infiltration. Each jurisdiction shall specify in its Comprehensive Plan a level of police protection that addresses Law Enforcement the safety of its citizens. Libraries Each jurisdiction will specify its own level of service. Parks Each jurisdiction will specify its own level of service. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 4 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.1 Regional Level of Service Standards FACILITY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD(LOS) Solid waste processing will meet Federal and State regulations, including maintaining any required Solid Waste facilities licenses. Each jurisdiction within the non-attainment area shall develop and use a street cleaning plan, coordinating with Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority (SCAPCA) as the oversight agency, to meet mandated Particulate Matter dust standards. Each jurisdiction's street cleaning plan will describe the programs and methods to be used to reduce particulate matter emissions from paved surfaces. Each plan shall address but not be limited to the following: 1) Street Street Cleaning sweeping frequency and technology to be employed. 2) Factors for determining when and where to initiate street sweeping following a sanding event, with the goals of expeditious removal when safety and mobility requirements have been satisfied. 3) Sanding reduction goal. 4) Sanding materials specifications to be employed. 5) Locations, application rates and circumstances for use of chemical de-icers and other sanding alternatives. 6) Identification of priority roadways (over 15,000 average daily traffic count). Jurisdictions within the Public Transit Benefit Area (PTBA)shall have policies consistent with the Public Transit level of service adopted by the Spokane Transit Authority Board of Directors. Urban areas jurisdictions in excess of 5,000 population, or once a population of 5,000 persons is achieved, shall be served by Fire District with at least a(Washington Survey and Rating Bureau of Insurance Services Office)Class 6 Insurance Rating or better. For the purposes of GMA minimum Levels of Service, Class 6 or better shall be based on the ISO Grading Schedule for municipal fire protection, 1974 edition,as amended, by using the fire district, fire service communication,and fire safety control portions of the grading schedule. The total deficiency points identified in these portions of the ISO or Washington Survey and Rating Bureau schedule shall not exceed 1,830 points. All jurisdictions, regardless of size,shall ensure that new development has a Fire Flow and Fire and Emergency hydrant placement per the International Fire Code adopted by that jurisdiction. Urban areas must Services be within 5 road miles of an operating fire station that provides service with a "Class A" pumper, unless structures are equipped with fire sprinkler(s)that are rated in accordance with the edition of the International Fire Code adopted by the jurisdiction, and is located within 5 road miles of an operating fire station that provides service with a Class "A" rated pumper. Urban areas shall be served by a state certified basic life support(BLS)agency. Urban areas should be served by an operating basic life saving unit within 5 miles; and an operating advanced life support unit within 6 miles or 10 minutes response time for those jurisdictions with urban areas in excess of 5,000 in population;and basic life support and advanced life support transport service. Public Schools To be determined by individual school district CFP. 2. Each jurisdiction and other providers of public services should use compatible information technologies to monitor demand for urban governmental and regional services and the efficiency of planning and services delivery. 3. Each jurisdiction shall include policies in its comprehensive plan to ensure that obstructions to regional transportation or utility corridors are not created. In addition, each jurisdiction should include policies in its comprehensive plan to ensure sustainable growth beyond the 20-year planning horizon. 7. Each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall include, at a minimum, the following policies to address adequate fire protection. a. Limit growth to areas served by a fire protection district or within the corporate limits of a city providing its own fire department. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 5 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan b. Commercial and residential subdivisions and developments and residential planned unit developments shall include the provision for road access adequate for residents, fire department or district ingress/egress and water supply for fire protection. c. Development in forested areas must provide defensible space between structure and adjacent fuels and require that fire-rated roofing materials be used. 9. Wellhead protection plans should be coordinated with water purveyors and implemented by local jurisdictions. The Steering Committee shall pursue strategies for regional (to include Idaho jurisdictions) water resource management, which sustain projected growth rates and protect the environment. 10. Each jurisdiction shall include provisions in its comprehensive plan for the distribution of essential public facilities. 13. Each jurisdiction shall plan for growth within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) which uses land efficiency, adds certainty to capital facilities planning and allows timely and coordinated extension of urban governmental services, public facilities and utilities for new development. Each jurisdiction shall identify intermediate growth areas (six to ten year increments) within its Urban Growth Area (UGA) or establish policies which direct growth consistent with land use and capital facility plans. Policy Topic 9— Fiscal Impacts Policies 1. Each jurisdiction shall identify, within the capital facilities element of its comprehensive plan, capital resources that will be available to accommodate the additional development which is anticipated within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). 4.2 Essential Public Facilities The City of Spokane Valley is required to plan for essential public facilities (EPFs) pursuant to GMA. Spokane County adopted through the CWPPs "Growth Management Essential Public Facilities Technical Committee Report" in 1996, which set forth a model project review process for the siting of EPFs. All jurisdictions within the County are required to provide a mechanism in the Comprehensive Plan to utilize the model project review process either verbatim or as a model. More recently, the Washington State Legislature passed two laws addressing siting of EPFs. In June 2001 the state enacted ESSB 6151, and in March 2002 the state enacted ESSB 6594. These laws require counties and cities fully planning under GMA to include a process in their Comprehensive Plans to provide for the siting of Secure Community Transition Facilities (SCTFs). A"secure community transition facility" (SCTF) is the statutory name for a less restrictive alternative residential facility program operated or contracted by the Department of Social and Health Services. As stated in RCW 71.09.020, "...a secure community transition facility has supervision and security, and either provides or ensures the provision of sex offender treatment services." The program offers 24-hour intensive staffing and line-of-sight supervision by trained escorts when residents leave the facility. A less restrictive alternative (LRA) placement is defined in the state law as a living arrangement that is less restrictive than total confinement. In response to these new state laws, planning staff from all jurisdictions in Spokane County formed a task force to cooperatively develop a regional siting process for all essential public facilities, including SCTFs. The Essential Public Facilities Task Force, with assistance from the Washington State Office of Community Development (OCD), the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS), and technical staff from the jurisdictions developed a regional siting process for essential public facilities titled Spokane County Regional Siting Process for Essential Public Facilities. Table 4.2 below lists EPFs that are either wholly or partially located within the City. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 6 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The regional process provides for a review process with a location analysis. Public involvement takes place throughout the process with public comment periods as well as public hearings. The review process requires the applicant for an EPF to assume responsibility for the bulk of the analysis and processing of the proposal. The analysis includes two parts. First, an analysis of functional criteria of all potential sites is conducted to select the highest-ranking ten (10) semi- finalist sites. Second, these ten semi-finalist sites are analyzed using more qualitative criteria and resulting in selection of at least three (3) preferred sites. Both analyses include public comment periods. Next, the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) conducts a public hearing on the Preferred Site List to allow for further public comment, identify strategies to address any issues associated with particular sites, and rank the finalist sites. The BoCC ranking is advisory to but not binding on the applicant. Last, the applicant, after selecting a specific site, will work directly with a local jurisdiction and its regulatory requirements to permit construction and operation of the EPF. The regional siting process is based on a coordinated inter-jurisdictional approach, which in combination with consistent development regulations among the jurisdictions will implement the requirement of equitable distribution of EPF of a statewide or regional/countywide nature. Table 4.2 Inventory of Essential Public Facilities Significance Category Name Address Statewide Regional Transportation Facilities Interstate 90 N/A Statewide Regional Transportation Facilities Centennial Trail N/A Regional Regional Transportation Facilities Pence-Cole Valley Park&Ride and 414 S. University Rd Transit/Transfer Center E.Montgomery, Pines Rd Regional Regional Transportation Facilities Pines Road/I 90 Park&Ride &I-90 Regional Regional Transportation Facilities STA Maintenance—Bowdish(Fleck 123 S.Bowdish Service Center) Regional Regional Transportation Facilities SR-27(Pines Road) N/A Regional Regional Transportation Facilities SR-290(Trent Avenue) N/A Regional Solid Waste,Wastewater&Water Valley Recycling-Transfer 3941 N. Sullivan Rd Facilities Regional f Social Service Facilities Valley Hospital&Medical Center 12606 E.Mission Ave Regional I Social Service Facilities American Behavioral Health Systems 12715 E.Mission Ave 4.3 Goals and Policies The following goals and policies are consistent with the goals and policies of the GMA and the Countywide Planning Policies. The City of Spokane Valley will implement the goals and policies for services provided by the City. Special purpose districts, such as water, school, and fire, are encouraged to implement the goals and policies that are under their control. Spokane Valley intends to coordinate with special purpose districts when they adopt and amend their own system plans and capital improvement programs. General Goal CFG-1 Provide facilities and services that the City can most effectively deliver, and contract or franchise for those facilities and services that the City determines can best be provided by a special district, other jurisdiction, or the private sector. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 7 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Policies CFP-1.1 Review plans of service providers within Spokane Valley to determine consistency with the SVCP. CFP-1.2 The City should seek a balance between the quality and cost of providing public facilities and services. CFP-1.3 Optimize the use of existing public facilities and promote orderly compact urban growth. CFP-1.4 Coordinate the construction of public infrastructure with private development to minimize costs whenever practicable and feasible. Capital Facilities Planning and Level of Service Goal CFG-2 Adopt and implement a Capital Facilities Plan to ensure public facilities and services meet Level of Service Standards. Policies CFP-2.1 Facilities and services shall meet the following minimum Level of Service standards: Table 4.3 Spokane Valley Level of Service Standards Facility or Service Level of Service Standard Domestic Water Meet the minimum Regional LOS* Sewer Public sewer required for new development LOS D for Signalized Intersections Transportation LOS E for Un-signalized Intersections Stormwater Meet the minimum Regional LOS* Law Enforcement No minimum LOS adopted Parks 1.92 acres per 1000 residents Libraries Library District to set LOS Solid Waste Meet the minimum Regional LOS* Street Cleaning Meet the minimum Regional LOS* Public Transit Meet the minimum Regional LOS* Fire and EMS Meet the minimum Regional LOS* Public Schools School Districts to set LOS *See Page 4 for Regional LOS standards CFP-2.2 Update the City's Capital Facilities Plan annually to ensure that services and facilities are provided efficiently and effectively and to help establish budget priorities. CFP-2.3 Planned expenditures for capital improvements shall not exceed estimated revenues. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 8 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CFP-2.4 If adopted level of service standards cannot be maintained, the City shall increase funding, reduce level of service standards or reassess the Land Use Element. Public Safety - Fire and Police Goal CFG-3 Provide police protection efficiently and cost effectively to Spokane Valley residents. Coordinate with fire districts to ensure adequate fire protection and emergency services for Spokane Valley citizens. Policies CFP-3.1 Encourage inter-jurisdictional cooperation among law enforcement agencies and fire districts to further develop, where practical, shared service and facility use. CFP-3.2 Develop a comprehensive emergency management plan that meets the needs of the City and coordinates with regional emergency planning efforts. CFP-3.3 Require adequate emergency vehicle road access and water supply/pressure for new development within the City. CFP-3.4 Encourage property owners to create a defensible space between structures and adjacent fuels and require that fire rated roofing materials are used on buildings in forested areas. Water and Sewer Goal CFG-4 Plans for water and sewer service should be consistent with the SVCP. Policies CFP-4.1 Review water and sewer plans to determine consistency with anticipated population growth, future land uses, comprehensive plan land use policies and development regulations. CFP-4.2 Coordinate sewer planning with appropriate jurisdictions for consistency with the SVCP. CFP-4.3 Support continued planning for domestic water needs in partnership with water purveyors, the Joint Aquifer Board, Washington State Department of Health and the Washington State Department of Ecology. CFP-4.4 Encourage public and private efforts to conserve water and to provide public education regarding the safe and appropriate use of the waste treatment system (i.e., NOT using drains and toilets for pharmaceuticals, grease, diapers, etc.). CFP-4.5 Discourage new, private domestic wells within the Spokane Valley City limits. CFP-4.6 New development must connect to public sewer and water. CFP-4.7 Consider grey water re-use and rainwater harvesting technology when and where appropriate and feasible. CFP-4.8 Encourage use of less water-intensive, native vegetation where possible. Solid Waste Goal CFG-5 Promote the reduction, re-use and recycling of solid waste. Policies CFP-5.1 Establish a City Hall recycling program to present a positive example of civic and environmental responsibility. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 9 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CFP-5.2 Participate in updates to the Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management plan and support its implementation. CFP-5.3 Work toward reducing waste at City-sponsored events through the provision of recycling canisters and other means. CFP-5.4 Provide links to reduction, re-use and recycling information on the City web site. CFP-5.5 Encourage the recycling of construction site waste. Stormwater Goal CFG-6 Ensure the provision of stormwater facilities and related management programs that protect surface and groundwater quality, prevent chronic flooding from stormwater, maintain natural stream hydrology, and protect aquatic resources. Policies CFP-6.1 Require stormwater management systems for new development. CFP-6.2 Create and implement a stormwater management plan to reduce impacts from urban runoff. CFP-6.3 Best management practices should be utilized to treat stormwater runoff prior to absorption of runoff into the ground. CFP-6.4 New development should include the multiple uses of facilities, such as the integration of stormwater facilities with recreation and/or open space areas, when possible. CFP-6.5 Encourage the use of alternatives to impervious surfaces, including permeable pavers, pervious pavement, subsurface drainage chambers and garden roofs. CFP-6.6 Consider programs limiting the use of herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers containing phosphates or other harmful chemicals. Library Service Goal CFG-7 Promote efficient and cost effective library service to Spokane Valley residents. Policies CFP-7.1 Encourage continued free, reciprocal library services among all libraries within the Spokane region. CFP-7.2 Land use regulations should allow siting of library facilities in locations convenient to residential areas. CFP-7.3 Work collaboratively with the Spokane County Library District to develop long- range library plans consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Schools Goal CFG-8 School sites and facilities should meet the education needs of Spokane Valley citizens. Policies CFP-8.1 Develop land use designations that allow new schools where they will best serve the community. CFP-8.2 Consider the adequacy of school facilities when reviewing new residential development. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 10 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CFP-8.3 Assist school districts in their planning processes. CFP-8.4 Encourage educational and vocational institutions to develop programs that will result in local employment opportunities for graduates. CFP-8.5 Coordinate with school districts to use school facilities as community centers where appropriate. Concurrency Goal CFG-9 New development shall be served with adequate facilities and services at the time of development, or within the time frame consistent with state law. Policies CFP-9.1 Implement a concurrency management system for transportation, water and sewer facilities. Financing Growth Goal CFG-10 Consider a variety of revenue sources and funding mechanisms including, but not limited to, impact fees. Policies CFP-10.1 Identify and pursue sources of revenue for financing public facilities. Essential Public Facilities Goal CFG-11 Collaborate with all Spokane County jurisdictions in determining the best locations for public and private essential public facilities. Policies CFP-11.1 Follow the process for siting essential public facilities as set forth in the Spokane County Regional Siting Process for Essential Public Facilities. Potential Annexation Areas Goal CFG-12 Provide capital facilities to serve and direct future growth within the City of Spokane Valley Potential Annexation Areas Policies CFP-12.1 Plan and coordinate the location of public facilities and utilities in the potential annexation areas CFP-12.2 Considering, in advance, property acquisition opportunities for future facilities including but not limited to parks, police facilities, stormwater facilities, greenbelts, open space, and street connections CFP-12.3 Coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions in developing capital improvement programs and studies addressing multi-jurisdictional issues 4.4 Capital Facilities Plan 4.4.1 Introduction The Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) provides an analysis of the facilities and services required to support the future land use and growth projected in the Comprehensive Plan. The CFP includes a six-year capital projects and a financing plan for facilities provided by the City. The finance plan identifies specific revenue sources that the City reasonably anticipates will be available in the year Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 11 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan the project is scheduled to be constructed. The CFP includes Level of Service (LOS) standards for each public facility or service and requires that new development be served by adequate facilities. The purpose of the CFP is to use sound fiscal policies to provide adequate public facilities consistent with the land use element and concurrent with, or prior to, the impacts of development. 4.4.2 Growth Assumption On June 9, 2009, the Spokane County Board of Commissioners (BoCC) approved a population allocation of 18,746 people for the City of Spokane Valley. The allocation is the amount of people the City can accommodate within its current municipal boundary. In addition, the BoCC approved a population allocation of 8,138 people for the unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) adjacent to the City of Spokane Valley. The City of Spokane Valley has identified the adjacent UGAs as Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs). The City has identified existing service providers to help determine the effects on existing levels of service in the event of annexation. Capital facilities planning activities within these UGAs continue to be the County's responsibility. The following population data is used for capital facilities planning purposes: Table 4.4 Population Projection Year 204314 204920 203.334 . Population 91,940248 95,33296,657 105,668106 831 4.4.3 Level of Service Cities are often defined by the quality of facilities and services that are provided to its residents. Good road, sewer and water infrastructure are typical criteria used by businesses considering relocation. Park and recreation facilities are increasingly used to judge the quality of a City. Businesses want to locate where they can attract the best employees, and quality of life issues are often the deciding factor for a person to move to a new area. Level of service standards are quantifiable measures, such as acres of parks per 1000 people, or the amount of time it takes to travel a road segment during peak morning and afternoon "rush hours," the higher the level of service the higher the cost. This element establishes levels of service which will be used to evaluate the adequacy and future cost of urban facilities and services. 4.4.3 Concurrency The Growth Management Act introduces the concept of concurrency, which requires new development to be served with adequate urban services at the time of development, or within a specified time thereafter. The GMA allows six years for necessary transportation improvements to be constructed as long as a financial commitment is made at the time of development. The GMA strongly encourages concurrency for water and sewer, and it is good public policy to require the same. 4.4.4 Financing Facilities and Services The City is limited in its ability to finance all desired capital facility projects. Options must be available for addressing funding shortfalls or decisions must be made to lower levels of service for public facilities. In deciding how to address a particular shortfall, the City will need to balance current needs versus future growth requirements; existing deficiencies versus future expansions. Capital facilities plans must be balanced. When funding shortfalls occur, the following options should be considered: a. Increase revenues, b. decrease level of service standards, c. decrease the cost of the service or facility, Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 12 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan d. decrease the demand for the service or facility, e. or some combination of the above. The following table presents possible financial resources available to the City for capital projects. Table 4.5 Funding Resources Funding Category Funding Source General Fund(Sales Tax,fees, property tax, utility tax,etc.) Current Revenues Real Estate Excise Tax(REET) Impact Fees Non-voted General Obligation Voted General Obligation Bonds Revenue(payable from a particular utility or enterprise) Local Improvement District(Assessment Bonds) Surface Transportation Program Bridge Replacement Funds Federal Grants Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) Land and Water Conservation Fund Community Development Block Grants Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account(ALEA) Transportation Improvement Account Centennial Clean Water Fund Public Works Trust Funds Interagency for Committee for Outdoor Recreation(IAC) State Grants/Loans Arterial Street Fund(Motor Fuel Tax) Urban Arterial Trust Account(UATA) Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account Hazardous Bridge Replacement Community and Economic Revitalization Board Water Pollution Control Fund Developer Contributions Other Donations Local Improvement Districts 4.4.6 Impact Fees New growth creates a demand for new and expanded public facilities and services. The GMA authorizes local governments to impose and collect impact fees to partially fund public facilities to accommodate new growth. Impact fees can be used to pay for new or expanded facilities and cannot be collected to address existing infrastructure deficiencies. The GMA allows impact fees to be assessed on the following: • Public Streets and Roads • Public Parks Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 13 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • Schools • Open Space • Fire Protection Facilities • Recreation Facilities The City has not enacted impact fees as a funding mechanism for capital facilities, but may study the issue as directed by future City policy. 4.4.7 Community Facilities This section of the CFP includes civic buildings such as government offices, community centers, and entertainment facilities. As a new City, Spokane Valley does not have a significant inventory of community facilities. Inventory of Existing Facilities Spokane Valley completed construction of CenterPlace at Mirabeau Point Park, in the summer, 2005. The facility houses the Spokane Valley Senior Center, conference facilities, classrooms and a "great room" for events. CenterPlace has a dining capacity of 400 and includes a full commercial kitchen. Spokane Valley leases office and meeting space for employees and City Council in the Redwood Plaza office building, located at 11707 East Sprague Avenue. Spokane Valley also leases precinct and court space at the Valley Precinct Building located 12710 East Sprague. Level of Service Spokane Valley does not propose to adopt a level of service standard for community facilities. Forecast of Future Needs The need for new community facilities is difficult to quantify and depends on the future structure of City government. If Spokane Valley continues to contract for services such as police, parks and road maintenance, the need to acquire and maintain facilities will be minimal. However, if Spokane Valley begins providing these services, there will be a corresponding need for administrative office space and other facilities. For example, if Spokane Valley assumes responsibility for parks maintenance, a new maintenance facility would have to be constructed to house equipment and employees. At some future point, Spokane Valley will likely purchase an existing building or construct a new building to house City Hall. This decision must be made with thought and vision. In the right location, City Hall will be the center for civic affairs and community events and will influence economic development in the area where it is constructed.. The location should be centralized and accessible to all citizens. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Spokane Valley currently has no specific plans to construct new community facilities. The City must decide the location of a permanent City Hall and/or other civic buildings. Future updates to the Capital Facilities element will include information on locations and capacities for community facilities. Capital Projects and Financing Plan Spokane Valley anticipates either constructing a new City Hall building, or purchasing and remodeling an existing building within the six year time frame of this CFP. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 14 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 4.4.8 Domestic Water The City of Spokane Valley does not own or operate a public water supply system. Rather, water is provided to Spokane Valley residences and businesses by special purpose districts, associations, and public and private corporations. Water service is coordinated by Spokane County through the Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP), which identifies service , boundaries, establishes minimum design standards and " promotes the consolidation of regional water resource 4. management. The CWSP is updated as needed at the 't+` ++ti�. '4=4 .. direction of the Board of County Commissioners or the Washington State Department of Health (DOH). - ._+a The City of Spokane Valley is supportive of existing regional water supply planning, water use efficiency programs and plans, watershed planning, wellhead protection plans, water quality plans, and planning for reclamation and reuse. Water Systems Water systems are categorized generally by the number of connections served; Group A systems provide service to 15 or more connections while Group B water systems serve fewer than 15 connections and fewer than 25 people per day. Group B water systems are regulated under chapter 246-291 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). In 2009, the Governor and the Legislature set a new direction for regulating Group B public water systems by eliminating all state funding for this program and providing regulatory flexibility. They did this because Group B systems serve a small population, and the cost to provide regulatory oversight is relatively high. The law authorized the State Board of Health (Board)to: • Establish requirements for the initial design and construction of a Group B water system. This change allowed the Board to eliminate ongoing requirements after initial approval of the system. It also allows local health jurisdictions (health department or health district) to establish Group B requirements that are more stringent than state requirements. • The law also authorized the Board to eliminate some, or all, regulatory requirements for Group B systems serving four or fewer connections. The current rule only eliminates requirements for some one and two connection Group B systems. Spokane Valley has 25 Group A systems and 13 Group B systems providing water service within the City. A detailed inventory of water systems is shown below in the inventory section. Water System Plans The Washington State Department of Health recommends that all water purveyors prepare a water system plan to determine future needs for water facilities within their service areas. The plans must include an existing facility inventory, project future needs for water supply, conservation strategies, and identify and provide for the protection of aquifers against contaminates. Once a water system plan is adopted, it must be updated every six years. The Department of Health is the approval authority for water system plans. Water purveyors meeting the following criteria are required to have water system plans approved by DOH. 1. Systems having 1000 or more connections. 2. Systems required to develop water system plans under the Public Water System Coordination Act of 1977 (Chapter 70.116 RCW). 3. Any system experiencing problems related to planning, operation and/or management as determined by the Department of Health. 4. All new systems. 5. Any expanding system. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 15 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 6. Any system proposing to use the document submittal exception process in WAC 246-290- 125 (documents such as project reports and constructions drawings). In 2003, the Washington State Legislation passed what is commonly referred to as the "Municipal Water Law" (MWL), amending sections of the State Board of Health Code (RCW 43.20); the laws governing Public Water Systems (RCW70.119A); and sections of the state's Water Code (RCW 90.03). The MWL requires that water system planning documents must be consistent with Spokane Valley's Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. The Department of Health is developing procedures that water systems must follow to ensure coordination with local jurisdictions and consistency with growth planning. Water Rights Washington State water law requires all prospective water uses to obtain a water right permit from the Department of Ecology (DOE) before constructing a well or withdrawing any groundwater from a well. However, the law does allow a water right permit exemption, referred to as the domestic exemption, which states that no water right permit is required for the withdrawal of up to 5,000 gallons of water per day from a well when the water is being used for the following: 1. Livestock watering. 2. Single or group domestic water supply. 3. Industrial purposes. 4. Irrigation of no more than one half acre of lawn or noncommercial garden (RCW 90.44.050). For many years, Ecology issued water right certificates to water suppliers based on projected future use, rather than actual "beneficial use." The unused portions of those certificates or rights are known as "inchoate" rights, which could potentially be taken away by Ecology if not put to beneficial use. This situation was troubling to municipal water suppliers. Public water systems need a level of certainty to obtain financing for capital facilities as well as to issue letters of water availability to development interests. The "Municipal Water Law: of 2003" clarified that cities are entitled to inchoate (unused) water for the purpose of serving expanding areas. This ensures that municipalities have sufficient water for anticipated growth based on the communities' comprehensive plans and water and supply plans. Watershed Planning In 1998, Washington State passed the Watershed Management Act to develop a "thorough and cooperative method of determining what the current water resource situation is in each Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) of the state and to provide local citizens with the maximum possible input concerning their goals and objectives for water resource management and development" (RCW 90.82.005). In late 1998, a Planning Unit was formed for WRIAs 55 and 57, or the Middle Spokane-Little Spokane River watersheds, with Spokane County designated as the lead agency. The Watershed Management Act requires the Planning Unit to address water quantity issues and allows water quality, habitat and in-stream flows to be considered in the process. The watershed planning effort is expected to produce information on how water is used in the Water Resource Inventory Areas and recommendations for how it should be used in the future. The Planning Unit may also formulate a recommendation for in-stream flows for the Spokane and Little Spokane Rivers. The Department of Ecology may establish minimum water flows or levels for streams, lakes or other public waters for the purpose of protecting fish, game, birds or other wildlife resources, or recreational or aesthetic values of said public waters whenever it appears to be in the public interest to do so. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 16 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The data, information and recommendations generated by the Planning Unit may be used by the Department of Ecology to assess the ability to issue new water rights for the Spokane Valley- Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. The WRIA 55 and 57 planning process will provide a basis for better understanding of potential water resource limits and will be incorporated into future updates to this capital facilities plan. Inventory of Water Systems Most of the water used by Spokane Valley residents and businesses is provided by water and irrigation districts and small water systems, listed in Tables 4.7 and 4.8 and shown on the Water Districts and Wellheads map, located at the end of this chapter. The City of Spokane provides water to the western portions of Spokane Valley, totaling approximately 620 connections. Group A water systems are those which have 15 or more service connections or regularly serve 25 or more people 60 or more days per year. Group B water systems serve two to 14 connections and are not subject to the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. Instead, they must meet state and local requirements for water quality and operations. Table 4.7 Spokane Valley Water Purveyors-Group A Systems Current Residential Current Non Residential Storage Group A Systems Connections Connections Capacity (gallons) Bayou On Barker 0 4 0 Burger Royal 4 1 50 Carnhope Irrigation District 7 495 31 i 0 Central Pre Mix-Sullivan Rd 4 4 0 City Of Spokane* 59700" 0 Not reported Consolidated Irrig Dist 19 System 1 3349 196 2,750,000 Consolidated Irrig Dist 19 System 2 5168 125 2,200,000 East Spokane Water Dist 1 1700 94 1,277,000 Hutchinson Irrigation Dist#16 790 0 1,200,000 Honeywell Electronic Mfg LLC 0 1 0 Irvin Water District#6 1597 154 1,900,000 Kaiser Alum-Trentwood Works 0 2 21,200 Model Irrigation Dist#18 2518 6 550,000 Modern Electric Water Co 7424 824 1,500,000 Orchard Avenue Irrigation Dist 6 1255 4 0 Pinecroft Mobile Home Park 143 0 400 Puerta Vallarta 0 1 0 Spitfire Pub And Eatery 0 2 87 Spokane Business&Industrial Park 0 252 478,000 Spokane Co-Mirabeau Park 0 2 200 Spokane Co Water Dist#3 9788 426 6,880,000 Trentwood Irrigation District 3 1727 162 1,120,000 Vera Water&Power 9259 390 8,650,000 Woodland Park Trailer Court 30 0 0 Approximately 620 connections within City of Spokane Valley Source: Washington State Department of Health Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 17 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.8 Group B Systems Group B System Connections Holiday Trailer Court 12 Janzen&Janzen 1 Levernier Const.Water System 1 Mercer Trucking Co Inc 1 Middco Tool&Equipment 1 Systems Transport Inc 1 Tci Water System 6 Tds 2 Union Pacific Railroad-Trentwood 1 Westco S Apparel Service 3 Western Structures Inc 2 WSDT-Pines Road Maintenance 1 Source: Washington State Department of Health Level of Service The Countywide Planning Policies were amended in 2004 to defer level of service standards for water supply and fire flow to the requirements of the Department of Health and local fire codes respectively. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley adopts by reference water system plans for all water purveyors providing service within the City of Spokane Valley. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Spokane Valley adopts by reference water system plans for all water purveyors providing service within the City of Spokane Valley. Capital Projects and Financing Plan Spokane Valley adopts by reference capital project and financing plans for all water purveyors providing service within the City of Spokane Valley. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Service Fire protection, rescue, and emergency medical services (EMS) are provided by Spokane Valley Fire Department (SVFD) and Spokane County Fire • District No. 8. SVFD serves over 90% of the ' Valley, while District 8 serves a few small areas in 1E -R the southern part of the City (see Fire Districts Map "' ` ' '- 3 at the end of this chapter). Both districts serve the 4 - City with a full range of fire suppression and EMS services. Spokane Valley voters chose to annex into SVFD and District No. 8 in September, 2004. Insurance Rating Fire departments are assigned a numerical fire protection rating by the Washington Surveying and Ratings Bureau. Insurance companies fund the Bureau to perform on-site inspections of fire Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 18 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan districts to determine the rating. The Bureau analyzes five main areas: average response time, water supply, communication network, schedule of fire inspections and fire station evaluations (which focus on age of vehicles), personnel training and staffing of facilities. Insurance companies use the fire protection rating to help determine insurance rates on all fire insurance policies. The rating is on a scale of one to ten, with one representing the best score. Quality of fire service can have a significant impact on fire insurance rates, particularly for commercial businesses. SVFD has a Fire Insurance Rating of three (3) and District No. 8 has a Rating of five (5), both indicating excellent fire protection services. Inventory of Existing Facilities and Apparatus The Fire Districts Map shows the location of fire stations and service area boundaries for SVFD, District No. 8 and surrounding fire protection districts. All fire agencies have mutual aid agreements to assist each other in major emergencies. SVFD 2014 apparatus inventory includes -149 Type I Engines, `2 Type II Engines, 3 Class A pumper/ladders, three brush trucks. 1 heavy rescue and other miscellaneous vehicles for staff, training, rescue, maintenance, prevention and command. SVFD has ten stations, including seven within the City of Spokane Valley. Locations of the stations are as follows: Fire District No. 8 has one fire station inside the City limits, station 84 in the Ponderosa neighborhood, located at 4410 South Bates. The District has two stations located outside the City Table 4.9 Spokane Valley Fire limits providing additional coverage, No. 81 at 6117 Department Station Locations South Palouse Highway and No. 85 at 3324 South Linke Road. Stations 81 and 84 each have two University Station 1" 10319 East Sprague Class A engines and two wild land brush engines. Millwood Station 2 9111 East Frederick Station 85 has one Class A engine and one wild land Liberty Lake Station-3 2218 North Harvard brush engine. Otis orchards Station- 4 tation4 22406 East Wellesley Level of Service �— Sullivan Station" 15510 East Marietta The Level of Service goals for response time are Edgecliff Station" 6306 East Sprague described in SFVD's Standard of Cover. SVFD's Standard of Cover is consistent with the regionally Pindecroft Station 7" 1121 South Evergreen adopted minimum level of service for fire protection Evergreen Station" North 2110 North Wilbur and emergency services. The following table shows South Valley Station W" East 12121 East 32"' the number of calls per year. Greenacres Station" East 17217 East Sprague J * Inside Spokane Valley City Limits Table 4.10 Spokane Valley Fire Department City Responses Year 2946 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 City y Responses 8,270 9,144 10,080 9,480 9,394 9,663 10,141 10,998 The Countywide Planning Policies for Spokane County establishes minimum levels of service for fire and emergency medical services as follows: • Urban areas are required to be serviced by a Fire District with at least a Class Six Insurance rating. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 19 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • Urban areas must be within five road miles of an operating fire station that provides service with a "Class A" pumper, unless structures are equipped with fire sprinklers. • Urban areas shall be served by a state certified basic life support (BLS) agency within five miles and an operating advanced life support unit within six miles or ten minutes response time. Both SVFD and 8 meet the minimum countywide level of service standards. Forecast of Future Needs The northeast area of the City is underdeveloped at present but as the City grows over the next ten to fifteen years, SVFD recognizes that a new station will need to be constructed to provide an adequate level of service. Station 11 will be constructed at Barker and Euclid. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Station No. 11 will be located in the vicinity of Barker and Euclid and will have 3 bays with 1 fire apparatus. Construction for Station 11 is tentatively planned for 20162017 or when growth in the area will support the investment and ongoing costs. Capital Projects and Financing Plan SVFD is a junior taxing district and supplements its regular taxes with special levies. As the restrictions on the taxes generated from the regular tax go down, special levies are proposed to maintain needed funding. Special levies must be approved by voters served by SVFD. The Department does not use its bonding capacity to fund capital projects. The Department's philosophy is to reserve funds generated through its regular revenues for future capital needs. The following table represents SVFD planned capital expenditures. Table 4.11 SVFD Capital Projects Plan Project 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Fire Station No. 11 (New construction) $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,800 $0 .0 $1,800 (Amounts Dollars are in times$1,000) 4.4.9 Library Service Library services are provided by the Spokane County Library District (District).The District is a municipal VALLEY corporation established by voters in 1942 under 4111111111111111 provisions of RCW 27.12.040. An independent special purpose district, The District's sole purpose is to `I ■ nen".n provide public library services to the unincorporated 4. county and affiliated municipalities. A five-member Board of Trustees appointed by Spokane County111 Commissioners governs the District. A Board-appointed E library director serves as chief administrator. Inventory of Existing Facilities Spokane Valley has one library located inside its boundary, the District's Valley Branch, located at 12004 East Main. This resource library is the District's largest facility, measuring 22,950 square feet, including branch administrative space. The District has two other libraries within the greater Valley area located at 4322 North Argonne and 22324 East Wellesley in Otis Orchards. As of January 2013, approximately 36,000 Spokane Valley residents were District cardholders. Valley Library was the primary branch of registration, with Argonne second and Otis Orchards third. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 20 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Library District has a reciprocal borrowing agreement with the City of Spokane with over 1,600 Spokane Valley residents having a Spokane Public Library card. Library Facility Master Plan The District currently provides library services to the residents of Spokane Valley primarily from a 22,950 square foot library. The Spokane Valley Library was built in 1955 and expanded in 1986. The Spokane Valley Library is one of the busiest libraries in Washington. In March 2008, voters defeated a proposal to establish a proposed Greater Spokane Valley Library Capital Facility area and to issue General Obligation Bonds for construction of a new main library and a new neighborhood branch in the eastern area of the City. The District subsequently undertook a capital facilities planning process for its entire service area, resulting in the July 2010 Board of Trustees approval of a 20-year Library Facilities Master Plan (LFMP). The LFMP proposed a capital investment totaling $50.8 million (2010 dollars). In 2013, the Board of Trustees approved a Strategic Plan (Plan) to guide allocation of resources to support programs and services that are responsive to community needs. The Plan is based upon community conversations held in every library facility along with interviews with individuals actively engaged in the community. The Plan identified four service response priorities for the next three to five years. • Create Young Learners • Support Job Seekers & Local Businesses • Inspire people of all ages to discover plan and learn • Connect Community As part of the planning process the Board of Trustees took a fresh look at the LFMP. They recognized that the changing role of public libraries and the current economic environment required a critical evaluation of all future building projects. New facilities will support early learning, workforce development, creative learning and community connections by being open, flexible spaces that adapt to changing roles and emerging services. With the increasing use of digital content and the emerging role of library as a place to gather, meet and exchange information, the physical library is an information commons as well as community knowledge center. Future Facilities for the City of Spokane Valley The existing Spokane Valley Library has served residents of the valley for nearly 60 years. The split design is not efficient and the layout does not meet current needs. In 2012, the District entered into an agreement with the City of Spokane Valley to purchase 8 acres on Sprague between Farr and University adjacent to Balfour Park. A jointly funded site plan that will include a one story 30,000 square foot library placed within a City park was initiated in 2013. The goal is to develop a park with amenities to enhance the library experience and create a welcoming civic destination. The District also owns property south of Sprague along Conklin Road and intends to build a 12,000- 15,000 square foot library. The building will offer an open, flexible floor plan providing meeting rooms, study rooms, children's learning areas, information commons and space to browse library materials. The combined square footage for library facilities in the City of Spokane Valley is planned to be between 42,000-45,000 square foot. The agreement with the City of Spokane Valley allows the District up to five years to begin building on the Sprague property. The Board of Trustees is currently evaluating the possibility of putting a proposal before the voters in 2014 to fund the capital investment in two libraries that will be built within the City of Spokane Valley. If successful, the District would break ground in 2015 on the first building and shortly after on the second. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 21 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Operational Costs The District anticipates that efficient building design and continuing staff productivity improvements, a larger Spokane Valley Library and an eventual new branch can be operated at normal District funding levels of$0.50 per$1,000 of assessed valuation. 4.4.10 Parks and Recreationpbl] . {; Spokane Valley has a wide range of recreational opportunities available to residents and visitors. City 1 . :4 parks, school play fields, golf courses, trails, County ` • , parks and conservations areas are all within close vicinity to Spokane Valley residents. - The City provides a system of local parks that is - managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department. The Parks Department is in the process of updating its developing a new Parks and Recreation, and Open Spaces Master Plan. .. When finished, this plan will offer a detailed picture of , the park, recreation and open space system, including changes and improvements that will be made in the future. This section of the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) provides summaries of the parks inventory, level of service (LOS), future park needs, proposed projects, and a financing plan for the next six years. Park Types Parks are classified by their size, service area and function. Spokane Valley uses the nationally recognized Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines, to establish standard for parks planning. Major classifications include mini-park, neighborhood, school-park, community, large urban, various trail designations and special use facilities. The Parks Element, Chapter 9, provides a thorough description of park types used for planning purposes. Inventory of Existing Facilities The Parks Map, found at the end of this Chapter, shows the location of all parks within Spokane Valley. Table 4.13 provides an inventory of park and recreation facilities owned by Spokane Valley. These parks are used to calculate Spokane Valley's level of service for parks. The Parks Master Plan provides the most detailed inventory of parks, including equipment, structures and other miscellaneous park facilities. Table 4.13 Spokane Valley Park Facilities Spokane Valley Parks Acreage Status Neighborhood Parks Balfour Park 2.86 Developed Browns Park 8.203 Developed Castle Park 2.74 Minimally Developed Edgecliff Park 4.74 Developed Greenacres Park 8.3 Developed Terrace View Park 9.24 Developed Subtotal 35.988 Community Parks Valley Mission Park 24.01.91 Developed Sullivan Park 16.1 Developed Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 22 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.13 Spokane Valley Park Facilities Spokane Valley Parks Acreage Status Subtotal 40.1 21.91 Large Urban Parks Mirabeau Point Park 42_01.91 Developed Subtotal 42_01-94 Special Use Areas Park Road Pool 2.08 Developed Sullivan ParkWestern Dance Hall 16.07 Developed CenterPlace 13.60 Developed Subtotal 31.67 Undeveloped Park Land Myrtle Point Park 31 10.7 Undeveloped Valley Mission Park(South) 7.22 Undeveloped Valley Senior CenterBalfour Park Expansion 2.0984 Undeveloped Subtotal 46_78,38 Total Park Acres 180.345 Level of Service The Countywide Planning Policies for Spokane County requires all jurisdictions to adopt a level of service (LOS) standard for parks. Spokane Valley has the flexibility and freedom to adopt a LOS standard for parks that reflects the expressed need and desire of our community. ;' ie The National Recreation and Parks Association . suggest that cities adopt LOS standards for q different park types, such as mini (pocket), � 1, neighborhood, community and major parks. =s " Spokane Valley does not have a well-developed i r ` park system and will use total City-owned park acres for its LOS measurement. In 2006, Spokane Valley adopted a LOS of 1.92 >- acres/1000 people as its minimum LOS standard. Spokane Valley recognizes that schools - churches, natural areas and commercial enterprises all provide recreation opportunities for Spokane Valley residents. These will all be taken into consideration when Spokane Valley determines the best location to purchase new park land. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley has the capacity to accommodate an additional 15,11814 891 people over the next 20 years within the current City limits. In order to maintain the adopted LOS of 1.92 acres/1000 people, Spokane Valley would have to add about 3-1-25 acres of park land over the next 20 years, with 445 acres in the first six years, as shown in Table 4.15. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan provides a more detailed analysis of park and recreation needs by dividing the City into smaller service areas. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 23 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.15 Future Park Demand Total Park Acres Acres Required at Year Population Available 1.92 acres/1000 Net Deficiency Acres I 281-32014 91.94090,550 180.3 474,75 176.5217-3-86 (3.78)2.11 I 294-9202 96 65795,332 I 180.347-1,75I 185.58183.01 I 5.284 1,49 I 283332034 106,831105,668 180.345 205.12202.88 24.8231.13 I *Assumes 20-year growth of 14,8911-5,11-8 people Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities In order to maintain the adopted 1.92 acres/1000 level of service standard, Spokane Valley would need to add 5 acres of park land by the year"', `2020. Capital Projects and Financing Plan The following table details Spokane Valley's six year Parks and Recreation capital improvement financing plan. The table details projects that address level of service deficiencies (capacity projects) and other capital improvements (non-capacity) projects. Table 1.17 Parks Capital Facilities Plan klb2} Note. Amounts in$4 000 Rroject 2013 2844 2015 22846 p017 2018Elb3} $600} I Dark Improve eats $400 $400 $400 $409 $400 $400 Total $400 $400 $400 $400 $400 $400 $600 I Revenue-Sour-se I Gene Rl C„n.lC„nd $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $300 REET#1 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $398 Grants $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9 Total $408 $480 $400 $400 $400 $400 $609 Table 4.17 Parks Capital Facilities Plan Note:Amounts in$1,000 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Project Total Park Improvements 263 i 100 100 100_ 100 100 $763 Total 263 100 100100 100 100 $763 Revenue Source _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ General Fund 193 100 100 100 100 100 $693 REET#1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fund balance 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 263 100 100 100 100 100 $763 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 24 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 4.4.11 Public Safety The Spokane Valley Police Department is a contract law enforcement agency, partnering with the Spokane County Sheriff's Department to provide a safe environment for the citizens, businesses, and visitors of the City of Spokane Valley. This unique contracting relationship allows for the sharing of many of our resources, allowing both agencies to operate at peak efficiency without duplicating services. Spokane Valley also contracts with Spokane County for judicial, jail and animal control services. The total contract for public safety for 2011 totaled over $$15.3 million, including approximately 100 commissioned police officers. Spokane Valley supports community oriented policing and recognizes it as an important complement to traditional law enforcement. In Spokane County, community policing is known as S.C.O.P.E., or Sheriff Community Oriented Policing Effort. The community policing model balances reactive responses to calls for service with proactive problem-solving centered on the causes of crime and disorder. Community policing requires police and citizens to join together as partners in the course of both identifying and effectively addressing these issues. About 364 Spokane Valley citizens are S.C.O.P.E volunteers. Community Survey The Community Preference Survey included questions to gauge the public's perception of police services. Results show that 85% of Spokane Valley residents believe police services are good, very good, or excellent, indicating a generally high level of confidence in the police force. Only 27% of respondents expressed a willingness to pay additional taxes to have improved police services. Inventory of Existing Facilities The Spokane Valley Police Precinct is located at 12710 E. Sprague and houses patrol and detective divisions, the traffic unit and administrative staff. The Precinct also includes a Spokane County District Court. Spokane Valley is served by four S.C.O.P.E. stations, shown in the following table. Table 4.18 Spokane Valley S.C.O.P.E stations Neighborhood Location Neighborhood Location University 10621 East 15th Trentwood I22400 N.Wilbur#79 Edgecliff 522 S.Thierman Rd. Central Valley 115 N. Evergreen Rd. Level of Service Public safety is a priority for the City of Spokane Valley. It is difficult to determine at this time, an adequate and measurable level of police protection. Spokane Valley will monitor the performance of the Spokane County Sheriff's Department and will adjust the contract for services as necessary to ensure an adequate level of police protection. Forecast of Future Needs Future needs for police protection will be determined as a part of the annual budget process. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Spokane Valley is not planning to construct any new law enforcement facilities at this time. Capital Projects and Financing Plan Spokane Valley is not planning to construct any new law enforcement facilities at this time. 4.4.12 School Facilities Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 25 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Four public school districts provide service within Spokane Valley: East Valley, West Valley, Central Valley and Spokane School District 81. Spokane Valley must coordinate with each district to ensure consistency between the City's plan and school districts' plans. There are also a number of private schools that provide service to Spokane Valley area children. Inventory of Existing Facilities The School District Map, found at the end of this Chapter, shows district boundaries and locations of all public schools within Spokane Valley. Tables 4.19 through 4.21 shows capacities of all schools located within Spokane Valley. School districts use portable classrooms at some school sites as interim measures to house students until permanent facilities can be built. Portable units are not included in capacity figures. School capacity figures are reported by the Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction and are based on square footage per student. Table 4.19 Central Valley School Inventory Elementary School Sq.Ft.Area Capacity Adams 46,879 521 Summit(Formerly Blake) 34,823 436 Broadway 40,648 499 Chester 38,388 480 Greenacres 55,875 680 Keystone 33,669 421 Liberty Lake 60,477 756 McDonald 46,504 563 Opportunity 42,388 521 Ponderosa 51,377 642 Progress 37,573 452 South Pines 45,956 499 Sunrise 53,673 662 University 37,867 455 Total Elementary Permanent Facilities 626,097 7,587 Junior High Schools Sq.Ft.Area Capacity Bowdish 74,738 743 Evergreen 76,075 751 Greenacres 91,803 908 Horizon 84,795 838 North Pines 105,368 1,044 Total Junior High Permanent Facilities 432,779 4,284 Senior High Schools Sq.Ft.Area Capacity Central Valley 239,540 1,988 University 239,540 1,986 Total Senior High Facilities 479.080 3.974 Source: Central Valley School District Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 26 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.20 East Valley School Inventory Elementary School Sq.Ft.Area Capacity East Farms 47,047 579 Otis Orchards 51,789 629 Skyview 42,140 509 Trent 58,482 713 Trentwood 47,274 573 Total Elementary Permanent Facilities 246,732 3.003 Junior High Schools Sq.Ft.Area Capacity East Valley 84,561 831 Mountain View 82,544 816 Total Junior High Permanent Facilities 167,105 1.647 Senior High Schools Sq.Ft.Area Capacity East Valley 203,248 1,686 Total Senior High Facilities 203,248 1,686 Source: Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction Table 4.21 West Valley School Inventory Elementary School Sq.Ft.Area Capacity Millwood Early Childhood Ctr. 27,164 340 Ness 33,440 418 Orchard Center 34,094 426 Pasadena Park — 34,002 425 Seth Woodward 35,941 449 Total Elementary Permanent Facilities 164,641 2,058 Middle Schools Sq.Ft.Area Capacity Centennial 89,870 875 West Valley City School 30,258 307 Total Junior High Permanent Facilities 120,128 1,182 Senior High Schools Sq.Ft.Area Capacity West Valley 149,128 1,207 Spokane Valley 13,902 116 Total Senior High Facilities 163,030 1,323 Source: West Valley School District Level of Service The Countywide Planning Policies for Spokane County requires that all jurisdictions adopt a Level of Service standard for schools. Spokane Valley defers this responsibility to the individual school Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 27 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan districts providing service within the City. Individual school districts may request that Spokane Valley adopt a Level of Service standard in future updates to the Capital Facilities Element. Forecast of Future Needs Central Valley School District The Central Valley School District (CVSD) is experiencing a period of high growth in student population, particularly towards its eastern boundary. Liberty Lake and Greenacres Elementary Schools are currently over capacity. In response to this growth, the District initiated its "Community Linkages" planning process in the fall of 2004 to develop strategies and alternatives for accommodating its present and future students. The committee developed student population projections through the 2008/2009 school year for the entire district by analyzing growth trends in student population, building permit activity and proposed housing developments. The data will be used to guide decisions on where to locate school facilities. Table 4.23 shows the number of students enrolled in Central Valley Schools in 2005 for each school in the District and projections through the 2008-09 school year. In 2005, 11,480 students were enrolled in CVSD schools, with 9,363 of those students living within the City of Spokane Valley. Table 4.23 Central Valley Enrollment Projection Student New Projected Student Student School Attendance Area Enrollment 2005 Enrollment in 2008-2009 Increase Elementary Schools Broadway 492 517 25 Progress 291 311 20 Opportunity 339 366 27 Adams 466 503 37 University 419 435 16 South Pines 331 332 1 McDonald 356 364 8 Sunrise 490 532 42 Ponderosa 334 337 3 Chester 322 352 30 Greenacres 588 686 98 Liberty Lake 727 876 149 Total 5155 5611 456 Middle Schools North Pines 525 551 26 Bowdish 574 589 15 Horizon 440 462 22 Evergreen 578 630 52 Greenacres 644 757 113 Total 2761 2989 228 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 28 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.23 Central Valley Enrollment Projection Student New Projected Student Student School Attendance Area Enrollment 2005 Enrollment in 2008-2009 Increase High Schools University High 1922 2055 133 Central Valley High 1642 1804 162 Total 3564 3859 295 Total Student Enrollment 11,480 12,459 979 Source: Central Valley Linkages Committee-John Bottelli, Spokane County GIS The following table shows enrollment projections for Central Valley School District from the Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The table provides historic and projected school enrollments for the years 2001 through 2010. Table 4.24 Central Valley School Enrollment Actual Enrollment Projected Enrollment Grade 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 K-6 5,873 5,817 5,965 6,272 6,433 6,686 6,980 7,332 7,697 7,985 7-8 1,800 1,823 1,819 1,817 1,899 1,942 1,900 1,897 1,926 2,090 9-12 3,410 3,544 3,555 3,602 3,653 3,695 3,788 3,789 3,828 3,862 K-12 11,083 11,184 11,339 11,691 111,985 I 12,323 12,668 13,018 13,451 13,937 Source: Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction East Valley School District East Valley School District has experienced a significant decline in enrollment in recent years. In 1999, enrollment peaked at just under 4,700 students down to 4,355 students enrolled in the fall of 2004. The following table indicates that East Valley will continue to lose students through the year 2010. Table 4.25 East Valley School Enrollment Actual Enrollment Projected Enrollment Grade 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 K-6 2,355 2,288 2,167 2,139 I 2,082 2,022 1,974 1,964 1,931 1,917 7-8 743 735 732 716 I 690 681 659 599 572 564 9-12 1,592 1,565 1,544 1,500 I 1,396 1,354 1,322 1,337 1,292 1,217 K-12 4,690 4,588 4,443 4,355 4,168 4057 3,955 3,900 3,795 3,698 Source: Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction East Valley School District estimates that out of 4,240 total students enrolled in the District in September, 2005, 2,378 lived within the City of Spokane Valley. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 29 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan West Valley School District West Valley School District has grown in student population consistently since 1998 and is projected to continuing growing through the year 2010, as shown in Table 4.25. Table 4.26 West Valley School Enrollment Actual Enrollment Projected Enrollment Grade 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 K-6 1,591 1,552 1,614 1,581 1,605 1,610 1,632 1,710 1,728 1,750 7--8 545 566 575 528 542 560 567 503 519 589 9-12 1,469 1,502 1,503 1,534 1,510 1,538 1,554 1,559 1,576 1,493 K-12 3,605 3,620 3,692 3,643 I 3,657 ' 3,708 3,753 3,772 3,823 3,832 Source: Washington State Superintendent of Public Instruction Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Central Valley School District The most urgent need for the CVSD is to add more elementary classroom space in the east end of the District. The District recently acquired two properties in the north Greenacres area for a new elementary school. The District will need to construct a new high school and middle school in the 20-year time frame of this comprehensive plan. The district has a site for a middle school adjacent to the Liberty Lake Elementary School. A number of elementary schools need to be completely remodeled, including Opportunity, Greenacres and Ponderosa. East Valley School District East Valley is not planning to construct any new facilities within the six year time frame of this capital facilities plan. Future updates to this plan will incorporate new capital projects. West Valley School District West Valley is remodeling its High School and will add elementary school classroom space. Capital Projects and Financing Plan West Valley School District passed a $35 million bond measure in 2004 that is being used to remodel West Valley High School, construct new elementary school classrooms and a new gymnasium. Central Valley School District is in the process of developing a Capital Improvement and Financing Plan. 4.4.13 Sewer Service Background In 1980, Spokane County initiated the Septic Tank Elimination Program (STEP) to bring sewers to houses and businesses located in the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). Since that time, approximately 25,000 residences and businesses in the greater Spokane Valley area have been connected to the County's sewer system. The STEP will be completed in 2012. Residences and businesses with sewer available will be required to connect to the public sewer system by 2015. Upon incorporation, the City of Spokane Valley entered into an interlocal agreement giving Spokane County lead agency authority to provide sewer service. In 2009 another interlocal agreement was adopted which established a wastewater management advisory board and gave Spokane County the exclusive authority to provide sewer service to the City of Spokane Valley. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 30 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan In 1996, the County adopted the 1996 Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan Update (1996 CWMP). The intent of the 1996 CWMP was to develop strategies to expedite the sewer program for protection of the Aquifer, and to satisfy regulations established by the Washington State Departments of Health (DOH) and Ecology (DOE) and the Spokane County Health District. In 2001, Spokane County again updated the CWMP, which focused on reprioritizing the remaining STEP projects under an accelerated construction schedule, policy updates, and addressing conformance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA). Most significantly, the CWMP updated population and wastewater flow forecasts and produced a revised Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Spokane County will update the CWMP in 2012. Spokane Valley adopts by reference the most current CWMP. Wastewater Facilities Plan Spokane County adopted a Wastewater Facilities Plan (WFP) in 2002 that identified wastewater facilities and programs required to meet the long-term wastewater treatment needs of the County. The WFP focuses on developing a long-term wastewater management strategy for the County. The WFP provides an in-depth analysis of various wastewater treatment technologies available, in addition to exploring the wide range of related environmental considerations. Public participation was fully integrated into this extensive planning effort. The WFP was updated in 2006, 2007. It was approved by the Department of Ecology in 2008. The Plan was again updated in 2010. This Plan is in its implementation phase, with the recent completion and start-up of a new regional water reclamation facility. Spokane Valley adopts by reference the most current WFP. Wastewater Treatment In 1980, Spokane County and the City of Spokane signed an interlocal agreement wherein the County agreed to purchase ten million gallons per day (mgd) of capacity in the City's Riverside Park Water Reclamation Facility (RPWRF). Spokane County is currently using approximately 3 MGD of this capacity, as a result of the new Spokane County Regional Water Reclamation Facility (SCRWRF) coming on line recently. Wastewater from the City of Spokane Valley is now conveyed through Spokane County's sewer system to the recently completed SCRWRF. This facility is at the old Stockyards site north of 1-90 and east of Freya. The SCRWRF has a capacity of 8 million gallons per day (MGD) and produces effluent meeting Class A Reclaimed Water Standards prior to discharge into the Spokane River. In the future, when the flow from the Spokane Valley area exceeds 8 MGD, the additional flow will be directed to the City of Spokane Riverside Park Water Reclamation Facility (RPWRF) for treatment and discharge into the Spokane River, until the capacity of the SCRWRF is expanded. The site will support expansion of the SCRWRF up to 24 MGD in 4 MGD increments. The SCRWRF was designed and constructed by CH2M Hill, pursuant to a "Design-Build-Operate" contract with Spokane County. The contract provides for up to 20 years of facility operation by CH2M Hill. Inventory of Existing Facilities Sewer facilities within Spokane Valley are a system of pipes and pumping stations that move untreated sewage to two main interceptor lines. The interceptors are known as the Spokane Valley Interceptor (SVI) and North Valley Interceptor (NVI). These interceptors then convey the sewage to the County's SCRWRF through pumping stations or to the City's RPWRF by gravity flow. Major elements are summarized as follows: Interceptor Sewers: 32 Miles Major Pump Stations: 6 Collector Lines: 455 Miles Local Pump Stations: 10 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 31 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Level of Service The Regional Minimum Level of Service Standards state that incorporated areas will be provided with wastewater collection and transport systems in accordance with the adopted sewer concurrency requirements of the jurisdiction. Spokane Valley requires all new development to be served with public sewer. Only existing residential, commercial and industrial lots may be served by septic systems/drain fields (approved by the Spokane County Health District) and only if public sewer is unavailable. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane County currently has about 37,500 customers within its sewer system area. Since some customers generate more flow than others, it is common to define an Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) as a way to project future flows and to set the sewer service rates. Spokane County assigns one ERU to each 800 cubic feet of water use per month, or about 200 gallons per day. The 37,500 customers account for about 52,900 ERU's, based on an average of 1.41 ERU's per account. The following table shows that there are about 24,800 accounts within the City of Spokane Valley, representing approximately 71% of the County's total ERU's. Table 4.30 Current Spokane County Sewer Customers and ERU's Customer Type City of Spokane Other County Service Total for County Valley Areas Service Areas Accounts ERU's Accounts ERU's Accounts ERU's Single Family 20,860 20,860 11,820 11,820 32,680 32,680 Duplex and 2,160 9,220 610 2,290 2,770 11,510 Multi-Family Commercial 1,767 7,210 270 1,230 2,037 8,440 Mobile Home 13 270 0 0 13 270 Parks TOTAL 24,800 37,560 12,700 _ 15,340 37,500 52,900 Source: Spokane County Utilities Department Note that the number of accounts in the next three years is expected to increase substantially, due to the County's continuing emphasis on the enforcement of sewer connection deadlines within the Septic Tank Elimination Program areas. Anticipated growth in the number of accounts for the Spokane County sewer system overall is reflected by the following projections: YEAR No. of Accounts No. of ERU5 2012 38,900 54,800 2013 40,500 57,100 2014 42,100 59,400 Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Sewer Construction The County's Septic Tank Elimination Program (STEP) will be completed in the late spring of 2012. The purpose of the STEP is to expedite the construction of sanitary sewers and dramatically reduce the number of on-site sewage treatment facilities over the Spokane-Rathdrum Aquifer; and to satisfy regulations established by the State Departments of Heath and Ecology, Spokane County Health District and other regulatory agencies. The Sewer Projects Map found at the end of this chapter shows the areas where sewer has been extended as a part of the STEP program. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 32 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The industrial area in the far northeast corner of the City currently does not have public sewer service. To encourage economic development and job creation, Spokane Valley may consider projects that would extend public sewer to this area. New Wastewater Treatment Plant The Spokane County Water Reclamation Facility (SCRWRF) was completed in 2011. The new plant has a current capacity of 8 MGD. It is projected that this capacity will last until approximately 2030. Additional phases will likely be made in 4 MGD increments. The SCRWRF site can be expanded to 24 MGD to accommodate up to 50-years of anticipated future growth. Capital Projects and Financing Plan Wastewater Treatment Spokane County has programmed capital expenditures for its share of upgrading the City of Spokane Riverside Park Water Reclamation Facility(RPWRF) for the years 2011-2016, per the Six- Year Sewer Construction Capital Improvement Program. The upgrades must be undertaken to meet State and Federal effluent quality requirements. In 2011, Spokane County completed Phase 1 of the SCRWRF at a cost of$173 million. Phase 2 is estimated at$42 million (in 2011 dollars) for an additional 4 MGD of capacity. Spokane Valley adopts by reference the most current Spokane County Six-Year Sewer Construction Capital Improvement Program. Sewer Construction The Sewer Projects Map, as presented in the County's Six-Year Sewer Construction Capital Improvement Program, shows the location of the sewer projects planned in the Spokane Valley, both inside and outside the City boundary. Note that no specific new projects are currently planned, due to the completion of the Septic Tank Elimination Program in early 2012. Spokane Valley will continue to support the replacement of septic systems with public sewers and will consider the feasibility of extending public sewer to currently un-served commercial and industrial areas to encourage economic development and job creation. 4.4.14 Solid Waste In 1988, the intergovernmental agency known as the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System (System) was formed by interlocal agreement between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and all other cities and towns within the County. The System is responsible for implementing solid waste management plans, planning and developing specific waste management programs and updating solid waste plans for the entire County. The System is managed by the City of Spokane, which uses its structure to carry out the various solid waste management programs for our region. In Spokane Valley, solid waste services are provided by private haulers licensed by the Washington Utility and Transportation Commission (W.U.T.C.) through franchise agreements. Waste Management of Spokane provides residential and commercial garbage services and weekly curbside recycling collection; Sunshine Disposal provides only commercial services. At this time, Spokane Valley residents are allowed to self-haul their garbage to an appropriate dumping site. Inventory of Existing Facilities The Regional Solid Waste System includes a Waste to Energy facility located at 2900 South Geiger, and two recycling/transfer stations. One of the stations is located within Spokane Valley at 3941 N. Sullivan Road south of Trent and across from the Spokane Industrial Park; the other is located in north Spokane County at the intersection of Elk-Chattaroy Road and Highway 2. Landfills are necessary to provide disposal for solid waste that cannot be recycled or incinerated, or that exceeds the capacity of the WTE Facility. The Spokane County Regional Health District licenses six privately owned landfills in Spokane County. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 33 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Level of Service The minimum Regional Level of Service Standards requires solid waste services to meet all State and Federal regulations. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley is participating on the update of the Spokane County Waste Management Plan (SCWMP). The SCWMP update process will determine future needs for solid waste disposal. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities The updated Spokane County Solid Waste Management Plan will provide information on future regional solid waste facilities. Finance Plan The updated Spokane County Solid Waste Management plan will include a financing plan for future regional solid waste facilities. 4.4.15 Stormwater Facilities Stormwater runoff in Spokane Valley flows to a combination of public and private facilities. In developed areas, runoff infiltrates into the ground or flows to drywells in public road rights-of-way, drywells on private property and grassy swales with overflow drywells in easements on private property. There are advantages and disadvantages to relying on on-site facilities for all stormwater management. One advantage is that on-site facilities are typically constructed with private funds and can be integrated into the development as a green space amenity. However, on-site facilities are sometimes not well maintained. Their capacity may be diminished over time or they may fail entirely during large runoff events. On-site facilities may take up large portions of a development site, thereby reducing the effective density that can be accommodated in that area. In 2004, the Spokane Valley City Council created a stormwater utility to develop and maintain storm drainage systems on City owned land. To create revenues for the stormwater utility operations, the Council adopted an annual fee per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU). Residential ERUs are based on the number of single-family dwellings, while Commercial ERUs are based on the square footage of impervious surface associated with a business or commercial development. Inventory of Existing Facilities Spokane Valley's inventory of stormwater facilities, most of which are integral to the safe function of our street system, consists of about 7,200 drywells, 1900 bio-infiltration swales, 61 detention ponds, and one retention pond. Other facilities include curb inlets, bridge drains, and culverts, all of which require monitoring and maintenance. The retention pond, located at Dishman-Mica Road. and 32nd Ave., was constructed as a part of a road project and provides a disposal point for water flowing from Chester Creek. The inventory does not reflect stormwater structures located on private properties that do not serve the public street drainage system. Level of Service The Spokane County Board of Commissioners adopted new regional level of service standards for stormwater in 2004 as a part of the Countywide Planning Policies update: "Flooding of property outside designated drainage-ways, defacto drainage-ways, easements, flood zones or other approved drainage facilities, during the design precipitation or runoff event prescribed in the standards of the governing local agency or jurisdiction, shall be prevented within the reasonable probability afforded by such standards. Impact to buildings and accessory structures shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable by evaluating the effects of a100 year rain event, and implementing measures to ensure that the runoff attendant to such event is directed away from such buildings and accessory structures. Any stormwater Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 34 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan discharge to surface or ground waters must meet federal, state and local requirements for water quality treatment, stormwater runoff and infiltration. " The standards reflect current best practices that are established in adopted stormwater design guidelines. Spokane Valley follows said guidelines in reviewing and approving new development and is therefore in compliance with the regional LOS standards for stormwater runoff. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley will continue to use private, on-site treatment facilities for new development and will install drywells, swales and other facilities as needed for new street improvement projects. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Location and capacities of future facilities is dependent on the location and size of new development, future public street projects, and projects that will address current problem areas within the City. Future updates to this Capital Facilities Plan will incorporate capital programming for stormwater facilities. Capital Projects and Financing Plan The 2014-2019 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan was developed to give quidance and direction on which priority projects should be advanced for design and construction during the next six years. The document outlines the current goals of the Capital Program, the 2014-2019 plan development, immediate year proposed budget levels, project summary listing, and proposed project locations, descriptions, and planning level cost estimates. The City currently charges a $21 annual stormwater utility fee per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) to generate revenues for stormwater facility engineering, maintenance and administration. The stormwater fee is expected to generate $1.8 million annually. Table 4.34 provides -a summary of the Budget, and Table 4.35 provides a summary of the projects from 2014 throuqh 2019. Table 4.34 Storm Water Mana•ement Bud•et Summar of Revenues and Ex•enditures 2011 2012 2014 Actual Actual 2013 Bud•et Bud•et Revenues _ _ _ _ _ _ Stormwater Management fees 1,785,381 1,789,489 1,800,000 1,835,000 Investment Interest 2,833 _ 2,601 _ 1,800 _ 2,500 _ Miscellaneous 47,571 45,308 0 0 Nonrecurring Grant Proceeds 373,861 64,838 200,000 0 Total Revenues 2,209,646 1,902,236 2,001,800 1,837,500 Total Expenditures 1,633,017 _ 1,587,563 _ 2,707,991.0 _ 2,823,978.0 _ Revenues over(under) expenditures 576,629 314,673 (706,191) (986,478) Beginning fund balance2,697,333 1,991,142 Endinq fund balance _ _ _ _ 1,991,142 _ 1,004,664 _ Table 4.35 2014-02019 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan Summary Dollars are in $1 000's Note: A means the A.uifer Protection Area Fund and G means Grant Proiect 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Totals G A Annual Small Works Protects $600 $600 $300 $300 $300 $300 $2,400 x Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 35 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Retrofits w/Pavement Preservation Protects $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $1,800 x x Broadway, Havana to Fancher SD Retrofit $100 $1,200 $1,300 x x Havana-Yale Diversion $300 _ _ _ _ _ $300 x x Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion $250 _ _ _ _ _ $250 x x Strategic Property Acguisition(s) $250 $250 x - Chester Cr Wetland Overflow Improvements _ $200 _ _ _ - $200 x x SE Yardly Retrofits (Area SE of Fancher/Broadway? _ $100 $900 _ _ _ $1,000 x x Wellhead Protection Study and Pre-Design _ $80 _ _ _ - $80 x x Dishman-Mica Infiltration Facility Plan _ _ $40 _ _ - $40 x x Glenrose Surface Water Diversion $300 $300 x x Montgomery,Argonne to Mansfield Retrofit _ _ $115 $1,185 _ _ $1,300 x x Petroleum Transport Routes, Spill Protection _ _ $200 _ _ _ $200 x x NW Yardly Retrofits (Area NW of Fancher/Broadwayl _ - _ $100 $1,150 _ $1,250 x x Dishman-Mica, 16th to Appleway Retrofits _ - - $300 _ _ $300 x x NE Yardly Retrofits (Area East of Fancher &North of 1-90 _ _ _ $100 _ $900 $1,000 x x Veracrest Groundwater/Stormwat er Conveance _ _ _ _ $350 _ $350 _ x Argonne, 1-90 to Montgomery Retrofits _ _ _ _ _ $400 $400 x x Sloan's Addition (15th/Stanley) - - - - - $250 $250 _ x Totals $1,800 $2,480 $2,155 $2,285 $2,100 $2,150 $12,970 Transportation Facilities Inventory of Existing Facilities This section of the Capital Facilities Plan includes transportation facilities within Spokane Valley, including streets, bridges, pathways and sidewalks. Street maintenance is not included as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan. Spokane Valley is responsible for about 455 miles of public roads, including 51 miles of Urban Principal Arterials, 61 miles of Urban Minor Arterials, 44 miles of Urban Collectors, and 298.85 miles of Local Access Streets. Table 4.36 provides a list of all arterial intersections within Spokane Valley. Level of Service Spokane Valley uses arterial intersection delay as its transportation level of service (LOS). This LOS is based on travel delay and is expressed as letters "A"through "F", with "A" being the highest Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 36 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan or best travel condition and "F" being the lowest or worst condition. The lowest acceptable LOS for signalized arterial intersections is set at "D"; the lowest acceptable LOS for un-signalized arterial intersections is set at "E". This LOS standard conforms to the latest edition of the Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, published by the Transportation Research Board. Table 4.36 provides a six and twenty year level of service analysis for all arterial intersections in Spokane Valley. The analysis uses the regional transportation model prepared and maintained by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council as its basis for forecasting future intersection volumes. Levels of service calculations follow Highway Capacity Manual methodologies. The last column in the table cross-references to capital projects listed in Table 4.38. These projects will address capacity deficiencies at the corresponding intersection. Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier 4th/Adams 20C 41 way stop 4th/Bowdish 2-047 2 way stop 4th/Carnahan EST 2008 2 way stop 4th/Dishman Mica EST 2008 2 way stop 4th/Evergreen 2006 2 way stop 4th/Farr EST 2008 2 way stop 4th/McDonald 2007 2 way stop 4th/Park 2008 2 way stop 4th/SR 27 EST 2008 2 way stop 4th/Sullivan 2007 Si�aat 4th/Thierman 2007 4 way stop 4th/University 2008 S44a1 8th/Adams 200-7 4 way stop - - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 37 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier 8th/Barker 2 way step B B C - - 8th/Bettman EST 2008 2 way stop - - Bowdich 8th/Bowdich EST 2008 2 way stop 0 TWLTL from 8th 32nd 8th/Carnahan 2005 /l way stop - - 8th/Dishman Mica 2008 S4 a4 - 8th/Evergreen 2006 S+g44a4 - 8th/Farr 2007 2 way stop 8th/McDonald 2007 2 way stop 8th/Park 2008 2 way stop 8th/SR 27 2001 2 way stop 8th/Sullivan 20&7 Signal 8th/Thierman EST 2008 2 way stop 8th/Univercity 2008 S+ a4 16th/Adams 2008 /I way stop 16th/Bowdich 2008 /I way stop 16th/Carnahan EST 2008 2 way stop 16th/Dishman Mica 2001 Sig-aa4 B - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 38 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier 16th/Evergreen a{. A A A - - 16th/McDonald A - - 16th/Pinco S TBD"` Ek 16th!SR 27 TBD"` 16th/Sullivan 16th/University - 24th/Adams - 24th/Blakc EST 3 - Bowdich 24th/Bowdich 200-7 C TWLTL from 8th 32nd Evergreen 24th/Evergreen 2008 4 \n/a; A TWLTL from 16th 32nd 24th/McDonald EST 2008 2 way stop - - 24th/Pines EST 2008 2 way stop 24th/SR 27 200 2 way stop 24th/Sullivan 2008 Signal B 24th/University EST 2008 2 way stop - - 32nd/Bowdich 2095 Signal B B - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 39 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier 32nd/Dishman Mica B S B - - 32nd/Evergreen € - 32nd/Pines - - 32nd/SR 27 - 32nd/University 44th/Schafer EST 2008 4 way stop Appleway /Barker 2005 S Appleway /Dishman Mica 2008 S4a4 Appleway /Farr 2008 Sigaat Appleway /Park 2008 Sigaa4 Appleway /Thierman 2005 S4gaa4 Appleway /University 2008 Sigaa4 Appleway /Vista 2008 Signa4 Blake/SR 27 EST 2008 2 way stop - Broadway/Adams 2005 2 way stop - - Broadway/Argonnc 2008 Signa4 - - Broadway/Barker EST 2008 2 way stop - Broadway/Bowdish 2-095 Signal A - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 40 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Broadway/Conklin 2 way atm G - € - - Broadway/Evergreen - - Broadway/Fancher - - Broadway/Farr - - Roundabout Broadway/Flora B Moore to Flora Broadway/Heacox - - Broadway/McDonald 2005 Signal - Broadway/Mullan 2008 Signal Broadway/Park 2008 Si-g-nal Broadway/Pincs 2009 Sig-na4 Broadway/Sullivan 2007 S4g+aa4 Broadway/University 2007 Saa4 Broadway/Victa 2007 Sg+aa4 Broadway/Yardley 2006 2 way stop Buckeye/Park EST 2008 2 way stop Buckeye/Vista EST 2008 2 way stop - - Dishman Mica/Bowdish 2405 Signal B - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 41 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Euclid/Park 2 way atop B S B - - Euclid/Sullivan - - Euclid West/Barker 200'1 - - Euclid East/Barker EST 2008 2 way stop - Euclid West/Flora 2007 2 way stop Euclid East/Flora 2007 2 way stop Indiana/Evergreen 2000 Signal Indiana/Mirabeau 2009 Signal I K..e ;e 2008 Signal Knox/Vista EST 2008 2 way stop - Mansfield/Mirabeau 2000 2 way stop - Mansfield/Pines 2008 Signal - - Mirabcau/Pines 2008 2 way stop B Install Signal Mission/Adams 2005 2 way stop B - - Mission!orgonne 2005 Signal B - - Mission/Bowdish 2005 2 way stop - - Roundabout Mission/Flora 2000 2 way stop A Indiana Extension Mission/McDonald 2096 Sig-nal A - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 42 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Mission/Mis-ion Conn. 2 way atop S - C - - Mission/Mullan - - Park Road Mission/Park Broadway Indiana Mis.,ion/Pines Mission/Sullivan - Mission/Thierman EST 2008 2 way stop - - Mission/University 2008 2 way stop - - Mission Conn./Evergreen 2007 Sigaal - - Montgomcry/Argonnc 2008 Sigaa4 D Argonne 190 to Trent Montgomery/Mansfield 2008 4135 - Montgomery/University 2007 2 way stop - Rutter/Park 2003 2 way stop - EST 2008 4 way stop Saltese/Sullivan 2008 2 way stop Schafer/Dishman Mica 2008 Signal Sprague/Adams 2008 Sig-nal Sprague/Appleway 2-096 Sig-Rat S - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 43 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Sprague/Argonne al. B S B - - Sprague/Barker C Install Signal Sprague/Bowdish - Sprague/Conklin 2049 Sprague/Evergreen 2006 Signal Sprague/Fancher 2007 Signal Sprague/Farr 2008 Signal Sprague/Flora 2005 Sial Sprague/190 WB On Ramp EST 2008 Signal Sprague/McDonald 2009 Signal Sprague/Mullan 2008 Signal Sprague/Park 2008 Signal Sprague/Pinco 2008 Sigaa4 Sprague/Progrccs 2008 Signal - Sprague/Sullivan 2008 Signal - Sprague/Thierman 2005 Signal - - Sprague/University 2098 Signa4 Sprague/Vista 2008 Signal A - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 44 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Thorpe/Dishman Mien B B B - - Thorpe/Madison - - Tren4ie - - Trent/Barker F/B West Trent TWLTL Trent/Evergreen - - BTV Trent/Flora Eliminate NB Movement Trent/McDonald - BTV Trent/Park Reconfigure Intersection Trent/Pines 200 Trent/Progress 2007 2 way stop Trent/Sullivan N Ramp 2007 Bigaa4 Trent/Sullivan S Ramp 2007 Sigaa4 - - BTV Trent/University 2008 2 way stop Eliminate Intersection Trent/Vista 2008 Sig-na4 - - Wellesley/Evergreen 2005 4 way stop - Wellesley/McDonald 2009 4 way stop - Wellesley/Progress 2007 4 way stop q A Bigelow Gulch Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 45 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Bigelow Wellesley/Sullivan 1l way stop C B C C Gulch Install Broadway/Thierman 2009 A - Broadway/190 WB Ramp 200-9 Broadway/190 EB Ramp 2009 Argonne/190 WB Ramp 2008 Signal B Argonne/190 EB Ramp 2008 Signal Mullan/190 WB Ramp 2008 Signal Mullan/190 EB Ramp 2008 Signal Indiana/Pines 2008 Signal Pines/190 EB Ramp 2008 Signal Evergreen/190 WB Ramp 2899 Signal Evergreen/190 EB Ramp 200-9 Signal Indiana/Sullivan 2007 Signal - Sullivan/190 WB Ramp 2006 Signal B - - Sullivan/190 EB Ramp 2006 Signal - - Indiana/190 WB Ramp 2-006 Signal - Barker/190 WB Ramp EST 2008 Signal - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 46 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2008 2014 2014 2030 2030 2010-2015 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Barker!190 ER Raw... EST 2008 Si-gna4 0 - Note: See Table x.38 fora listing of capital improvement projects. - *Includes volumes from Bigelow Gulch Road project - - - - **Intersection may be impactcd by Applcway Extcnsion projcct, but analysis was not complctcd duo to uncertainty of ROW - - - - - - *""Improvement options are still under evaluation - - BTV: Bridging the Valley - - Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 20182040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Proiect LOS LOS Identifier 4th/Adams 2007 4-way stop A A - A - - 4th/Bowdish 2012 2-way stop C D - D - - 4th/Carnahan 2012 2-way stop A A - B - - 4`h/Conklin 2005 2-way stop B B B 4th/Dishman Mica EST-2012 2-way stop C D - E - - 4th/Evergreen 2006 2-way stop C C - D - - 4th/Farr-North 2008 2-way stop A A - B - - 4th/Farr-South 2008 2-way stop A A - A - 4th/McDonald 2007 2-way stop C C - E - - 4th/Park 2008 2-way stop B B - C - - 4th/SR 27 EST-2012 2-way stop C C - C - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 47 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated ojec LOS LOS IdePrntifiet r 4th/Sullivan 2011 Signal A A - B - - 4th/Thierman 2007 4-way stop A B - C - - 4th/University 2008 Signal A A - A - - 8th/Adams 2007 4-way stop A A - A - - 8th/Barker 2012 2-way stop B B - D - - 8th/Bettman 2012 2-way stop B B - C - - 8th/Bowdish 2012 2-way stop C C C 8th/Carnahan 2012 4-way stop B B - F - - 8th/Dishman Mica 2008 Signal B B - B - - 8th/Evergreen 2011 Signal A A - A - - 8th/Farr 2007 2-way stop B B - C - - 8th/McDonald 2007 2-way stop C C - F - - 8th/Park 2010 2-way stop B B _ C _ _ 8th/SR 27 2011 2-way stop B C _ C _ _ 8th/Sullivan 2007 Signal B B _ C _ _ 8th/Thierman 2010 2-way stop B C _ E _ _ 8th/University 2008 Signal A A _ B _ _ 16th/Adams 2008 4-way stop A A _ B _ _ Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 48 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier 16th/Bowdish 2008 4-way stop D D F 16th/Carnahan EST-2012 2-way stop B C - F - - 16th/Dishman Mica 2004 Signal B B - B - - 16th/Evergreen 2011 Signal A A - A - - 16th/McDonald 2008 4-way stop B B _ B _ _ 16th/Pines 2012 2-way stop F F F 16th/Saltese EST-2012 2-way stop B B _ B _ _ 16th/SR 27 2012 Signal C C D 16th/Sullivan 2012 Signal B B _ B _ _ 16th/University 2009 Signal B B _ C - _ 24th/Adams 2007 4-way stop A A - A - - 24th/Blake EST-2012 4-way stop A A - A - - 24th/Bowdish 2007 2-way stop C C C 24th/Evergreen 2008 4-way stop B B B 24th/McDonald EST-2012 2-way stop A B - B - - 24th/Pines 2012 2-way stop B B - C - - 24th/SR 27 2012 2-way stop B B E _ _ 24th/Sullivan 2012 Signal B C _ C _ _ Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 49 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier 24th/University EST-2012 2-way stop A A _ A _ _ 32nd/Bowdish 2011 Signal B B B - 32nd/Dishman Mica EST-2012 2-way stop B B _ C - - 32nd/Evergreen 2008 2-way stop B B C - 32nd/Pines 2009 Signal B B _ C - - 32nd/SR 27 2012 Signal C C C - - 32nd/University 2011 Signal A A _ B - - 44th/Schafer EST-2012 4-way stop A A _ A - - Appleway /Barker 2012 Signal C C _ D _ _ Appleway /Dishman Mica 2009 Signal B B _ B _ _ Appleway /Farr 2009 Signal A A _ A _ _ Appleway /Park 2010 Signal B B _ D _ _ Appleway /Thierman 2011 Signal C D _ F _ _ Appleway /University 2008 Signal B B _ B _ Appleway /Vista 2009 Signal A A _ A _ _ Blake/SR 27 2012 2-way stop B C _ D _ _ Broadway/Adams 2009 2-way stop C C _ C _ _ Broadway/Argonne 2010 Signal B B _ C _ _ Broadway/Barker 2012 2-way stop C C _ E _ _ Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 50 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated ojec LOS LOS IdePrntifiet r Broadway/Bowdish 2010 Signal A A - A - - Broadway/Conklin 2012 2-way stop B C - C - - Broadway/Evergreen 2005 Signal C C - D - - Broadway/Fancher 2009 Signal D E - F - - Broadway/Farr 2012 2-way stop C C - C - - Broadway/Flora 2008 RDB A A C Broadway/Heacox 2009 2-way stop E F _ F _ _ Broadway/McDonald 2012 Signal A A _ A _ _ Broadway/Mullan 2010 Signal B B _ C _ _ Broadway/Park 2008 Signal D D F Broadway/Pines 2010 Signal C C _ D _ _ Broadway/Sullivan 2012 Signal C C _ C _ _ Broadway/University 2010 Signal A A _ B _ _ Broadway/Vista 2007 Signal A A _ A _ _ Broadway/Yardley 2006 2-way stop B B _ D _ _ Buckeye/Park EST-2012 2-way stop A B _ B _ _ Buckeye/Vista EST-2012 2-way stop B B - B - - Dishman Mica/Bowdish 2011 Signal B B - B - - Euclid/Park 2005 2-way stop B B - B - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 51 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated ojec LOS LOS IdePrntifiet r Euclid/Sullivan 2010 4-way stop C C _ C _ _ Euclid-West/Barker 2011 2-way stop B B _ C - - Euclid-East/Barker 2011 2-way stop B B _ D - - Euclid-West/Flora 2007 2-way stop B B _ C - - Euclid-East/Flora 2007 2-way stop B B _ C - - Indiana/Evergreen 2009 Signal B B _ B - - Indiana/Mirabeau 2009 Signal A A _ A - - Knox/Argonne 2008 Signal C C _ C _ _ Knox/Vista EST-2012 2-way stop B B _ B _ _ Mansfield/Mirabeau 2009 2-way stop C C _ C _ _ Mansfield/Pines 2012 Signal C B _ D _ _ Mirabeau/Pines 2012 2-way stop F F B F B Install Signal Mission/Adams 2005 2-way stop B B _ B _ _ Mission/Argonne 2005 Signal B B _ C _ _ Mission/Bowdish 2012 2-way stop C C _ E _ _ Mission/Flora 2009 RDB A A F Mission/McDonald 2011 Signal A A _ A - _ Mission/Mission Conn. 2008 2-way stop B B _ B _ _ Mission/Mullan 2005 Signal B B _ B _ _ Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 52 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated ojec LOS LOS IdePrntifiet r Park Road Mission/Park 2006 Signal B C D Broadway- Indiana Mission/Pines 2007 Signal D D _ E _ - Mission/Sullivan 2012 Signal B B _ B _ - Mission/Thierman 2012 2-way stop A A _ B _ - Mission/University 2008 2-way stop C D _ F _ _ Mission Conn./Evergreen 2007 Signal A A _ A _ _ Montgomery/Argonne 2008 Signal D D E Montgomery/Mansfield 2011 RDB A A _ A _ _ Montgomery/University 2008 2-way stop C C _ F - _ Rutter/Park 2003 2-way stop B B _ B - _ Saltese/McDonald 2012 4-way stop A A _ A - _ Saltese/Sullivan 2008 2-way stop C F F Install Signal Schafer/Dishman Mica 2008 Signal B B _ D _ _ Sprague/Adams 2011 Signal B B _ B _ _ Sprague/Appleway 2006 Signal B B _ B _ _ Sprague/Argonne 2009 Signal B B _ B _ _ Install Signal Sprague/Barker 2012 4-way stop B F B F C or Roundabout Sprague/Bowdish 2008 Signal C C _ C _ Sprague/Conklin 20012 Signal A B _ B _ _ Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 53 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated ojec LOS LOS IdePrntifiet r Sprague/Evergreen 2011 Signal C C - C - Sprague/Fancher 2009 Signal C D - D - - Sprague/Farr 2009 Signal A A - A - - Sprague/Flora 2005 Signal B B - C - - Sprague/1-90 WB On Ramp EST-2012 Signal B C - C - - Sprague/McDonald 2009 Signal C C - C - Sprague/Mullan 2009 Signal B B _ B - - Sprague/Park 2010 Signal A A _ B - - Sprague/Pines 2008 Signal D D _ E _ Sprague/Progress 2011 Signal A A _ B _ _ Sprague/Sullivan 2012 Signal D D _ E _ _ Sprague/Thierman 2011 Signal B B _ B _ _ Sprague/University 2008 Signal C C - C - Sprague/Vista 2009 Signal A A - A - - Thorpe/Dishman Mica 2012 2-way stop A A - B - - Thorpe/Madison 2007 2-way stop A B - B - - Trent/Argonne 2008 Signal D D - D - - Trent/Barker 2007 2-way stop D E F - West Trent TWLTL Trent/Evergreen 2008 Signal B B _ C _ - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 54 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated ojec LOS LOS IdePrntifiet r BTV- Trent/Flora 2012 2-way stop C C F Eliminate NB Movement Trent/McDonald 2007 2-way stop D E - F - - BTV- Trent/Park 2008 Signal B B D Reconfigure Intersection Trent/Pines 2010 Signal C C - F - - Trent/Progress 2007 2-way stop C C - D - - Trent/Sullivan-N Ramp 2013 Signal A A - A - - Trent/Sullivan-S Ramp 2013 Signal A A - A - - BTV- Trent/University 2008 2-way stop B B C Eliminate Intersection Trent/Vista 2008 Signal B B - B - - Wellesley/Evergreen 2011 4-way stop B B - C - - Wellesley/McDonald 2009 2-way stop D D - F - - Wellesley/Progress 2013 4-way stop C D F Bigelow Gulch Bigelow Wellesley/Sullivan 2011 4-way stop E F F Gulch Install Signal State Controlled Intersections Broadway/Thierman 2009 Signal A B - A - - Broadway/1-90 WB Ramp 2009 Signal A B - A - - Broadway/1-90 EB Ramp 2009 Signal B C - B - - Argonne/1-90 WB Ramp 2008 Signal C C - C - - Argonne/1-90 EB Ramp 2008 Signal B B - B - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 55 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis 2018 2040 2013-2019 2012 2018 2040 Intersection Count Control LOS LOS Mitigated LOS Mitigated Project LOS LOS Identifier Mullan/1-90 WB Ramp 2008 Signal B B _ E _ _ Mullan/1-90 EB Ramp 2008 Signal C C _ D - - Indiana/Pines 2008 Signal D E _ F _ Indiana e/o Pines/1-90 WB 2010 Signal C A D Ramp - Pines/1-90 EB Ramp 2008 Signal D D _ F _ _ Evergreen/1-90 WB Ramp 2009 Signal C B _ C _ _ Evergreen/1-90 EB Ramp 2009 Signal B B _ B - _ Indiana/Sullivan 2011 Signal D E _ F _ _ Sullivan/1-90 WB Ramp 2011 Signal B B _ C _ - WSDOT Sullivan/1-90 EB Ramp 2012 Signal F F F planned low- cost safety Indiana e/o Sullivan/1-90 WB 2012 Signal B B B Ramp WSDOT Barker/1-90 WB Ramp 2012 Signal A A A Barker - Interchange _ WSDOT Barker/1-90 EB Ramp 2012 Signal A B B Barker Interchange BTV: Bridging the Valley _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Regional Level of Service The Countywide Planning Policies require that LOS standards be adopted in accordance with the regional minimum level of service standards set by the Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials. The Steering Committee approved the use of corridor travel time for use in establishing the regional transportation system. The Spokane Regional Transportation Council is determining annual average corridor travel time through a travel time study. This study is still in progress and corridor travel time Level of Service standards will be adopted upon its completion. Uses of Level of Service Standards As measures of transportation effectiveness, LOS standards can help jurisdictions identify where and when transportation improvements are needed, and when development or growth will affect Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 56 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan system operation. Level of service provides a standard below which a transportation facility or system is not considered adequate. Level of service standards can be used to evaluate the impact of proposed developments on the surrounding road system. They can also be used to identify problems, suggest remedial actions and apportion costs between public and private sources. LOS standards are a cornerstone in the development of equitable traffic impact fee systems, which makes development pay some of the costs for improvements to the transportation infrastructure. The Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) performed traffic modeling for the urban area, considering future population growth and distribution. This model examines the performance of the entire urban transportation system. Improvements to provide for the increased traffic volumes shown by the model at the adopted level of service standards, are included in this plan. More information on the transportation modeling based on future land use assumptions is contained in Chapter 3, Transportation. Relationship to Concurrency Management Concurrency involves matching public facilities and new development. The concept of concurrency predates the Growth Management Act for some public facilities, specifically through SEPA mitigation requirements. The GMA extends concurrency to transportation facilities by requiring that new development be served by adequate roads and public transportation service, and that development is not permitted to cause these transportation facilities to operate below level of service standards that are adopted by local governments in their comprehensive plans. "Adequate capacity refers to the maintenance of concurrency" (WAC 365-195-835). State Transportation Facilities The Growth Management Act requires local jurisdictions to include inventory and Level of Service information for state transportation facilities in their Comprehensive Plans. State facilities are divided into two categories: Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS), and Regionally Significant Highways (non-HSS). The Growth Management Act requires non-HSS facilities to be subject to concurrency. Interstate-90 (1-90) is designated a HSS and is not subject to concurrency. SR-27 (Pines Road)and SR-290 (Trent Avenue) are designated non-HSS and are subject to concurrency. State Transportation Level of Service The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) requires state transportation facilities in urban areas (inside the UGA) to maintain a minimum Level of Service standard "D." In rural areas (outside the UGA), the minimum LOS standard is "C." Those areas lying outside the UGA that may have urban characteristics can be evaluated by the WSDOT in conjunction with the City on a case-by-case basis to determine which standard is the most appropriate fit. Intergovernmental Coordination Transportation plans were distributed for comment to all jurisdictions that may be impacted by, or impact, Spokane Valley's transportation system, including adjacent towns and cities, Spokane County, Spokane Transit Authority, Washington State DOT, and Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC). SRTC has overall responsibility for intergovernmental coordination of transportation plans. Each jurisdiction in the region must submit transportation plans to SRTC for inclusion in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan. SRTC responsibilities include: 1) Certifying the transportation elements of comprehensive plans adopted by the County, cities and towns in the region for consistency with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan; 2) Maintaining consistency between infrastructure plans and land use development plans, and 3) Reviewing LOS thresholds for transportation facilities in the Spokane Region. SRTC is also responsible for monitoring and evaluating the performance of regional transportation facilities as affected by land use and transportation improvement decisions. Concurrency management is linked to the planning process. Any amendments to the comprehensive plans require a concurrency management system analysis and must meet thresholds before their Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 57 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan adoption. SRTC will annually assess the regional transportation system with respect to regional concurrency. Capital Facilities Projects and Financing Capital Projects Table 4.38 contains a complete list of transportation related capital projects. The City updates the six year TIP throughout the year as project priorities and funding changes. This Plan adopts by reference any updates to the TIP occurring between Plan update cycles. The current TIP is available for viewing online at www.spokanevalley.org. These projects address capacity issues at intersections and safety improvements. Following is a discussion of potential funding sources. Funding Sources Funding for the operation and expansion of the City's transportation system falls into several categories, which include federal, state and city funds. Some sources consist of reliable annual funds while others are periodic, such as grants. The use, availability and applicability of these various sources are not always at the discretion of the City. Spokane Valley will develop a track record with funding agencies as time goes on, which will help make to make more reliable funding assumptions. A summary of expected federal, state and local funding sources for the City's six year Capital Improvement Program is shown in Table 4.39. The following is a summary of transportation funding options. Federal Assistance These funds are authorized under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (SAFETEA-21) and are administered by the Federal Highway Administration through Washington State Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Planning Organization (Spokane Regional Transportation Council). Federal funding programs include Bridge Replacement (BR), Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) and the Surface Transportation Program (STP). State Assistance The Washington State Transportation Improvement Board administers State transportation programs, including the Urban Corridor Program (UCP), the Urban Arterial Program (UAP), and the Sidewalk Program (SP). City Funds Spokane Valley contributes revenues from the General Fund and the Real Estate Excise Tax funds for transportation projects. The City also receives State Motor Fuel Tax and Restricted State Fuel Tax. Pavement Preservation Fund The Pavement Preservation Fund was created during the 2011 Budget development process for the purpose of setting money aside for future street capital improvement projects. In the 2012 budget, the City opted to transfer 100% of the General Fund unreserved fund balance in excess of$26,000,000 to the Pavement Preservation Fund. In the 2013 budget, the City committed to financing pavement preservation at a level equivalent to 6% of 2013 General Fund. Financing pavement preservation at an amount equivalent to 6% of General Fund expenditures through the aforementioned plan is sustainable for approximately 4 years. Beyond that point, we anticipate the financial commitment to pavement preservation is sustainable at an annual level of no less than $1,437,857. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 58 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Because this is a Capital Project Fund whose sole purpose is to provide for Pavement Preservation projects, any money not expended in a given year will remain in the fund and will be available for reappropriation in subsequent years. Revenues and expenditures for the Pavement Preservation Program are shown in Table 4.37. Table 4.37 Pavement Preservation Revenues and Expenditurct-,. - 2013 2-044 2015 2046 2017 2048 Revenuc.s - - - - - General Fund $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 Street Fund $282,000 $282,000 $282,000. $282,000 $282,000 $282,000 Civic Facility Replacement Fend $616,281 $616,281 $616,281 $551,996 $0 $0 REET 1 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 REET 2 $450,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 Total-Revenues $2,051,111 $2,051,111 $2,051,111 $1,992,853 $1,137,857 $1,137,857 Total Expen-clittires $2,051,111 $2,051,111 $2,051,111 $1,992,853 $1,137,857 $1,137,857 Fund Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Table 4.37 Pavement Preservation Revenues and Expenditures 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Revenues General Fund $888,823 $888,823 $888,823 $888,823 $888,823 $888,823 Street Fund 282 000 282 000 282 000 52n0()0 52n0()0 52n0(10 Civic Facility Replacement Fund $616,284 $616,284 $554,996 �0 �0 �0 REET 1 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 REET 2 5L18, 5L18, 472 184 z= '5 jE 5L18, 472 184,6 Grants $2,763,272 $971,032 �0 �0 �0 �0 Total Revenues $4,919,323 $3,127,083 $2,094,763 $1,539,767 $1,539,767 $1,539,767 Total Expenditures $3,595,521 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 Beginning Fund Balance $264,354 $1,588,156 $2,559,188 $2,497,900 $1,881,616 $1,265,332 Fund Balance $1,588,156 $2,559,188 $2,497,900 $1,881,616 $1,265,332 $649,048 2013 (dollar_,,,T4housands) Primary City Total e em 1t: Project Name Source Amount Amount 4 Argonne Road 190 to Trent CIMAG $420 $82 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 59 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 2013 (dollars in thousands) 2 Mission Ave. Flora Rd.to Barker Rd. (PE/RW) STP(U) S89 $66541 3 Sidewalk Infill Program CMAQ $65 $3211 4 Sullivan Road Wcet Bridgc BR $242 $1,208 5 211th Ave Sidewalk Adams to Sullivan City $432 $258 6 Mansfield Ave Connection Pines(SR 27)to 200 ft East of Houk Rd I ISD $61 $1,5111 Other Sidewalk&Transit Stop Accessibility Project FTA $22 $414 3 Spokane Valley Millwood Trail SCC to Evergreen Rd(PE) STP(E) $0 $553 4 Sullivan Rd/UPRR Overpass Bridge Resurfacing Project BR $92 $1161 40 University Rd/I 90 Overpass Study CMAQ $26 $188 Other 44 Wellesley/Adams Sidewalk Project Stats $2 $57-0 1.2 Park Road #2 Broadway to Indiana(RW&CN) STP(U) $20 $450 Other 43 Park Road#1 Sidewalk Project Sinto Ave.to Indiana Ave. Statc $2 $44 Other 44 Park Road#2 Sidewalk Project Marietta Ave.to Buckeye Ave. Statc $4 $23 45 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Fancher to Dollar City $249 $249 46 -- --- _ - City $500 $500 47 Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection(RW/CN) STP(U) $214 $1,562 48 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study 190 to Wellesley STP(U) $27 $200 2013 Totals: $1,861 $9,494 241-4 (dollars in thousands) Prim mary City Total Item if Pr�^t Name Sourcemoununtmoun��.,t 4 Sullivan Road Wcst Bridgc Other Fed $24-s $8,1111Q 42 Park Road #2 Broadway to Indiana(RW&CN) STP(U) $388 $2,877 Other 43 Park Road#1 Sidewalk Project Sinto Ave.to Indiana Ave. Statc $14 $385 Other 44 Park Road#2 Sidewalk Project Marietta Ave.to Buckeye Ave. Stats $6 $420 44 Argonne Road Resurfacing Sprague to Broadway City $295 $295 20 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Concrete Intersections(CN Only) STP(U) $235 $2,11G 24 Euclid Ave Rcconctruction Flora to E City Limit° City $1,61Q $1,61G 22 Evergreen Road Resurfacing Sprague to Mission City $995 $995 23 Greenacres Trail Sullivan to E City Limits(RW&CN) STP(E) $0 $1,095 24 Mission Ave. Flora Rd.to Barker Rd. (CN) UAP $683 $3,1116 2.5 Mullan Road Resurfacing Dishman Mica to Broadway City $245 $245 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 60 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan - --- - - CTS $0 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Herald to University City $/105 - - STP(U) $32 2014 Totals: $5,226 2015 (dllars in thousands) Primary City Total Item it oro, ,^*Name Source Amount Amount 4 Sullivan Road West Bridge Other Fed $21-a $8,ddO 28 Spokane Valley Millwood Trail SCC to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) STP(E) $0 $2,1/10 28 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 1 Marietta to Euclid STP(U) $038 $2,'185 25 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) $0 $100 30 Dishman Mica Resurfacing Sands to Thorpe City $353 $350 34 Euclid Ave Reconstruction W end to Sullivan City $555 $555 32 Flora Road Reconstruction Euclid to Trent City $1,395 $1,395 33 Madison Road Rcconstruction ilOth to Thorpc City $1,550 $1,550 34 Mission Ave Resurfacing Argonne to Herald City $/170 $/170 35 Mullan Road Resurfacing Broadway to Mission City $3-14 $314 36 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Argonne to Herald STP(U) $96 $710 3.; Sullivan Road Resurfacing Broadway to Mission STP(U) $38 $280 2015 Totals: $5,317 $1-€1,749 20-1-6 (dollars in thousands) Primary City Total Item if Projest-":ame Source Amount Amount 25 Spokane Valley Millwood Trail SCC to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) STP(E) $0 $2,1/10 25 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) $0 $100 33 Appleway Blvd Resurfacing Vista to Dishman Mica City $1,155 $1,155 30 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement 190 to Montgomery City $362 $362 40 . ..._. ,. . _ _ -_ City $280 $280 41- Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing Thorpe to S City Limit City $210 $210 42 Euclid Ave Reconstruction Sullivan to Marietta STP(U) $285 $2,110 LI0 - - = City $525 $525 44 - City $'185 $d85 45 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Vista to Argonne STP(U) $90 $670 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 61 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan - - _ I $-143 $810 2016 Totals: $3,505 $8,877 2017 (dollars in thousands) Prim -ary City Total Item# Source Amount o. , ,t 2-9 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) $0 $1,009 99 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement 190 to Montgomery City $2,776 $2,776 47 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation(PE&RW Only) Other Fed $404 $750 48 Euclid Ave Reconstruction Marictta to Flora City $1,135 $1435 49 Evergreen Road Resurfacing 190 to Indiana City $280 $280 .0 Farr Road Reconstruction Appleway to 1th City $250 $250 51 Sprague/Fancher Concrete Intersection STP(U) $242 $1,572 52 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Flora to Corbin STP(U) $58 $130 .53 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Park to Vista STP(U) $89 $595 54 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Sullivan to Conklin STP(U) $94 $695 .55 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 Euclid to Kiernan STP(U) $31 $291 2017 Totals: $5,325 $10,071 2048 (dollars in thousands) Primary City Total Item it Project Name Source Amount Amount 29 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) $0 $1,000 47 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation(PE&RW Only) Other Fed $256 $1,899 55 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 Euclid to Kiernan STP(U) $111 $3,069 66 Sprague/Argonne Mullan Concrctc Intersections. City $2,312 $2,312 2018 Totals: $3,012 $8,31-9 Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2014 (dollars in thousands) Primary ay Total Item# Project Name Source Amount Amount 1 Argonne Road-190 to Trent CMAQ $79 $582 2 Mission Ave.-Flora Rd.to Barker Rd. (PE/RW) STP(U) $74 $548 3 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail-SCC to Evergreen Rd(PE) STP(E) 511 $440 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 62 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 4 Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection(PE) STP(U) 57 52 5 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR $893 $8,440 6 Mansfield Ave Connection-Pines(SR-27)to 200-ft East of Houk Rd UCP $13 $951 7 Adams St Resurfacing Proiect-4th to Sprague CDBG 27 $195 8 Citywide Traffic Sign Proiect Other Fed 50 $100 9 SR-27 Pines &Grace Ave. Intersection Safet Other Fed '.0 '.523 10 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study-1-90 to Wellesley STP(U) $11 $80 11 Appleway Trail Phase 2-University to Evergreen(RW&CN) CMAQ $343 $2,542 12 Park Road-#2-Broadway to Indiana(RW&CN) CMAQ 54 26 13 Sidewalk Infill Program-Phase 3 CMAQ 512 5E.7 14 Sprague Ave Resurfacing-Argonne to Herald STP(U) $98 $725 15 Sprague Ave Resurfacing-Vista to Argonne STP(U) $91 $670 16 2014 Street Preservation Project City $2,000 $2,000 2014 Totals: $3,652 $17,961 Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2015 (dollars in thousands) Primary Cy Total Item# Project Name Source Amount Amount 5 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR $893 $8,440 12 ITS Infill Project, Phase 1 CMAQ $41 $302 13 Sidewalk Infill Program-Phase 3 CMAQ 57 53 17 Appleway Trail Phase 3-Evergreen to Corbin CMAQ 29 $214 18 As elewa Trail Phase 4-Universit Rd.To Balfour Park TA '.68 '.500 19 Bowdish Sidewalk-8th to 12th SRTS $14 $97 20 Mission Ave.-Flora Rd.to Barker Rd. (CN) UAP $683 $3,416 21 Park Road#1 Sidewalk Proiect-Sinto Ave.to Indiana Ave. SRTS 55 5,10 22 Sullivan Corridor ITS-Indiana to Trent(SR 290) CMAQ14 $105 23 Sullivan Road Resurfacin. -Broadwa to Mission STP U '.4 '.30 24 Sullivan Road Resurfacing-Sprague to Broadway STP(U) $113 $840 25 2015 Street Preservation Project City $2,000 $2,000 2015 Totals: $3,871 $16,037 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 63 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2016 (dollars in thousands) Primary Cy Total Item# Project Name Source Amount Amount 13 Sidewalk Infill Program-Phase 3 CMAQ $70 $515 17 Appleway Trail Phase 3-Evergreen to Corbin CMAQ $386 $2,860 18 Appleway Trail Phase 4-University Rd.to Balfour Park TA 94 $700 19 Bowdish Sidewalk-8th to 12th SRTS § I3 $504 21 Park Road#1 Sidewalk Pro.ect-Sinto Ave.to Indiana Ave. SRTS '.56 '.416 22 Sullivan Corridor ITS-Indiana to Trent(SR 290) CMAQ $109 $809 26 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation(PE&RW Only) Other Fed $101 $750 27 Broadway Improvement Proiect-Flora to Barker UAP $309 $1,543 28 2016 Street Preservation Proiect City $2,000 $2,000 2016 Totals: $3,193 $10,097 Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2017 (dollars in thousands) Primary City Total Item# Project Name Source Amount Amount 26 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation(PE&RW Only) Other Fed $256 $1,899 27 Broadway Improvement Proiect-Flora to Barker UAP $833 $4,163 29 Barker Rd-Spokane River to Euclid UAP '.81 '.403 30 Broadway @-Argonne/Mullan Concrete Intersection(CN Only) STP(U) $285 $2,110 31 Park Road#2-Broadway to Indiana(RW&CN) STP(U) $20 $150 32 Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection(RW/CN) STP(U) $211 $1,562 33 2017 Street Preservation Proiect City $1,400 $1,400 2017 Totals: $3,086 $11,687 Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2018 (dollars in thousands) Primary City Total Item# Project Name Source Amount Amount 26 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation(PE&RW Only) Other Fed $263 $1,950 29 Barker Rd-Spokane River to Euclid UAP $580 $2,899 31 Park Road#2-Broadway to Indiana(RW&CN) STP(U) $388 $2,877 34 2018 Street Preservation Project City $1,400 $1,400 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 64 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 35 Ar.onne Road Concrete Pavement -1-90 to Monte omer City $359 $359 36 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail-SCC to Evergreen Rd(RW&CN) STP(E) $14 $100 2018 Totals: $3,004 $9,585 Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2019 (dollars in thousands) Primary City Total Item# Project Name Source Amount Amount 35 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement-1-90 to Montgomery City $2,749 $2,749 36 S.okane Valle -Millwood Trail-SCC to Ever'reen Rd RW&CN STP E '.289 '.2 140 37 2019 Street Preservation Project City $1,400 $1,400 38 Barker Rd-Euclid to 0.1 mi.S.of Trent Ave(SR290) UAP $114 $571 2019 Totals: $4,552 $6,860 - Secured-Rrojests - - Planned-Projects - Totalc Yer Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total 2012 $4787-8. $4-488 474 $749 $0388 $2,023 $69 $0 $4462 $3-1494 $5961- 55 $47-7 $-1-864 $9,191 2013 $77227 $4990 :.e $213 $8440 $64-43 $3243 :.e $67043 $43,939 $1-2,948 $4.214 -e $6226 $22479 2044 $7,227 $47986 $6 $213 $37446 4..97245 $6 $6 $4494 $407349 42472 $44416 $6 $5443 $18489 2015 :.! :.e ::e :.e :.! $6372 ::e :.e 6 $878.4 ::e ::! 5 $87874 2946 $0 $0 $9 $6 $6 $1,711 $9 $38 $.97.125 $40,074 $44-14 $6 $38 $.9-,32.5 $40,074 2017 :.! :.! :.! :.! ::e $57203 ::e $94 $3704-2 $1-346 $6293 :.e $95 $3791-2 $873-1-0 Tot i $18,332 $3;486 $477 $1,185 $23,480 $28,267 $3,282 $433 $23,061 $54,743 $46,599 $6.768 $340 $24,246 $77,923 Table 4.39 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Summary 2014 through 2019(in$1,000) Secured Projects Planned Projects Totals Year Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total 2014 I 8325 3542 146 1293 $13,306 2296 0 0 2359 $4,655 10621 3542 146 3652 $17,961 2015 I 5550 2750 0 1010 $9,310 1133 2733 0 2861 $6,727 6683 5483 0 3871 $16,037 2016 I 0 0 0 0 30 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 2017 I 0 0 0 0 30 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 2018 I 0 0 0 0 30 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 2019 I 0 0 0 0 30 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 Total $113,875 $6,292 $146 $2,303 $22,616 $19,930 $10,395 $231 $19,055 $49,611 $33,805 $16,687 $377 $21,358 $72,227 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 65 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.40 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 20132014 Through 2-04-82019(in$1,000) Projects without Local Match within Existing Resources Project Name Project Description Total Cost Arterial Improvement Projects Sprague to 8th: Inlay&Enhancement;8th to 16th: Bowdish Road- 16th to Sprague Reconstruct as 2-lane section w/curb,sidewalk,bike lanes $2,851.002,858 and new stormwater facilities; Bowdish Road-24th to 16th Reconstruct Roadway as 2-lane section w/curb,sidewalk $2,846.00 and new stormwater facilities; Bowdish Road-32nd to 24th Reconstruct Roadway as 2-lane section w/curb,sidewalk $2,63740 and new stormwater facilities; Sullivan Road North Extension(Bigelow Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road extension north Gulch) also known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4-lane roadway $5540 with 8-foot shoulders and a 12-foot two way left turn lane. Wellesley Realignment @ Barker/SR290 Realign connection of Wellesley to Barker Rd and SR290, $5,18749 3-lane section, Part of Barker/BNSF Grade Separation Bridge Projects Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Construct Grade Separation at Barker/BNSF RR/Trent $32,000.0044 500 I (CN Only) (SR290) Park Road/BNSF Grade Separation Reconstruct Park Road to separate the grades of Park Road $16,52049 and the BNSF railroad tracks. Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation Construct grade-separation at Pines Rd(SR-27)/Trent Ave $45,000 (SR 290)/BNSF RR Sullivan Rd/BNSF Grade Separation Upgrade and widen grade separation at Sullivan/BNSF/ $45,000 Improvements Trent(SR290) Congestion Improvement Projects Evergreen ITS Improvcmcnts Traffic Control Systems Upgrades for Evergreen(Broadway $708.00 to 16th) Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to 16th Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor $78540 Saltese/Sullivan Traffic Signal Improvements to Intersection, Install Traffic Signal(In $586.00 coordination w/Spokane County) Sprague/Barker Traffic Signal Install Traffic Signal $5940 SR-27(Pines /Mirabeau Parkway Traffic Install Traffic Signal $575 Signal Pedestrian/Bicycle Protects Bowdish Sidewalk- 12th to 16th Construct Sidewalk along both sides of Bowdish $557 Greenacres Trail-Sullivan to E City Limits Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned railroad right-of- $1,095 (RW&CN) way Park Road#2 Sidewalk Project-Marietta Construct sidewalk along one side of Park Road and 160-ft gap $143 Ave.to Buckeye Ave. on north side of Buckeye Ave east of Park Road Reconstruction Projects Sprague/Fancher Concrete Intersection Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement $1,572 Sprague/Thierman Concrete Intersection Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement $1,243240 Sprague/University Concrete Intersection Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement; $1,66040 Sullivan/Kiernan Concrete Intersection Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement; $1,42340 Sullivan/Marietta Concrete Intersection Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement $1,49340 Sprague/Argonne-Mullan Concrete Reconstruct intersections in concrete pavement $2,342 Intersections Sullivan Road Concrctc Pavcmcnt Phacc Concrete Pavement OCI: 37.28(2013) $2,933.00 3 Inland to Marictta Sullivan Road Concrctc Pavcmcnt Phacc Concrete Pavement;OCI: 37.28(2013) $2,398.00 I Spokane River to Inland Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 66 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase Concrete Pavement;OCI 37./15(2013) $2,720.00 5 Kiernan to Trent Street Preservation Projects Pavement Management Program 2013 Annual street preservation projects per PMP $3,729.00 Annual street preservation projects per PMP $11,229.00 • - -- - -- -- - ! - Annual etreet preservation projects per PMP $3,806.00 • -••-- -••-- -- - • ! e Annual street preservation projects per PMP $3,206.00 - . - -_ •• - -- _ e Annual street preservation projects per PMP $3,91/1.00 • -••-- -••-- -- - ! = Annual street preservation projects per PMP $/1,200.00 Pavement Management Program-Local Annual street preservation projects $12,000.0011664 Access Total $113,v w".^^".^^190,335 Potential Annexation Areas/Urban Services The Growth Management Act requires that counties designate urban growth areas (UGAs). The City of Spokane Valley identified lands adjacent to the City within existing UGAs that would likely be developed for urban uses and potentially be annexed to the City. In order to assess the need for capital facilities, the City has identified existing service providers within the Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs). This assessment should help identify the effects a potential annexation area will have on existing levels of service. Table 4.41 Existing Urban Service Providers within Potential Annexation Areas(PAAs) PAAs Northwood Northeast East Southeast South Ponderosa Edgecliff Domestic Water Pasadena Park Consolidated Consolidated Vera Vera S.C.W.D.No.3 East Spokane Hutton Settlement Consolidated S.C.W.D.No.3 Fire&Emergency F.D.No.1&9 F.D.No.1 F.D.No.1 F.D.No.1&8 F.D.No.1&8 F.D.No.8 F.D.No.1&8 Services Law Enforcement Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Libraries S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library n o+ Parks&Open Space Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Public Schools W.V.S.D.&S.D.81 E.V.S.D C.V.S.D. C.V.S.D. C.V.S.D. C.V.S.D. W.V.S.D.& C 01 Public Transit Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Sanitary Sewer Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Not Sewered Spokane County Solid Waste/Recycle Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Storm water Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Street Cleaning Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Transportation Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County The City of Spokane Valley has adopted Levels of Service (LOS) to measure a public facility or service's operational characteristics to gauge its performance. The following analysis will assess current levels of service in the PAAs to provide a context of how annexation could affect the City's LOS and provide guidance for phasing of annexations. Additionally, the analysis will provide City staff and elected officials information to assist in the planning and budgeting of public service delivery as a result of annexation to the City of Spokane Valley. The following study includes LOS analysis for sanitary sewer and parks and open space. Analysis is not provided for services where the City has adopted the minimum regional LOS. Services excluded from Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 67 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan this analysis are domestic water, fire protection, law enforcement, libraries, public schools, public transit, sanitary sewer, solid waste/recycle, storm water, street cleaning, and transportation. If a level of service is measured on a per capita basis, the population assumptions are based on Table 2.1(Land Capacity Analysis) in the Land Use chapter and Spokane County's estimated current population in the Metropolitan Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). The City of Spokane Valley's land capacity analysis is based on the adopted regional methodology. Sanitary Sewer The City of Spokane Valley does not provide sanitary sewer service at this time. Spokane County provides wastewater collection and transport systems within the City of Spokane Valley. Incorporated areas must have wastewater collection and transport systems in accordance with the adopted sewer concurrency requirements. The table below provides a sewer assessment within the PAAs. Level of service is categorized as sewered, within the 6-year sewer plan, or not planned for sewer. Table 4.42 Sewer assessment within Potential Annexation Areas(PAAs)in Acres PAAs Total Sewered Within 6-year Sewer not Percentage CIP available Sewered Northwood 1,820 1,397 0 423 77% Northeast 48 5 0 43 11% East 380 64 207 109 17% Southeast 791 443 0 347 56% South 1,041 669 0 371 64% Ponderosa 47 0 12 35 0% Edgecliff 298 21 0 276 7% Currently, Spokane County owns a capacity allocation of 10 million gallons per day (mgd) in the Spokane Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant (SAWTP). By the year 2020, the County's flow is projected to reach 21 mgd. In 1999, Spokane County began a Wastewater Facilities Plan process to evaluate long- term regional wastewater needs, and to determine alternatives to meet those needs. The result was a decision by the Board of County Commissioners to build a new Spokane County Regional Water Reclamation Facility (SCRWRF). Spokane County is proposing to construct a new regional wastewater treatment plant at the Stockyards site in the City of Spokane. The new treatment plant and associated facilities will provide additional capacity for increased wastewater flows generated by the County's Septic Elimination Program and for projected growth in the County's service area. Many of the PAAs have sewer services, however new development will continue to add demand for new sewer services. The City should evaluate existing sewer treatment capacity and infrastructure prior to annexation. Parks and Open Space The City of Spokane Valley has an adopted level of service of 1.92 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. In 2007, Spokane County commissioned a fiscal study of the Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). The report focuses on the services provided by Spokane County to the metropolitan UGAs and the revenue generated for Spokane County in these areas. The report established a base population in the metropolitan UGAs using 2000 Census data and building permits. The estimated population for the UGAs adjacent to the City of Spokane Valley was determined to be 7,294. The City of Spokane Valley 2007 Land Quantity Analysis (LQA) estimated the land capacity in the PAAs could potentially add 13,406 additional residents. Using the population estimate from Spokane County's fiscal study and the City of Spokane Valley's estimated land capacity there is the potential of 20,700 residents at build out in the PAAs. Currently there are no parks in the PAAs. If the City annexed all the PAAs 40 acres of parkland would be needed to meet the current level of service of 1.92 acres. According to the City's Park Master Plan, many residents in the City of Spokane Valley are not conveniently located near a park. The City's Park Master Plan states that parks should be one of the Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 68 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan highest priorities for the City. The plan also states that meeting Park needs can be a challenge in neighborhoods where little vacant land exists. Many residents expressed a desire for sports fields (complexes); these facilities generally require large vacant properties. The City should consider purchasing parkland prior to annexation to ensure adequate facilities will be available to serve neighborhoods in Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs). Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Page 69 of 69 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 6 — PRIVATE & PUBLIC UTILITIES 6.0 Introduction City of Spokane Valley residents rely on facilities and services that help define their quality of life. These facilities include those provided by several privately owned utilities in the region. Although these utilities are privately owned and regulated at either the state and/or federal level, coordination and conscientious planning at the local level is essential to ensure that adequate utility service is available to all citizens. Sanitary sewer and potable water are typically considered "utilities" however, for purposes of the City's comprehensive plan sewer and water are addressed in the Capital Facilities Element of this Plan. Privately and publicly owned electrical, natural gas, and line telephone utilities are regulated by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC). Wireless telephone communication companies are licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Cable television companies are regulated by the FCC and the Communications Acts of 1934 and 1996. Utilities must have a franchise agreement to place utilities in the public right-of-way. Franchise agreements give each utility the non-exclusive right to provide its category of service within the City. The City acknowledges that it would not have been possible to prepare this element without the assistance of local utility providers. 6.1 Plannincl Context This element satisfies the Growth Management Act(GMA) requirement that cities prepare a Utilities element. This element describes the location of existing utilities and the proposed location of new utilities, as well as the capacity of existing and proposed utilities. The GMA requires the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (SVCP) to have internal consistency. This means that the Private and Public Utilities element must be fully coordinated with other appropriate elements of the SVCP. 6.1.1 Growth Management Act In accordance with WAC 365-195-320(2)(c), this Private and Public Utilities element includes plans for natural gas, electricity, telecommunications, and cable television service for the City. Each utility section will describe and analyze existing and proposed utility systems within Spokane Valley and improvements necessary to meet growing consumer demand. In most cases maps and other graphics are provided to illustrate the existing system and proposed improvements. Plans for water supply and sewer are found in the Capital Facilities element of the SVCP. Specifically, the GMA requires a Utilities Element to include the following information: • General location of existing utility facilities; • Proposed location of future facilities; and • Capacity of all existing and proposed facilities. The City sees the GMA requirement to prepare a Private and Public Utilities element as an opportunity to identify ways of improving the quality of services provided within the City. The City will use this element to identify priorities and develop implementation strategies to ensure that provision of utilities is properly coordinated with land use. 6.1.2 County Wide Planning Policies Development of the Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs) is required by GMA in order to provide a regional policy framework to achieve the overall goals of GMA. The CWPPs was coordinated by the Spokane County Steering Committee of Elected Officials and adopted by the Spokane County Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 1 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Board of County Commissioners. The following are the CWPPs relevant to private and public utilities:1 Policy Topic 3 — Promotion of Contiguous and Orderly Development and Provision of Urban Services Policies 11. The Steering Committee shall oversee the preparation of a regional utility corridor plan for incorporation into local comprehensive plans that includes the following elements: a. Protection of existing and designation of future regional corridors. b. Dimensional guidelines for regional corridors. c. Provision for multiuse corridors for compatible utilities. d. Measures to mitigate impacts on adjacent areas. e. Land uses which are appropriate on or adjacent to corridors. f. Vegetation clearance guidelines for electrical transmission and distribution lines in order to reduce fire hazard. Note: The Spokane County Regional Utility Technical Committee prepared a Regional Utility Corridor Plan that was adopted by the Spokane County Steering Committee of Elected Officials on December 15, 1995. 18. Each jurisdiction in its comprehensive plan should provide policies that support the compatible incorporation of utilities, greenbelts and open space within common corridors. 19. Each jurisdiction shall review environmental and health issues regarding regional utility corridors sited within its boundaries for use in the decision making process by respective agencies. 20. Each jurisdiction shall plan for growth within urban growth areas (UGA) which uses land efficiently, adds certainty to capital facilities planning, and allows timely and coordinated extension of urban government services, public facilities and utilities for new development. Each jurisdiction shall identify intermediate growth areas (six to ten year increments)within its UGA or establish policies which direct growth consistent with land use and capital facilities plans. ... 6.2 Electricity Utilities _ L[G4nf] 1 -,,eRS i.rVM1WM 4'i. 6.2.1 Bonneville Power art Administrationflof m^��°^°� :. e r online The Bonneville Powerw . Administration (BPA) was ; • established in 1937 and is a federal ,Wyoming agency under the U.S. Department of Energy that markets wholesale electrical power. BPA operates and " markets electrical transmission Oregon services in the Pacific Northwest. The power that is marked by BPA is Ca,iforniax.rad. - ;• i.." ••• u� 6 generated at 31 federal hydro- electric projects, one non-federal Figure 6.1 -BPA's Transmission System&Federal Dams nuclear plant and several other non- ' Note to reader: The following policies are numbered according to the policy number in the CWPPs, resulting in non-sequential numbering in this document. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 2 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan federal power plants. In addition to the power generating plants, BPA manages 15,397 circuit miles of transmission lines and owns 284 substations. BPA operates a 500 kV line just north of the existing city limits in portions of the Spokane County urban growth area (UGA). Additionally, BPA operates two substations and 115kV transmission lines within the City of Spokane Valley. The hydro-electric projects and the electrical system are known as the Federal Columbia River Power System. About 45 percent of the electric power used in the Northwest comes from BPA. BPA's transmission system accounts for approximately 75 percent of the region's high-voltage grid and includes major transmission links with other regions. BPA is a self-funding agency, which pays for its costs through power and transmission sales. BPA's customers include publicly owned and investor-owned utilities, as well as some large industries. BPA also sells or exchanges power with utilities in Canada and the western United States. 6.2.2 Avista Utilities - Description of Utility Avista Utilities' primary market area is eastern Washington and northern Idaho. Avista serves nearly 310,000 electric customers in their market area and is the principal electricity provider in the City of Spokane Valley. Avista owns and operates eight hydroelectric plants on the Clark Fork and Spokane Rivers. These hydroelectric facilities produce about 60 percent of the total electrical energy used by Avista customers. Avista also owns and operates coal, gas, and wood-waste combustion plants in five Washington, northern Idaho and eastern Montana locations. Avista has a number of substation facilities and 115 kV (Kilovolt) transmission lines in the City of Spokane Valley. Map 6.1 indicates those facility locations and describes that portion of Avista's transmission system that covers Spokane Valley. A grid provides the link between the BPA bulk transmission system and the local distribution system that connects �'� �n<a.,.:. A. Et„it with customers. SenncaAre The "Bulk Transmission System" is operated by BPA, which operates a region wide, interconnecting, transmission system that supplies Oft, Alb, electric power to utilities from federal _ •.--ms's hydroelectric projects east and west of 11161 kRvrcr. the Cascades. The primary service (:never e!'A7enr lokr ��'n'°r J':t l.n.N.rrr BPA provides to Avista and other II E I ++�► electricity utilities is wheeling electrical energy throughout the region. A majority of the transmission lines Figure 6.2-Avista Hydro Facilities supplying Spokane Valley are energized at 115kV. There is an existing Avista 230kV line that cuts across the north-eastern portion of the City in the Barker Road area. These lines supply power into the Spokane Valley distribution system and provide connections to other providers of electricity in Spokane Valley. Power is transferred from the transmission system to Spokane Valley's local distribution system at six distribution substations. The following substations are located within Spokane Valley: Boulder Park, Barker Road, S.I.P., Opportunity, Chester, and 9th &Central. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 3 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 6.2.3 Vera Water& Power—Description of Utility Vera Water and Power is a publicly owned utility that supplies water and electricity to the Veradale area in the City of Spokane Valley. Vera operates three substations in Spokane Valley including: Valleyway located on Valleyway, east of McDonald Road; Sullivan, located on the northeast corner of Sullivan Road and Valleyway; and Vera located on the northwest corner of Sullivan Road and 36th Avenue. Vera plans a new substation (Central Valley) on the southwest corner of Sullivan Road and 16th Avenue slated to be constructed in approximately 2006. Vera purchases a majority of its power from the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) which is then distributed to its customers through an underground and overhead electrical distribution system. Vera takes delivery of power from BPA at the three local substations indicated above. Vera serves over 8,700 electric customers in the City of Spokane Valley. 6.2.4 Modern Electric Water Company—Description of Utility Modern Electric began operations in the Spokane area in 1905 as part of the development of the Valley by the Modern Irrigation and Land Company. Modern Electric provides water and electricity to approximately 10,000 households in Spokane Valley. Modern's electrical supply system consists of three Neyelem ° a �IIeY PEND oNew,° FERRY .. OREILLE DO, substations including the Locust station, located south of "ef "men °n ke ° ° Haaelmere.. °spy-,aeale aaa°nava --c°wee oam enema:e sre�Ns ° Interstate 90 on the west side of Locust Street; Nelson station, COLN - fr C Ib e located south of 4th Avenue east of Walnut; and the LINb° Niv°e° P°sFalls Opportunity station located at Modern's main office site ona°` oa„e°p°rt caeale k Pines Road, north of Broadway. eaal�ke Ham'ng[ °Canby 5°Nn-% neY W°ley° Oe O°was Fairt -PIS M1k n 6.2.5 Inland Power& Light— Description of Utility pipmellus � II Packak° > °b,°, TenSee F She Rhz°ille !°kl0 Oakeseale ° Inland Power& Light (IP&L) began operation in 1937 providing Jvareen we Hlllcres[° °caamar Stepme GaHieia' electrical service to some 160 farms and homes northeast ofIl-ePa ° .••% Cry �a,�Re�°L°laa. °Pa'OVSe A M 6 ,Sse° WHITMAN gbi°n ' Spokane. IP&L's now serves electrical customers in 13 •6nan°O aM°=°a °°oe.vema counties in eastern Washington and northern Idaho. IP&L's customer base has grown to over 33,000 customers with a relatively small number located in the southern portion of the Figure 6.3 -Inland Power& City of Spokane Valley. Light Service Area 6.3 Natural Gas Utilities 6.3.1 Avista Utilities —Description of Utility The North Operating Division (NOD) of Avista Utilities provides natural gas to more than 174,000 customers primarily in eastern Washington and northern Idaho. The4# Iry k f" 4 Spokane area is the largest metropolitan region served by Avista with a population of • �: 1'I1.s ' /A- • over 350,000. ,-- 'MTA, 44 Avista is advantageously located on two 'e pa Y interstate natural gas pipelines. Williams Pipeline —West, (still referred to as Northwest Pipeline Corporation — NWP), provides both W � firm and interruptible natural gas ", transportation service to access both British Columbia and domestic Rocky Mountain gas. Pacific Gas & Electric Transmission — Figure 6.5- Natural Gas Supply System Northwest (PG&E GT-NW) provides both firm and interruptible transportation to access Alberta natural gas. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 4 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The NOD consists of approximately 3,000 miles of gas distribution mains, through which it delivers annual volumes of just fewer than 350 million therms. This gas is received at more than 40 points along the interstate pipelines and distributed to Avista's residential, commercial and industrial customers. Avista is unable at this time to identify how many customers are located within the new corporate limits of Spokane Valley. As that information becomes available, it will be included in a future update to this plan. Gas Supply Mains: These are generally larger diameter (six-inch steel and larger) mains designed to operate at higher pressure (100 to 250 pounds per square inch gauge (psig)) to deliver natural gas from the supply source to pressure reducing stations. Pressure Reducing (District Regulators) Stations:These are located at various locations throughout the system to reduce supply main pressure to a standard distribution operating pressure of approximately 60 psi. Distribution Mains: Distribution mains are fed from District Regulators. These are typically 8, 6, 4, 2 and 1.25 inch in diameter. The pipe material is typically polyethylene (PE). 6.4 Telecommunications Utilities The telecommunications section focuses on wire telephone, wireless communications, Internet service, and cable television. Telecommunications is not only important for voice transmission, but also provides the infrastructure for the transmission of images and electronic data. In Spokane Valley, Qwest Communications provides local wire telephone service, wireless telephone service, and Internet connection. A number of other wireless communications providers operate networks in Spokane Valley as well. Comcast provides cable television services and Internet connection to Spokane Valley residents. The telephone (both wireless and wired) portions of the telecommunications industry are extremely competitive and for that reason, the City had difficulty obtaining detailed information about operations and plans. As a result, the section of the plan addressing telephone services: 1) reflects the City's commitment to allow for the provision of advanced telecommunications services; 2) provides a general description of how the existing system works; and 3) describes the process for improving service delivery. 6.4.1 Telephone System (wired) Existing Facilities and Operations — Qwest Communication, Inc. provides telecommunication service to the Spokane Valley planning area as regulated by WUTC. A local exchange area is served by a central office (CO), which contains various kinds of switching equipment. From a CO, there are typically four main cable routes extending relatively north, south, east, and west. From each main cable route there are branch distribution routes. These facilities may be aerial or buried, copper or fiber. Extending from the branch distribution routes are local lines that can be used for voice or data transmission by subscribers. In December of 2005, Comcast began offering wired phone service to the Spokane Valley area. Comcast n " utilizes existing telecommunications infrastructure for this service. Comcast is regulated by the WUTC as r. , ,ycreb.„ , well. . 'JrJ -c 9 Proposed Improvements — Qwest and Comcast are DhhMn required by law to provide adequate telecommunications services on demand. Accordingly, Qwest and Comcast provide facilities to accommodate whatever growth pattern occurs within the City. Due to advances in technology, additional Figure 6.5-Cricket Wireless Coverage Area capacity is easily and quickly added to the system. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 5 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 6.4.2 Telephone System (wireless) Existing Systems – The City of Spokane Valley is currently served with a number of wireless communication service providers. Wireless communication is becoming increasingly important in the telecommunications world. It is a combination of a portion of the radio frequency spectrum with switching technology, making it possible to provide mobile or portable telephone service to virtually any number of subscribers within a given area. Transmission quality is comparable to that provided by conventional wire line telephones, and the same dialing W Ai capabilities and features available to wire line users are San available to cellular users. The wireless/cellular • ok communications sector of the economy is growing rapidly. • Ilwl - A Cha . un 0 Pulima Athol h,. Figure 6.7-T-Mobile Coverage Area a H: Urr1rY HC1ri41 6412�d ff # W4a dale Height— r hii. d�F r!" '�' 4; Deer Park of u� Spokane C eur d'Alene Figure 6.6-Qwest Wireless Coverage Area Wireless or personal communication services (PCS) works Figure 6.9-Sprint Wireless by splitting a region into smaller geographic areas called Coverage Area cells that are each served by a transmitter receiver or "base station." As a caller moves across the landscape, the call is passed or"handed-off" from one base station to another. Each base station is connected to a mobile telephone switching office, which is linked to the land based phone network serving the home or office. Individual base station locations are selected based on a number of considerations related to topography, distance from other base stations, proximity to traffic corridors, and other technical features. Wireless engineers utilize computer modeling and radio testing to determine potential sites. Because PCS base stations consist of very low powered transmitters which cover a relatively small geographic area, there is limited flexibility in site selection. Typically, the coverage radius of a PCS facility is one-half to three miles and is affected by the topography and SpO r.!' vegetation of the area. Radio frequency engineers must •I*M design and optimize cell site heights and locations within the PCS network to enable sufficient overlap between ' ,_ cells to provide continuous coverage. ' a Staff has identified the major wireless providers in the Spokane Valley area. The maps and graphics indicate .1. the individual wireless providers service areas. Information regarding current and future predicted Figure 6.8-Cingular Coverage Area number of subscribers is considered by the purveyors to Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6– Private & Public Utilities Page 6 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan be proprietary, and no data were furnished in this regard. However, given the increasing number of wireless subscribers and the introduction of hand sets that access the Internet, send text messages and other information and data features, it is SiirvripOirrit anticipated that subscriber numbers will Priest F H continue to increase over the time horizon of mar this Plan. thoi Post Forecasting for new cellular facilities uses a Fal Is Coeur pip 14' d' Allan relatively narrow time frame of typically two • . years. Expansion of the wireless system is p rturiity .. demand driven; therefore wireless providers waliCierray Coeur Spoken a d Aden Figure 6.10-Nextel Wireless Coverage Area must maintain a short response time and a tight ° planning horizon. Future cell sites are considered proprietary information by the wireless companies f , , and are not shared for purposes of local comprehensive planning. Figure 6.11 -Verizon Wireless 6.4.3 Internet Service Coverage Area Internet service is presently provided by telephone, cable, wireless facilities and satellite. Qwest provides Internet service via telephone lines and Comcast provides Internet service via cable. Several PCS providers, if not all, include internet access service options. In addition, as streets are constructed or reconstructed, conduits to assist in the installation of fiber optic communication systems should be included as part of the road project. 6.4.4 Cable Television On November 18, 2002, Comcast and AT&T Broadband merged to form the new Comcast Corporation. Comcast Corporation, which is headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the largest U.S. cable company serving more than 21 million customers in 41 states, as of 2003. The illustration below is a general description of the components of the cable TV (CATV) system and shows supply from source to customer. One of the primary components of a cable system is the headend siteCan electronic control ..'• . center where the information signal is processed �- .. for distribution through the cable system. ThemmlmIs signal can be received either off a hard line _ ;.,� _ (cable), satellite dish, microwave antennas, 1 and/or TV antenna. 44_ Main trunk cable lines (coax and fiber) distribute ' A signals throughout Spokane Valley. Feeder - • - cables branch from the main trunk cables to distribute the signals to neighborhood areas. From there, individual connections are made to the customer's service entry. Comcast attempts to provide service to all Figure 6.12-Cable Television Schematic residents within its franchise areas. Factors Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 7 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan considered in extending service are overall technical integrity, economical feasibility, and franchise requirements. Provided subscribers are less than 150 feet from a distribution or feeder line, cable television installations are made to new subscribers at published rates, either to new dwelling units or to a much smaller degree, to residences who have not previously opted for cable television. Connections requiring longer runs are charged on a time and material basis. Most public work considerations, such as tree trimming, work in the right-of-way, restoration of property, and so on, are covered in the City's Franchise Agreement. Comcast now offers digital service (includes internet access) to Spokane Valley customers. Comcast has also begun replacing existing copper cable trunk lines with fiber optic, which can be configured to carry video or data transmission signals. 6.5 Goals and Policies The Private and Public Utilities element provides an opportunity for the City to assist utility companies in delivering efficient service to customers and to seek to reduce potential negative impacts on the natural and built environments. This section builds upon system descriptions to identify issues and sets forth policies to coordinate the provision of utilities with City planning. The GMA requires that the utilities element include the general location, proposed location and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities. This has resulted in cities and counties becoming more actively involved in the way in which utilities are sited and provided. In order to protect both citizens and utility customers, the City will work in accordance with the following priorities and strategies: Goal PUG-1 Work with utility providers to allow them to provide service in a way that balances cost-effectiveness with environmental protection, aesthetic impact, public safety, and public health. Goal PUG-2 Process permits for utility facilities efficiently and expeditiously, in accordance with franchise agreements, development regulations, the SVCP, and adopted codes. Goal PUG-3 Ensure that development regulations are consistent with public service obligations imposed upon utilities by federal and state law. Policies PUP-3.1 The City's right-of-way permitting process should not unnecessarily delay the expansion or improvement of the utility network. PUP-3.2 Promote joint planning and coordination of public and private utility activities by providing timely notice to affected private and public utilities of City construction projects, including the maintenance and repair of existing roads. PUP-3.3 Promote the co-location of new utility transmission, distribution and communication facilities when consistent with industry practices, Department of Transportation requirements, and building and electrical codes. (Examples of facilities that may be shared are trenches, rights-of-way, towers, poles and antennas.) PUP-3.4 The City will encourage the development of Citywide communication networks using the most advanced technology available, to increase internal and external connectivity. PUP-3.5 Based upon applicable regulations, the City should require the under grounding of utility distribution lines in new subdivisions. The City should encourage under grounding of utility distribution lines in new construction and significantly reconstructed facilities, consistent with all applicable laws. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 8 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PUP-3.6 Based upon applicable regulations, the City should work with utilities and appropriate entities in preparing a plan for under grounding utilities in areas where their visual impact is critical to improving the appearance of the City, such as the City Center, Sprague Avenue and identified aesthetic corridors. PUP-3.7 The City should work with appropriate entities to prepare right-of-way vegetation plans to ensure that the needs of landscaping and screening are balanced with the need to prevent negative impacts to utilities. PUP-3.8 Require the placement of cellular facilities, substations and antennas in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on adjacent land uses and utilizes existing structures where feasible. PUP-3.9 Coordinate with utility providers to ensure that sizing, locating and phasing of utility systems are consistent with the SVCP. PUP-3.10 The City and utilities should be encouraged to develop an integrated Geographic Information System (GIS)to better serve mutual needs and those of the public. PUP-3.11 The City should adhere to the Policies and Actions identified in the current Regional Utility Corridor Plan. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6— Private & Public Utilities Page 9 of 9 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 7 — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 7.0 Introduction and Purpose A city can foster economic development to achieve its goals by anticipating and responding to changes in the local, regional, national and international economies. For Spokane Valley, these goals include providing for economic stability through economic diversity and encouraging a broad range of jobs to help employ the community's residents. A city's economic development actions can include activities primarily directed toward economic development and those undertaken for other reasons, but that also produce economic benefits. Examples of activities primarily directed toward economic development include allocating land for manufacturing uses, extending water and sewer systems to business sites, providing tax credits and incentives, and advance planning to accommodate growth. Examples of activities with economic benefits as secondary impacts include providing an efficient transportation system, encouraging high quality schools, providing for affordable housing, streamlining permit processes and providing park and recreation facilities and activities that improve the quality of life. Market-driven economic growth depends upon the decisions of individuals and firms; most jobs and investments are generated by private businesses. Local governments must also contend with forces beyond local control, such as changes in the regional, national and international economies. These changes result from numerous individual decisions and changes in economic and social trends. However, local governments can plan to take advantage of favorable trends and lessen the impact of unfavorable trends. Local governments also can hinder economic development through ill-advised policies, such as fiscal zoning which involves zoning more land than is needed for uses that produce relatively high tax revenues. 7.1 Planning Context 7.1.1 Washington State Growth Management Act The Growth Management Act (GMA) includes economic development as one of its basic goals. It considers the need to stimulate economic development throughout the state, but requires that these activities be balanced with the need to protect the physical environment. It encourages the efficient use of land, the availability of urban services, and the financing strategies necessary to pay for infrastructure. Finally, the GMA mandates that communities do their planning and then provide the zoning and regulatory environment so that appropriate development can occur. GMA recognizes that while the public sector can shape and influence development, it is the private sector that generates community growth. The GMA goal regarding economic development provides: RCW 36.70A.020(5) Economic development — Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons... and encourage growth... all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. The GMA requires an economic development element be included in comprehensive plans (RCW 36.70A.070 (7)). An economic development element must include the following: • A summary of the local economy such as population, employment, payroll, sectors, businesses, sales, and other information as appropriate; • A summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the local economy defined as the commercial and industrial sectors and supporting factors such as land use, transportation, utilities, education, work force, housing, and natural/cultural resources; and, Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 1 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • An identification of policies, programs, and projects to foster economic growth and development and to address future needs. 7.1.2 County Wide Planning Policies The Spokane County Wide Planning Policies (CWPPs) required by GMA (RCW 36.70A.210) and adopted in 1994 with subsequent amendments in 1996, 1997 and 2004, provide a regional framework to achieve goals of the GMA. The CWPPs establish overall policy direction that calls for greater cooperation and coordination between the private sector and government in measuring both the performance of the local economy and the relationship between economic development and preservation of the area's natural environment and quality of life. In addition, the CWPPs emphasize the need for a regional (Eastern Washington and Northern Idaho) approach to the critical environmental issues of water and air quality; recognize the importance of central business areas, and the benefits of locating housing and regional transportation facilities in close proximity to employment centers. CWPP pertinent to the City of Spokane Valley include: Policies: 1. Include an economic development element in each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan that establishes local goals, policies, objectives, and provisions for economic growth and vitality and a high quality of life. The element shall include: a. a summary of the local economy such as population, employment, payroll, sectors, businesses, sales, and other information as appropriate; b. a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the local economy defined as the commercial and industrial sectors and supporting factors such as land use, transportation, utilities, education, work force, housing, and natural/cultural resources; and c. an identification of policies, programs, and projects to foster economic growth and development and to address future needs. A city that has chosen to be a residential community is exempt from the economic development element requirement of the GMA. 2. Jurisdictions should adopt in their comprehensive plans economic development policies which will help protect the environment as a key economic value in the region. 4. Maintain the integrity of downtowns (Central Business Districts) as centers for retail, business and cultural activity. 5. Each jurisdiction should designate sites for industrial and service employers to encourage them to locate throughout urban areas in proximity to housing and regional transportation facilities (including public transportation). 7.2 Summary of Local Economy Economic data, including employment information, is collected by the State of Washington at both the County level and for the Spokane Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Table 7.1 summarizes 2011 employment data in the Spokane MSA in comparison with the state of Washington. From September 2009 to September 2010, Spokane County posted the largest employment loss among large counties in Washington State, down 1.7 percent. Nationally, employment increased 0.2 percent during the same 12 month period.' U S Department of Labor, Bureau of Land Statistics,Third Quarter 2010 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 2 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 7.1 2011 Employment Spokane MSA Spokane, Washington September 2011 September 2011 Total#Employed 206,650 3,194,560 %Unemployed 8.6 8.5 Average Monthly Earnings $3,550 $4,685 Source:Workforce Explorer. Table 7.2 shows November 2011 Spokane MSA Employment statistics by industry category. Employment figures include the self-employed. Industries which saw the largest increase in employment include natural resources, information and state educational services. Table 7.2 Nonagricultural Wage and Salary Employment in the Spokane Metropolitan Statistical Area(Spokane County) (in thousands) ""NAICS INDUSTRY TITLE(numbers in thousands) Nov'11 %Change from Nov'10 TOTAL NONFARM 206.3 -0.9 TOTAL PRIVATE 169.9 -0.8 GOODS PRODUCING 24.4 -1.6 NATURAL RESOURCES and MINING 9.3 -8.8 MANUFACTURING 15.1 3.4 SERVICES PROVIDING 181.9 -.08 TRADE,TRANSPORTATION,and UTILITIES 41.4 0.2 Wholesale Trade 9.4 0 Retail Trade 25.8 0 Food and Beverage Stores 4.3 0 General Merchandise Stores 6.2 3.3 Transportation,Warehousing,and Utilities 6.2 1.6 INFORMATION 2.7 -6.9 FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES 12.0 0 Finance and Insurance 9.0 -1.1 PROFESSIONAL and BUSINESS SERVICES 21.1 -.09 EDUCATION and HEALTH SERVICES 39.6 -2.9 Health and Social Assistance 34.1 -1.2 Ambulatory Health Care Services 13.8 0.7 Hospitals 8.7 3.6 LEISURE and HOSPITALITY 19.4 2.6 Food Services and Drinking Places 14.0 -.07 OTHER SERVICES 9.3 1.1 GOVERNMENT 36.4 -1.6 Federal Government 4.6 0 Total State Government 11.0 -5.2 State Government Educational Services 6.1 -6.2 Total Local Government 20.8 0 Local Government Educational Services 11.8 0 Workers in Labor/Management Disputes 0.0 0.0 1/Excludes proprietors,self-employed, members of armed forces,and private household employees. "Prepared by the Labor Market and Economic Analysis branch using a Quarterly Benchmark process. Source:Washington State Employment Security Department Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7- Economic Development Page 3 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The Spokane MSA has experienced a decrease in employment over the previous three years, as indicated in Figure 7.1. During the same period, the local unemployment rate has declined, as indicated in Figure 7.2. Figure 7.1. Non-Farm Employment Trends Nonfarm industry employment,not seasonally adjusted,in Spokane County(Spokane MSA) 212,000-..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 210,000-..............LI . kIIIIIII. LLII ..... .......................................... ................. ................. ............................................................................................ 20i ,000 .............. .............,000 .............. .............,000-.............. .............,000 .............. ...... ,000 ■ .... ................ Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep OctNov Dec Source:Washington State Employment Security Department,Labor Market and Economic Analysis Branch Figure 7.2 Unemployment Trends Unemployment rates,not seasonally adjusted,in Spokane County(Spokane MSA) 12.0% 11.0% .......................................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 10.0%-.................................................. .... `,,................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ....................... - 2009 2010 - 2011 8.0% + Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Source:Washington State Employment Security Department,Labor Market and Economic Analysis Branch The 2009-2019 employment forecast by industry for Spokane County is shown on Table 7.3. The highest growth is expected in the fields of computers and mathematics, followed by building and grounds maintenance and personal care and service occupations. Table 7.3 Employment Forecasts AvAvg. g. Avg. Estimated Annual Annual Annual Show All Occupations Employment Growth Opening Total Rate Due to Openings Growth Occupation Group 2009 2014 2019 2009-2014-2009-2014-2009-2014- 2014 2019 2014 2019 2014 2019 TOTAL ALL OCCUPATIONS 231,053 246,731 265,391 1.3% 1.5% 3,126 3,702 8,507 9,454 MANAGEMENT OCCUPATIONS 8,562 9,099 9,711 1.2% 1.3% 109 120 292 356 BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL OPERATIONS OCCUPATIONS 8,754 9,409 10,008 1.5% 1.2% 129 118 296 331 COMPUTER AND MATHEMATICAL OCCUPATIONS 4,059 4,575 5,226 2.4% 2.7% 102 129 177 228 ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING OCCUPATIONS 3,174 3,389 3,719 1.3% 1.9% 46 65 105 141 LIFE, PHYSICAL,AND SOCIAL SCIENCE OCCUPATIONS 1,908 2,031 2,227 1.3% 1.9% 25 38 81 98 COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES OCCUPATIONS 5,577 5,854 6,310 1% 1.5% 55 90 164 228 LEGAL OCCUPATIONS 1,984 2,126 2,253 1.4% 1.2% 28 25 59 65 EDUCATION,TRAINING,AND LIBRARY OCCUPATIONS 14,295 15,056 16,049 1% 1.3% 148 195 436 541 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7- Economic Development Page 4 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 7.3 Employment Forecasts AvAvg. g. Avg. Estimated Annual Annual Annual Show All Occupations Employment Growth Opening Total Rate Due to Openings Growth Occupation Group 2009 2014 2019 2009-2014-2009-2014-2009-2014- 2014 2019 2014 2019 2014 2019 ARTS, DESIGN, ENTERTAINMENT,SPORTS,AND MEDIA OCCS 4,107 4,324 4,553 1% 1% 42 43 158 169 HEALTHCARE PRACTITIONERS AND TECHNICAL OCCUPATIONS 15,907 17,127 19,085 1.5% 2.2% 239 392 529 794 HEALTHCARE SUPPORT OCCUPATIONS 8,073 8,545 9,315 1.1% 1.7% 94 153 177 276 PROTECTIVE SERVICE OCCUPATIONS 4,696 4,918 5,269 .9% 1.4% 44 69 202 213 FOOD PREPARATION AND SERVING RELATED OCCUPATIONS 18,654 19,389 20,338 .8% 1% 150 188 895 754 BUILDING AND GROUNDS CLEANING AND MAINT. OCCS 9,920 11,113 12,267 2.3% 2% 240 230 397 439 PERSONAL CARE AND SERVICE OCCUPATIONS 11,436 12,594 13,975 1.9% 2.1% 233 274 544 571 SALES AND RELATED OCCUPATIONS 25,835 27,669 29,233 1.4% 1.1% 368 311 1,206 1,029 OFFICE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT OCCUPATIONS 37,200 39,810 42,578 1.4% 1.4% 521 552 1,302 1,406 FARMING, FISHING,AND FORESTRY OCCUPATIONS 861 872 890 .3% .4% 2 4 25 25 CONSTRUCTION AND EXTRACTION OCCUPATIONS 11,932 12,152 13,425 .4% 2% 40 251 233 503 INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE,AND REPAIR OCCUPATIONS 9,074 9,586 10,051 1.1% 1% 99 94 266 309 PRODUCTION OCCUPATIONS 11,522 12,665 13,551 1.9% 1.4% 232 175 465 440 TRANSPORTATION AND MATERIAL MOVING OCCUPATIONS 13,523 14,428 15,358 1.3% 1.3% 180 186 498 538 Source: Workforce Explorer,Washington State Employment Security Department, Labor Market and Economic Analysis Branch Table 7.4 estimates the type of employment by job classes within Spokane Valley, compared to the County and State. In 2010, the majority of jobs were in sales as well as management and professional occupations. Table 7.4 Occupations of the City of Spokane Valley Area Residents,2010 Census Percent Employment by Category within Spokane Valley Spokane County State (in thousands) Valley Management, Professional and Related Occupations 11.3 71.2 1,183.0 Service Occupations 6.4 41.4 538.4 Sales and Office Occupations 12.7 58.7 715.6 Natural Resources, Construction and Maintenance 3.6 14.4 295.1 Production,Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 6.9 25.3 337.9 Total 40.9 211.0 3,070.0 Source: American Fact Finder 2,2010 Census Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7- Economic Development Page 5 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Taxable sales within Spokane Valley by business category is shown in Figure 7.3 and Table 7.5. Figure 7.3 2010 Taxable Sales by Business Category ~� Retail Trade,63.91 Accommodation &Food Services,9.6 Construction, 6.84 Administrative, Waste Management, Remediation Services,1.49 Wholesale Real Estate Rental& Trade, 5.18 Information.3.81 I leasing,1.72 Other Services,5.46 Manufacturing,1.99 Source:Spokane Community Indicators Table 7.5 2010 Taxable Sales by Business Category Category Total Taxable Sales Percent of Total Agriculture, Fishing, Forestry 465,244 0.03 Utilities 158,527 0.01 Construction 108,424,546 6.84 Manufacturing 31,595,586 1.99 Wholesale Trade 82,092,127 5.18 Retail Trade 1,012,831,614 63.91 Transportation and Warehousing 1,625,684 0.10 Information 60,372,526 3.81 Finance and Insurance 8,407,401 0.53 Real Estate Rental and Leasing 27,185,713 1.72 Professional, Scientific and Technical 12,140,247 0.77 Administrative&Support and Waste Management& 23,560,170 1.49 remediation Services Educational Services 1,190,899 0.08 Health Care and Social Assistance 3,386,226 0.21 Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 7,974,085 0.50 Accommodation and Food Services 152,221,399 9.60 Other Services 51,041,524 3.22 Public Administration 215,261 0.01 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 6 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The gross taxable sales for the City, from 2004 to 2010, is shown in Figure 7.4 and Table 7.6. Figure 7.4 Gross Taxable Sales r ®2004 ■2005 ®2006 ■2007 MI 2008 ®2009 y 2010 Table 7.6 Gross Taxable Sales 2004—2010 Year Total Taxable Sales 2004 1,539,680,299 2005 1,731,672,576 2006 1,882,594,225 2007 1,966,515,200 2008 1,797,852,179 2009 1,613,410,134 2010 1,585,010,451 Source: Spokane Community Indicators Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 7 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan A comparison of the County of Spokane, City of Spokane and Spokane Valley gross taxable sales and annual growth rate is illustrated in Figure 7.5. Figure 7.5 Total Taxable Retail Sales and Annual Growth Rate: City Data 5,00 25.0% 20,0% 4.00 o 15,0% P a, o,' 3.00 10.0% a S ti r) '111n e- 2.30 5.0% ua . " 0.0% 1,04 -5,0% 0.00 r • -10,0% 1999 2030 2001 2302 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year • Total Retail Sales(Billions),City of Spokane Total Retail Sales(Billions),City of Spokane Valley w Annual Growth Rate,Spokane County ▪ Annual Growth Rate,City of Spokane Annual Growth Rate,City of Spokane Valley Year City of Spokane Valley City of Spokane County of Spokane 2004 Taxable Retail Sales(in 1.54 3.29 N/A billions) Annual Growth Rate N/A 2.2% 5.9% 2005 Taxable Retail Sales(in 1.73 3.48 N/A billions) Annual Growth Rate 12.5% 5.7% 7.9% 2006 Taxable Retail Sales(in 1.88 3.84 N/A billions) Annual Growth Rate 8.7% 10.3% 9.2% 2007 Taxable Retail Sales(in 1.97 4.00 N/A billions) Annual Growth Rate 4.5% 4.5% 5.6% 2008 Taxable Retail Sales(in 1.80 3.92 N/A billions) Annual Growth Rate -8.6% -2.1% -4.2% 2009 Taxable Retail Sales(in 1.61 3.73 N/A billions) Annual Growth Rate -8.3% -4.9% -6.9% 2010 Taxable Retail Sales(in 1.59 3.67 N/A billions) Annual Growth Rate -1.8% -1.4% -1.8% Source: Community Indicators Initiative of Spokane, Eastern Washington University Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7- Economic Development Page 8 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Property taxes are part of the cost of doing business. The 2011 Property taxes in Spokane Valley include County, City, Library Bond, State School, Fire District and local school taxes, as illustrated in Table 7.7, for individual Tax Code Areas (TCA) Table 7.7 2011 Property Tax Rates within Spokane Valley per$1,000 valuation Levy Rate TCA 140 TCA 141 TCA 144 TCA 145 TCA 146 TCA 148 County: General 1.195057 Conservation Futures 0.044188 Road 1.332306 City of Spokane Valley 1.503003 State School 2.241034 Library 0.50000000 Subtotal 6.815588 6.815588 6.815588 6.815588 6.815588 6.815588 6.815588 SD 081 Spokane 5.654338 5.654338 5.654338 SD 356 Central Valley 4.490794 4.490794 4 4.490794 SD 361 East Valley 3.538868 3.538868 SD 363 West Valley 6.633464 6.633464 Fire 01 Spokane Valley 3.157323 3.157323 3.157323 3.157323 3.157323 Fire/EMS 08 Moran 2.121076 2.121076 2.121076 Total 15.627249 14.591002 14.463705 13.427458 13.511779 16.606375 Source: Spokane County Assessor A significant indicator of economic vitality is construction activity. Figures 7.6 through 7.8 summarizes levels of construction activity, valuation and permit revenue since 2004. Figure 7.6 Building Permit Activity Figure 7.6 New Construction Permits Issued 4 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Commercial 289 79 •Multi-Family 0 7_1 5 ■Single Family/Duplex 2971 396 4 7 539 3 4 1 6 Source: Spokane Valley Community Development Department-Building&Code Compliance Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7- Economic Development Page 9 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Figure 7.7 Construction Valuation lifirtfir I lip 2004 2005 2006 2007 ■2008 2009 ■2010 ■2011 Figure 7.8 Permit Revenue 11116 2004 2005 ■2006 L 2007 ■2008 ■2009 ■2010 ■2011 Tables 7.8 and 7.9 show the largest office / business parks and the leading industrial parks in the City of Spokane Valley, ranked by total square footage. Table 7.8 Largest Spokane Valley Office and Business Parks (Ranked by total square footage) Park Name/Address Total Square Footage Space Available as of Number of 1-1-12 Buildings Pinecroft Business Park 350,000 DND 12 12310—12825 E. Mirabeau Parkway Riverview Corporate Center 250,000 158,000 1 16021 E. Indiana Redwood Plaza 107,400 12,900 3 11707 E. Sprague CenterPointe Business Park 68,000 10,000 3 200 N. Mullan Argonne Mullan Plaza 54,000 8,000 2 920 N. Mullan Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 10 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 7.8 Largest Spokane Valley Office and Business Parks (Ranked by total square footage) Park Name/Address Total Square Footage Space Available as of Number of 1-1-12 Buildings Montgomery East Commercial Center 53,000 11,710 4 11616 E. Montgomery Broadway Avenue Business Park 52,700 17,000 4 5501 E. Broadway North Valley Business Park 51,300 6,390 3 11303, 11306&11327 E. Montgomery North Pines Center 51,000 2,000 6 1014 N. Pines Argonne Forrest Office Park 44,360 3,860 3 8815-8775 E. Mission Mullan Center 43,000 4,200 2 1410&1420 N. Mullan North Pines Professional Center 37,580 8,940 7 1005 N. Pines Montgomery CommerCenter 29,050 2,300 2 2721 N.Van Marter Boulder Creek 25,000 2,300 2 505 N.Argonne Argonne Mullan Center 20,000 775 2 708&720 N.Argonne Pinestone Business Center 7,900 1,550 3 2310-2314 N. Cherry DND did not disclose; FTE means full-time equivalent; NA means not available Source: January 2012 Book of Lists, Spokane County Journal of Business Table 7.9 Leading Industrial Parks (Ranked by total square footage) Park Name Total Square Space Available Park Number of Zoning Address Footage as of 1-1-12 Size(acres) Buildings Spokane Business and Industrial Park 3,800,000* 425,000 615 55 LI 3808 N. Sullivan Central Business Park 513,000 180,000 300 26 LI 11016 E. Montgomery East Spokane Industrial Park 110,000 none 8.5 5 I Broadway and Fancher Montgomery Business Park 105,800 4,100 6.8 2 LI 9922 E. Montgomery Bielec Industrial Park 105,000 25,000 14.5 4 HI 18001 E. Euclid Vista Industrial Park 95,600 9,000 18 8 HI 111 N.Vista Empire Industrial Park 90,000 2,200 7.5 13 LI 12009 E. Empire Trent Center 56,700 none 4.2 7 LI 6206 E.Trent Argonne Commercial Center 56,600 5,100 2.4 3 LI 9516-9608 E. Montgomery Fancher Bridge Business Park 56,000 15,300 3 5 HI 5805 E.Sharp Carstens Industrial Park 48,000 none 5 3 I 415 N.Thierman Van Marter Warehouse 45,000 none 3 1 LI 2701 N.Van Marter Farr Industrial Park 44,500 none 3.6 3 LI 9708 E. Montgomery Ella Industrial park 40,000 none 3 6 I 525 N. Ella Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7- Economic Development Page 11 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 7.9 Leading Industrial Parks (Ranked by total square footage) Park Name Total Square Space Available Park Number of Zoning Address Footage as of 1-1-12 Size(acres) Buildings Thierman Warehouse 30,000 none 1.5 2 HI 1419 and 1507 N.Thierman Alki Industrial Park 13,000 1,800 DND 2 HI 6002—6010 E.Alki *includes office and felx space I Industrial; HI Heavy Industrial; LI Light Industrial; DND did not disclose; FTE means full-time equivalent; NA means not available Source: January 2012 Book of Lists, Spokane County Journal of Business The largest employers within the City of Spokane Valley are summarized in Table 7.10. Table 7.10 Largest Spokane Valley Employers (Ranked by number of full time equivalent employees) Name FTE Employees FTE Employees Parent Organization, Business Spokane Valley Elsewhere Location Activity 11/1/11 11/1/10 11/1/11 11/1/10 Wal-Mart Stores 1,332 1,362 DND DND Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Retail Sales Bentonville,AK Central Valley School 1,248 1,245 0 0 Spokane Valley Public School District Kaiser Aluminum 850 800 DND DND Foothill Ranch, CA Aluminum Production Valley Hospital 485 457 0 0 Spokane Hospital/Health Care Yokes Foods, Inc. 426 408 317 282 Spokane Valley Retail Grocery Appleway Automotive 360 340 18,000 17,500 AutoNation, Inc. Auto Sales, Group Ft. Lauderdale, FL Service, Repair Spokane Industries, 282 211 3 3 Spokane Valley Stainless Steel Inc. Products Wagstaff, Inc. 279 259 67 66 Spokane Valley Machinery Design and Manufacturing SCAFCO Corp. 200 225 66 47 Spokane Valley Grain Storage System Manufacturing Alliance Machine 176 201 206 DND Spokane Valley Corrugated Box System International Handling and LLC Machines KeyTronicEMS 176 166 2,480 1,842 Spokane Valley Contract Manufacturing Good Samaritan 175 168 27,000 27,000 Sioux Falls, SD Retirement Society Community Principal Financial 169 177 DND 14,200 Des Moines, IA Investment, Group Insurance, Banking Hotstart, Inc. 166 162 6 4 Spokane Valley Engine Heaters Servatron Inc. 163 160 0 0 Spokane Valley Electronic Manufacturing Cascade Windows 162 200 374 200 Spokane Valley Vinyl Window Manufacturing DND did not disclose; FTE full-time equivalent; NA not available Source: January 2012 Book of Lists, Spokane County Journal of Business 7.3 Strengths &Weaknesses 7.3.1 Strengths Spokane Valley is sheltered from harsh continental climate by the Cascades and Bitterroot Mountain Ranges, and has a mild climate with four seasons. Its proximity to Idaho and the mountains provides excellent recreational opportunities throughout the year. Sportsmen appreciate the opportunities for hunting and fishing within the Inland Northwest. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 12 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane Valley is strategically located along Interstate-90 with an excellent transportation system linking air freight, rail and freight terminals. It has an ample supply of land designated for commercial and industrial purposes. Plentiful vacant and underdeveloped land is located in close proximity to the scenic Spokane River. The Spokane Industrial Park located on SR 290 (Trent Road) houses a 325,000 square foot Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) designated by the U.S. Department of Commerce in November 2002 and activated in February 2004. The FTZ was allocated by the Spokane International Airport System from Felts Field to its present location in Spokane Valley. FTZ benefits importers by allowing them to defer import duties on shipments until the cargo is transshipped to another location within the United States, or to avoid those duties when imported freight is exported out of the country. Inland Empire Distribution Systems (IEDS) operates the FTZ, providing third party logistics and a public warehouse. The FTZ is also the site of the only U.S. Customs authorized Container Freight Station (CFS) which allows sealed in-bound containers to clear Customs in Spokane Valley. CFS is a federal service provided to individuals and businesses through the Spokane/Coeur d'Alene area. IEDS also provides the only public railroad transloader service in the Inland Northwest (Spokane/CDA Area) for both the BNSF and Union Pacific Railroads. Because of its location adjacent to the City of Spokane, Spokane Valley may be eligible to seek expansion of the Spokane Community Empowerment Zone for qualified Census block groups. Expansion of the Empowerment Zone will allow participating businesses to take advantage of sales tax deferrals and Washington business and occupation tax credits in exchange for expanding the employment opportunities available to low and moderate income individuals residing within the area. A wide variety of retail outlets provide goods for the region. Of major importance in Spokane Valley are automotive and recreational vehicle sales concentrated along Sprague Avenue at 1-90. These businesses and others in manufacturing, service, transportation, and wholesale/distribution are well represented by the Valley Chamber of Commerce, the sixth largest chamber in the State of Washington, which boasts over 900 members. (Valley Chamber 2010 Annual Report) The Spokane area hosts a number of accredited institutions of higher education including community colleges, universities (both public and private) and private technical and business schools. Local K-12 public and private school programs have sought partnerships with these institutions to meet the training needs of a future work force. These institutions, particularly the community college system, have been active in seeking to meet the re-training needs of older workers displaced by losses of manufacturing jobs, and are receptive to developing partnerships with the local business community. Among these, the Spokane Intercollegiate Research and Technology Institute (SIRTI) is a Washington State-funded, economic development agency that advances the growth of emerging technology companies in the Inland Northwest. SIRTI's commercialization services aim at helping clients bring innovative technologies to market while positioning them to compete globally. These services include: strategic planning, market research, business plan development, marketing, connections to technology managerial talent, and access to funding sources, as well as providing flexible, state-of-the-art incubator facilities. SIRTI also helps to build the Northwest's technology workforce by providing paid internships to eligible students from regional colleges and universities. The Small Business Development Center(SBDC) is a cooperative effort between Washington State University and the US Small Business Administration. Counselors provide one-on-one, confidential assistance at no charge for management and technical business affairs, such as start, purchase or the sale of a business, choosing and incorporating new technology, financial management, business plan development, market plan development, and business research. In 2010, small businesses in Washington State saw their sales decrease an average of one percent. However, clients who worked with SBDC advisors saw their sales increase an average of nearly four percent. (SBDC,2011) Advances in technology and local investment in fiber-optic cable networks represent a significant competitive advantage in attracting information-based business to Spokane Valley. Spokane Valley is also the beneficiary of high quality medical facilities which serve a wide region, extending beyond Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 13 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Washington. The presence of these facilities has attracted a large number of active retirees who represent a well-educated and highly-skilled resource for local employers. Housing in the Spokane Valley is of high quality and affordable in all density ranges. Plentiful water and power is provided by local utility purveyors at rates that are reasonable. In addition to the many businesses focused on the prosperity of Spokane Valley, the City is fortunate to have a large number of professional, volunteer, service and faith-based organizations committed to community development and improvement. Citizens are engaged in the development of the new city and have dedicated countless hours to developing ideas which would promote economic development and job creation. Another important piece of the regional economic development picture is Greater Spokane Inc. (formerly Spokane Area Economic Development Council). . Since 1974, Greater Spokane Inc. (GSI) has established a proven track record, strong leadership, and solid industry expertise as "the starting point" for regionally focused economic development. The role of GSI is to implement a business-focused strategy that proactively promotes the region's business identity, facilitates job growth and business expansion, and leverages available resources to provide effective solutions. While organized as an independent not-for-profit corporation funded by both public and private entities, GSI works collaboratively with key partners across the region. Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs (SNAP) provides programs to empower low income individuals and families with opportunities promoting financial independence. The SNAP Economic Development programs offer financial tools and education to promote sound money management and investment in assets, including business ownership, home ownership, higher education and transportation. The MicroEnterprise Development Program is operated by SNAP, along with public and private partners, to help qualified individuals develop a business plan, acquire capital and start or expand a business. Perhaps the most important aspect of economic development is the City's continuing efforts to streamline the permitting process and to ensure regulations are fair and predictable for businesses. Efficient permitting processes are a key factor for companies searching for suitable locations to build or expand their business operations. In order to remain competitive, the City must continually evaluate its permitting process to ensure a timely and predictable outcome. Regulations must also be continually monitored and amended as necessary to make sure the City is not unduly burdening businesses. 7.3.2 Weaknesses The City of Spokane Valley has yet to establish its own unique identity within the region. The lack of an identifiable city center and an overabundance of marginal commercial centers and strip development from an earlier era remain a part of the urban landscape. While they represent opportunities for redevelopment, they present very real challenges for economic development in the present. The costs of redevelopment are significantly higher than those with new development, and regulatory barriers often represent considerable obstacles to reinvestment in an aged infrastructure. Property subdivided in the past may need to be reassembled to meet development objectives at a significant cost to the investor in both time and money. The development experience of the last twenty years has shown the importance of attracting the proper tenant mix in a successful commercial project. To be successful today, retail development must be clean, well lit, landscaped and attractive, with convenient parking. More importantly, it must be perceived as safe with easy access. Existing buildings and properties are often not easily redeveloped to meet this criteria. Land development in the Spokane Valley has not had the advantages of urban planning at critical periods in its development. As a result, incompatibilities exist between adjacent land uses. This will be corrected over time as the City directs its own development. Development standards of the past have focused on rural rather than the urban types of development now mandated by the Growth Management Act. In some cases, the area continues to experience the effects of poor environmental practices in the past. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 14 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan As the information age advances, industrial development has moved from traditional manufacturing activities to business parks which combine corporate offices, call centers and electronic assembly of parts in an office/campus environment. Traditional warehousing has been replaced with "just in time" delivery and an increased dependence on efficient transportation movements. Business reliance on Internet access has replaced other more traditional methods of communication and sales. Unfortunately, many industrial properties have yet to be retrofitted to different standards. Because the historical economic base was predicated on manufacturing, as is the case within the entire Spokane area, the local labor force has not always adapted quickly enough to these changes in market conditions. Losses in manufacturing have displaced local workers without the skills required for work in highly technical jobs. Spokane Valley's location, only minutes from the Idaho state line, represents a significant challenge to local economic development efforts. The many services supported by the State of Washington's complex wage and tax structure place business and industrial development at a competitive disadvantage when compared with similar ventures in Idaho only a few miles away. Many of these weaknesses may be more perceived than real, but all have contributed to an image which will require time and focused community effort to correct. 7.4 Community Survey The statistically valid Community Survey conducted in the spring of 2004 identified economic growth as the single most important issue facing Spokane, followed closely by job creation and urban planning issues. Sixty-one percent of respondents also felt that having a city center was important to the City's future, and seventy-four percent supported spending public funds to create a city center. Not surprisingly, roughly three quarters of survey respondents felt that the establishment of a unique community identity in the City of Spokane Valley was important. Although nearly half of respondents (47%) felt that the development of a community identity could best be accomplished through social changes, another 28% indicated physical changes would be the best way to develop a community identity. One-quarter of respondents (25%) felt physical and social changes were equally important to the development of a community identity. During community workshops conducted in the spring and early summer of 2004, participants were asked to express their opinions on many of the same issues. Results of these informal surveys generally tracked the results of the larger survey. 7.5 Goals and Policies This section provides goals and policies that support cooperation and coordination at a regional level to ensure sustainable economic development. There are a number of established organizations in the region that are engaged in economic development activities. It is in the best interest of the City of Spokane Valley to collaborate with these regional organizations. By focusing on common goals and allocating resources accordingly, government and private organizations can work together regionally to maximize successful business start-up, retention, expansion and recruitment efforts. As with many cities, Spokane Valley will have limited funds with which to pursue its economic development goals. The City will have to use its resources in a focused and prioritized manner to have a positive impact on the local economic base. It will be imperative that Spokane Valley make strategic investments of the limited resources available and where possible, leverage resources in cooperation with other governmental and private agencies. Goal EDG-1 Encourage diverse and mutually supportive business development and the expansion and retention of existing businesses within the City for the purpose of emphasizing economic vitality, stability and sustainability. Policies Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 15 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan EDP-1.1 Strive to provide the necessary public facilities, infrastructure and services to support economic development. EDP-1.2 In conjunction with appropriate entities, encourage market feasibility studies to identify and target economic opportunities. EDP-1.3 In partnership with the business community and appropriate entities, encourage the development of a comprehensive marketing strategy customized for Spokane Valley and supportive of regional economic development objectives. EDP-1.4 Consider establishment of a public interactive web-based geographic information system to facilitate economic research for businesses. EDP-1.5 Encourage the development of business incubators to promote the creation of new business enterprises. EDP-1.6 Encourage creation and retention of home-based businesses that are consistent with neighborhood character. EDP-1.7 Encourage State and Federal agencies to locate in the City of Spokane Valley. EDP-1.8 Encourage local organizations engaged in business retention, expansion and recruitment. EDP-1.9 Encourage public and private programs and activities that diversify the economy and labor force. EDP-1.10 Encourage the full utilization and expansion of the Foreign Trade Zone. EDP-1.11 Seek expansion of the Spokane Community Empowerment Zone to include income-eligible Census block groups within the City of Spokane Valley. Goal EDG-2 Encourage redevelopment of commercial/industrial properties within the City. Policies EDP 2.1 Develop appropriate urban design and infrastructure standards for the City Center area. EDP-2.21—Develop zoning, permitting, and incentives that encourage prioritized development consistent with the SVCP. EDP-2.32 Focus economic development resources through specific redevelopment areas as appropriate. Goal EDG-3 Promote the development of a qualified labor force that is globally competitive and responds to the changing needs of the workplace. Policies EDP-3.1 Encourage the region's world-class education consortium. EDP-3.2 Encourage post-secondary education and technical schools to locate and expand offerings within the City of Spokane Valley. EDP-3.3 Encourage community colleges and technical schools in the development of customized training programs for businesses. EDP-3.4 Encourage K-12 education to include skills-based training and creative partnerships with business. EDP-3.5 Encourage public/private partnerships in training and education, through continuing employee education. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7– Economic Development Page 16 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan EDP-3.6 Encourage cooperation among businesses, schools, labor unions and other organizations in developing job training through apprenticeships, mentoring and other programs. EDP-3.7 Promote opportunities that employ Spokane Valley residents in Spokane Valley. Goal EDG-4 Encourage regional tourism as a sustainable provider of jobs and markets. Policies EDP-4.1 Encourage the development of a comprehensive tourism promotion plan that supports the marketing efforts of regional tourism agencies, attractions and events. EDP-4.2 Encourage the development of local attractions, recreational, cultural and sports events which take advantage of the four seasons. EDP-4.3 Encourage and promote the marketing of appropriate facilities that are consistent with Spokane Valley's tourism objectives. EDP-4.4 Expand and develop neighborhood and regional linkages and improvements to the Centennial Trail and Spokane River frontage. Goal EDG-5 Collaborate with other governmental agencies and the business community to promote a sustainable, strong, diverse and healthy regional economy. Policies EDP-5.1 Improve the effectiveness of capital improvement programs by encouraging greater communication and coordination between local governments and the private sector. EDP-5.2 Develop and implement strategies to identify and use appropriate Federal, State and regional economic resources and incentives. EDP-5.3 Encourage the continued support and funding of active duty, reserves and National Guard components of the United States Armed Forces. EDP-5.4 Collaborate with other local governments and business organizations in promoting legislation in support of economic development when appropriate. EDP-5.5 Encourage development of and participation in a recognition/certification program for businesses and non-profits moving toward local, sustainable practices in their operations. EDP-5.6 Encourage development of and participation in a "buy local" campaign. Goal EDG-6 Establish a balanced approach to environmental sustainability which complements the utilization of area resources and economic growth. Policies EDP-6.1 Encourage the retention, development and recruitment of environmentally friendly businesses. EDP-6.2 Encourage programs that foster and promote sustainable business practices. EDP-6.3 Encourage the development of clean technologies. Goal EDG-7 Maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility, consistency, predictability and clear direction. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 17 of 18 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Policies EDP-7.1 Evaluate, monitor and improve development standards to promote compatibility between adjacent land uses; and update permitting processes to ensure that they are equitable, cost-effective, and expeditious. EDP-7.2 Review development regulations periodically to ensure clarity, consistency and predictability. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Chapter 7— Economic Development Page 18 of 18 1 I 1 deo 1 e a pay` filo yoForkcr and Prowess °i 12 ir. nemo.ea.�ot�e vattey m Map 3.1 Mandalay ~ yF — Sanson 0 Wabash-Valle s•O" Wan II• — Arterial Street Plan pcnie.y , LL weuesle. J City of - ___�- , Spokane • ! _ __..___ ww 1 s Legend _/ lirlh9 miN M l o,Dalton - - � lh •Amom 0_07.30. IN1111,111114A1' -f CDrrent Classification IE■■■■ o p y � v. -"""� � Dalton „� Fred ck alb■ ��IIIGI�� �� El Enna'Spnkhae Rfver �� ,mo w11: • 7 � ®® ,111111015M of Mlllw6od� -<•' � � o State or Federal Principal Arterial � -• �° � � mor Arterial �. ®t<a� calls 41111. !IDI ,„:"'" imil � Ilk M� A IOW �mea��� u�raa am li .,„0 Aottmile ppm ./ Shannon- _a6iiiiiw _ _ di ear rr t Collector 111 — — -- _� - iii e, r -1,:e."�*Iii , se n Arterial .. _ �� Proposed Principal A ��,i�:,. V� �90 ;r `r ` NW."TE WAMM - ___ Proposed Minor Arterial Proposed Collector � ®ri �� Ir�� •��• � catalao �� �.��ry���� �, � � _colada. I rein ��'��+ �i111� �. � �a � r ` """"+'. Railroad NITAm MU M 11111. M E.WM.� m_ =—� � i Proposed Railyard - __ - _MI/4•13 E HQzeo A Valle .11II 1 NM MEI s'11��' ' C�ig� -le yw' 11 ...... .�� .�......'-,nim �immg t®® N®- IEeAY®®O1 City of Spokane Valley mimmmmMMIMIAIN1 ���' �� 1 Alm . Other Mnmci alines � ....aml� 9 ��i �1a . Shelle �i-� I �p®F��� mm7 Pi��ym �E2`,\ 1 ■�,nm�o^�11�' _�,I'>•l a y h i r Urban Growth Area MMIMMIklid _. 11=isNN .Ir� ■' �� �� ®= , Ir am Water Bodies °h �E1 ��N 999; _ t 1q. In�n •ME YID lam tun �`- Upm in. . EL.vtn11J1111 liililibl 5 ..or o -�*PE�� • ii„,,,,, IN.... • denryle Qat Pri'Icvadv Blvd collector, to Le ved. ���� f , -- NJ 25th c.'iend I .: � E smor _— .m„1.: -- Map Location nn „ea. __ Lam •• %,, � Ipp,,,,,, rsig=rimnir ■ 31st 32nd m ism xMen ill Effective Date:07/24/2013 irl• Viy ,R Ordinance No.:13-008 p Wil IIIIin 4ro 40 „a IM ff Be a Terre 1 = ! I� '42nd 44m .■aan, w v . aari- ■. •• - w 6m am ea` Miles 1 I rM o` " roi fTI f r l d R `7 :emssa a•ey _i Farcet .•P .�vcFPSs 's a° .. :est B K. taboutd. n r f' - p d R Mo p . ly d I 'ability f - d - i,Lowell,. 'ea F. &e,a e�n,ae `` T f m r t t t Ch f Spk F alley,Community E v fit a .n D l p t D p t t D fPl g 1p.(509)921-1000. �61sA U A Prndrictnfm Celt of Spnka ballet;Cnmm It Development Department --- _;r / - ? Map 7.1 411 =,k 2013 --i 1 W ur 'mummtuar. PI '; `°. -"" Development Activity Iiim.City of :ti- 4 'J 'M Spokane � ; A - '� 490 * _ NEM * Legend wlA� 111 -mi: �� * L-_-.!Urban Growth Boundary 1111 ul111 •�iiii r. G 1 Of-V1i11W 1 O 1 �� City of Spokane Valley wl . -=_ :■�:��/J' -*_-�� \, 1 - Other Municipalities l';i ` Pr �. Permits m Ons .. / „c..,„ 4.1 ir L111111 Woo r1101 irkel * New Commercial '. * New Residential yn ' ��_ i C' * Tenant Improvement �� �' IIIKOMME �.� MI 111 1.1 PM Land Actions(Plats and Rezones) _ 111 11� 11■ii.R��� G II!"�' 1— =WI WA 1=11:41111111111.. ;7C PIM • .11111111.1411. IN•mmmimmi—Emmiumirm•ili.mmkarla mpg! ;a eirra....._iiimuini IIETIM mlillnii=11= Ile Va . Ibiglimmulire H.. ,‘.......4.16 II* .r.,,, 1 mmommo=— - .■ mall . -- ''' ',_t win .i- �1 1 w� x�:r �f LakdLS �t * *i �7G--� t' *-inli ma �ww■ Y GT c:-, - * Ni: s` 11111 * IE.=iimm ■ ■ wlwlwl wl PiI! A ii-ii1 .. ..——jO iiioINffl 1 1 twlwlwl ■'1 t - ' t' =_,e•=_ 1 iris ale =-1diri 1 1 — , Map Location 1 Ell1, �i 1 1 -27 Effective Date:07/24/2013 �.al ,. ; ratite IP 1 14 11, Ordinance i o.:13-OORIT Spokae_ 'I' Walley J 11.11.11111 ��FW 0OS 0.9�� -.-- !WNW I i i i I i i :°::;% �t Pi fd L��I , _ d n� t t P� c Ok . x h ttl _ -� P hd-a liability t - 1- t. 1 t 7 f n t zd City fSpokaneFalley,Community ^ Development D pmtment,DI (Plano g(509)921-1000. / \ — Product of the City of Spokane t'alley,Community Development Department Clements mm IOWo age a ,?► re." Map 11.1 �E sp`m Fo` p Mandalay - r Sanson N C Existing Bike o� :Wu wanasn y / 8 le- ,... og. P � _�a •CC Facilities oilli ems' weuesie J� E _ ,....6 weuesiev weuE city of ViAlf 4. silAUpriver r �sXI AIMINA ���� Spokane .�(A" ; z � Legend � Orchard Ave •• wwlPlizaznaw f'7 Park p1p1E1�` ,•• re 1000° _Itn¢wl(�III .N�DII�]©�pRp�'{ Nm.�N •d-�oal‘e^ Em.E mum Dalton Existing Facilities Frederick a� 1pt�t�ldl'�11rS11 wA �� .��" ,. - ..--=__.. drFu�-'irw. :�_ Budd d DAN Spgkkne River ..^� � � Existing Bike Lane r�r�� ��' of-Millwood d•.» �� Baekev rg® gp ,,. N ♦ •d'„r - mi.mm.� Mirabeau Fe'nia Existing Shared Use Path -- Nu •. liar*IMEI Park ru�r a a NDN ii - ,..--"�• z , I Sullivan' - � � oi Shannon _ Park Indiana*)l N CentennialTrail a ��;irofroiiiirmil i� "`--���mum• 11 196 Valle Mission V „1 ® Trailheads �NNp Pank � Flora w1 E .. 1 m CPA BX 2813 aimIna dna N otir � Schools .® NG hh ■ �RR M rated.to 198 N _ 11C � ��N� - m rnearya_a n.P klj aH ��� -Ivzfisral =;.• • ii• cataido r Railroad . ._[iiaIli i Pool 11 ■ a - sroadwa Other Municipalities t itt lirager-r NW vaueu. ,11� =y' m - , wk _ • 8 �s��� wewo ��1 City of Spokane Valley ' -: sg� L Balfour��NNE Opportunity_ �� �,� ��� vaueywav i= Id "�, h •again Township N^�� Park Hall w RParks SMMN^ a� ,��: ®mispiFai d °� 2nd * Water Bodies ��77I��7�� � ��.on I� Skene i �N _'g G4n, k!✓• owe ��':. �:1 EIMM LakeY '7.. 6thJ N N ��E"aN�� EiE+IL7NNEMIII cd Y�~ N h IINU Edgecliff EJB , 1 r mmira A� . ..,,iv..: " . R_ N, t N Park " ��Via �� f ANRJ'N N������ 1r 11th ,: vi, ` _ n 12th Tih „wowNNEM £14th 13. .. 17th 14th 1AIME: wom , , , o z c 17M1 �y1 �'"e tiv ii0..... ..: J 12m - 111 0:. • - :II r..— 18th t vartiEromm i`4 1 j 1 - •� il i r” • 1, - m ,a11111601E,Mm.Trrace'V.iew Park�� �`•�1 �� ��° o," 21st e ytl = %Pool, ' ,t � '3,o`� 21stLo CPA-BX-2813 Schaf _=d 24tha. ` 1 � � ilr, Polo to S.of 15th Ave R • Rx e a�` N�[N�t Y 2 `';v wn,.i. o rB Map Location zstnNNA� ma, er 27tH S5e' mm®�• Br0, - v E ��NNN Park ohm., U 32nd i M31st 32nd 1 Castle7A� o. s m Park l. � 35In �I Effective Date:XX/XX/XX WO En X AN N33IM Ordinance No.:XX-XXX mil il* 41 I a91e 'o, ''6 � gene Terre p e him b = ° 1 j e Ball valley° 1 r " ~42nd 44th ,44tH .0 ,v," F w geav s 44tH 5Lormir )Thor•e E den 0 OS 1 Miles 46th _ Cinrker I I -d' (°S a Holm,. s E �� To 1 . T/ f t l tl P P)d f s F2,re `� by :auessa .:.ate rn e I d bj.z t t t The City k.- aim der .est as guarantee,about theJ 1 fth p d o ee Moo- ° P b d l -liabilityf - d - - t-Lowell,. Ng' 'Ped ca p,a - ��6 0 ` T f a t t t City)fSp k Valley,Community M �` a 2, "��o npa e / v D. l pm tD p t t D fPl ng(509)921-1000. m U k _ p7errp ��$ Product nfM CEt)of Spnka Talley,Cnmm Et)Development Department T i rike........ spm Map 11.2 1 Mandalay ~ .c Sanson ' wanasn = 11i — Recommended m lal {P o� Welle- +� Bikeway Network 4B.'6 well sl ++ City of e Upriver /1\N 1 -- . ___,.!,.= ,... ,i..,. Spokane g�A III i € ��/) '� �_ w� d aal Legend g� 1\ •. 1w� rrchpaarrdkAve '� Ken ® ■Loam. ■ ��p"pp'�©© • •• ',• '� I■w■wiw■wlFi■II Bicycle Sysfeneillh' mF�Fl�+�`1+�kyf� °ZZ s'oalion • Em _- � v�imassu u "€,im. mFla rv:w cr ce �� " i-Vy■eggla111104City4- -- ��t i=iiiimilshg oe�■ion '� Existing Bike Lane `�' =0:177Fred S oknne ' 7 ..�' _ ��� ,F� a Ii�WOOIt - Existing Shared Use Path gp =Er kg , Fairview MEQ Mirabeau _F � 6 iil ' - om .��a �7 okev @��� Park " =MS r � rt600 u`� a��r:a! " Ma^nom ,2 Proposed Bike Friendly Route ior w ■ _ �°� �� • � ■ s e'.a .r .I Mery Proposed Bike Lane 9 +,� ■ � � 4 Park Mol _ um d _.... Ivan .19 _ m ,w- ora P�1 �1.11.1011111r. Ill 04 r'liV ..... •••• Proposed Shared Use Path � -.--•"� .. Valls-Misslon� 'a �„.;/,„......e......41:„., mm. �Ve Parkes" ® Fi iai Ped/Bike Bridge 4 .,� a Greenacr s a°. -� '� ■... ���`■` �� MAW— - • • ,,= _ ___1- . orel1 j�- Proposed Ped/Bike Bridge -t: Park Road � 41■` ��Ej3 N 71771 °„met { 3�i - r... -, '111,161 �� `P6-41, milia.. i1� 01 _ CD Potential Crossing Treatments �mmw. ezr'O+ IG!!1M_4r1� o• _` Al, �OI v: � �_ ■■■ it y i ' n r .140.146111111 F-”+ °- PPM 6;x-0 I* n- a LIWYtI A-OX 2013 11 w 11 a B ay _ -, a pp }Township i1'. mAll Balfour e Q ortunit aarall ri 1=qP r, Ha r.- a!� Palrk "11 Hall m Centennial Trail l41 ■4rR'� i "�1�� PCZ �� s a a - �1�� a d 2nd s� F3�1VAN 2 d ® Tradheads 1 !�•11 • �� ® �,�� All S/ llc r1 A_� a' 61�■■ ma N= , Lake "-' mi M' Schools InF ul ul 777J1"•®7■ NI��Y� !•fume ■ 9th > `— 7t w;-i++++ Railroad F i �dgeclif` ° A 7l inim� ciplE 11a , 1iiimals �/�lith : J in 1m Park il rf•IlS wif keprp. _ -pi �%f r Other Municipalities izth 114th 13.h 14thIlkG _ •h 4th • i ck 12tH 1� $a77�7F]f _ 57■L 77irdllEMM City of Spokane Valley vm • .,. „ Ors Ili 18th ,i las. ��.V 11 ff i• ° et• nrn n Sf7t77F I■ r ° x▪ _ - Parks c m a nam Terracciyiew Park E 2 �� _ zlst e i ¢ t ei CPA-0X-2013 7 I r %-rOoln4• iTtf w� • "o nm 7tro Water Bodies LI Schafer to S. �5 21st e"ne E _of 15th Ave 4Wy `�'r-g- 7 `snag 25th a iiEl �� �' iv, ia.v 27th Vista M MPri Br ns - E E Map Location 29th e F �ai Park ® ::ii •. arra„, c _ o ▪ 32nd 31st 32nd m `cols le l� r' °' Park ((( 41 • �`t Effective Date:07/24/2013 37th � �'•.4 Ordinance No.:13-008 • ril i = Ito : € y " nail Spokane p , j116? Salt,ie ~'2nd 44th 44th imp �,.I.Th°r.e w er0 Beavis: 44th I Valley , 1ma, o c .; 46th 4 try �a cen,e F LLIIMI laii �t lei Z A .m ses„ 0 0.5 1 ,co o2 Miles "a oa a Holman my o v I i I i I 67,1 & >euessa u m a Bret r . Ti I , ilp pldf . E ao :esv - and b],t t t The City k a • Ro e° o Po n aaMw, 6 u guarantee, 9 / . a r fd - p d `Pea &°,,,. cerrude Ma goo °� _ w P -lyd I liabilityfor - d tLowell,. . o c _ T : �I ti101111111d Cin IfSp k Valley,Community $ �' ao`, :rr, ry � ��0 _ De,el pm nt Depth tme,t,D n fPl Planning,(509)921-1000. ,1st d , 6 n W An Product of the Cit,of Spokane 3'alley,Community Development Department _ Clements sa�4S'- c Vis:- __. / % jj' _ o t m 9 4. c_____ Map 11.3 ,( Joseph E Q'� F° P Mandalay t o °8 r SansonN� a�T, Existing Sidewalk m Sictlrsley. 1,,,an la • Wabash - >° oe a isenharl,Northside 3 , s v LL ;m Network �av0 Qo a ha�a� f� weuesle aL7mrij ' 4� I weueslev Ian esu C—ity of ,.river �� Adams Trentw ��g tta wettete,,we.a;aeI Spokane .aaItigri jik' o € ®�►Ma• Indua al ZaA Legend r 'Orchard Ave Emb • Ke ..1 wwni�•Iodiji ��,�,_ • • •• ,�,vp+a' ,j � .y�l s Sidewawe —lk Inventory Parkmn®eE'[I.EE i ,. a cam II111I ° ■ ff�i �pIYIIN / oal`on pj°•1tepI-ryk.�,Y�yn�Bau\ - � � oal�n Sidewalks Fred rick �� 11111111� m � • ,,,,,,2a-- e ' ^�^_'-••• t'IPe kE < Euelld Curb Ramps Spokane River w rEEE a e�� 11rl"" - of Mi11w6od ✓rlt �� -10 .� Ede g ■ �ya"� E p� Mirabeau g Ramps - m■® e ® 1 ./♦i Textured Curb Ram s -- ••Eli 9 v 9 srakeve A Park Buake ur F��1 ■.d. r- Iar.t 1f7 �� P to .. / Carl •1ID.� J I May�� ` ,• �4 /.%"�•,r a _•y"',•s K EM1 �� na`nn`°n' .rr ' '•�IIJI,i_� •.• SullivanPark • M°�omery -�.,� ,1ijl{ Centennial Trail ii I. ifc �j�ii%� �, I�-�" H s ■ Q, Valle Mission _ NO 1' ••safd.7:1 ��,:1 ® Traillleads i,�"'�,! � - �N Park I F ���� �' Flora Ea 14� 9■M-b�a s d ore*. -^ -' Mazur •• • A, , if-Gree MaZ1 P Schools •a IS �smo 1 �{ to �� nacres neo ,g -. I"� Vii. E 1 e �",-•- .00. III Railroad s ■� _ 011119EN =�I� a' .)i i - ; �1—EI 11 'I1 �� • E$Y Park MEM!ala � . �_.� 1i i ! . m��. "'etin= ., A calaldo 2 fey °�:m.. y '- ELM le y a LL O Itq�llm� a `� •adwa la Ido - I 1 Other Municipalities sroaaura E 1 Pool■ �11$111� - ® Balfour I �,Opportunity Tot i I � �_ -��,. _-3 7. I � - � ,m s ® s b Ve L1_ c�a a City of Spokane Valley A,`,-7.0,- m �t n t 7 I I 3 a vauev �� __vhl® pp pts • Alk allevur A ' — Parks �o Ma n, •_, He't.'�� -�_ Park Hall -__-_�— -- Oren 7',','-. $-'..fA -�E lar I, _ 1st1. ' 2nd r s a ilip Water Bodies "EERIII �,, - 13L1i wa _ `— 3r 3rd R —i,2' 2 2nd a y9 th 8 P a v f�� 4t �1 1 _ 3� 9 4th €1 @a Fialin o,A 4th d 5th St t �- Shelley 1 `- I'- ■L7•MIAMErammotosi ° r 6th 2i MEM Romig h�,o'`w. n I st t A 1, x° , a im-H b 1 I Lake tih c 6th I >�� Ifi ■ 1 E E` ■I I. 1- II 9M. �. �` S E Edgecliff4,. a h �" mp� m c E a _ ■■ i 11th a 7�, }n �� l %Y■ II.•Park- , �_i k'=•;-..c.- l N1zth ., _ �I ■■ 1I F �I 14th 13th v 12th 14th e+ gym 1 Id pI I-I_ a•1 1 •t °1 I I 1114th e- k u 5th 1] I� fie/ 17th i I I�I� 16th • 1 t @ I I ''a • ■'••s r Osm1 N!!. 18th 1 mss\ � _���'Si��18th f � ■ -- mMIla z� ,,:mzn _�'.„ to a\ •, , _E:��• Terrace\lew Park g °18th = I AlYa °° a a '2 -,-.° vs, ; Wi€t ill EE mom .rPool. a ast 21st Le- _m� 22n. _ i1■TI 'calF IZ3 E 23 d .22n..i 123rd J 24t 1— C p ` 24s .. denn;° ,,'N 1M=1 ;25Y Kic.r..•71 I j - ` •',n, _ 4 z4mwaama.o 9" aa:v 2 MapLocation 25th Q \ Bih. EEIE: - m or 4 ! .E0�_ - 9uttivan,North side E 27th �e`a ...,,-E Browns , 29th tt / \� SE©_E Par ^31n. - PIN sae o 32nd - ti 31st 32nd 0 s \-Castle 1 : ' E a\ .`ParkPik% 1-�,.• asln 36th E Effective Date:XX/XX/XX /- I. a - EM111 r�� � 5 Ordinance No.:XX-XXX Y 37th a 301.5 Li, Ci as-v?0; CA' t� ■r■'� c I W 1 = Na�ae' Terre p �■ •0L3 c� Wo 4, .-0,„o y € `°Ci b 41st sail - • ffi 1 'ho All \ 42nd 44th ,44th a m` w VS 44th ���"""111��9�1��t1t��� Marie ■. Thor.e �`J 3 4'l �a ° 1 46th a h B� 0 0.5 1 2 Miles cnrkery •� ", rf( m, PSN I 1 I 1 I �+kdap Holman r.nolo rod vAh e 1 r T) t , ) d n - n ii d f m H :aueas • „Saoil'i 1 ,soun e,and bj.z t -t t The City k.- aim Er 6: °ey Fercet .o d'io '�° n eesi�`.r n 8 guarantee,about they z fth p d Ili° Mor,° ° P bd I liability j d t Lowell,. Po $ eat �e,n C---f2,,,„ henna s400x 7 f ro t tt City fSp k Valley,C ry a 1 V - D. l pm tD p t t D fPl g(509)921-1000. v A` kms e 0 \05555 - � s Product of theCDts of SpokaneTalle,,Cnmm it,Development Department Clements sa• 1-g " tea 1 II%I k7:1411:4 6111.'1: °wA a s 9a o� °_ Map 11.4 P � m Recommended Mandalay F o Sen .erect .......egf• y "' C wcllcl 9IL'a a W h � dot _ � ��"d`o �. Pedestrian Network ,,hr 9onn.. - ? Br.ea• we awl S "0 ellesley E I li• . ,zr+' Wella d City of � �ig �Ixn t,.rver rxx ="...� .. J �ii77 _., Spokane xn' = a \ xx I0 . ....--- Legend - _ iRFlA11i7/11.1 egen Orchard Ave im'immb •� raww� mam _ • • ���.11,�,�pp,, ` Pedestrian Network �C■E . ..• .... _��iii.. 1...._ ill _ anima fillE �� ..oal�on �., sw w Sidewalks xt "r, €��tl��nilr�U���w:.. '� ,; oauon� .� ra Proposed Sidewalks Rrede k S okkae River .w•' p _��� ���� —= of MPllwood rira raga = Blpr7 [Bo '�� Mirabeau � 7 e e Existing Shared Use Path lin spy $ ���Em ��� g>`+ limn • "� Park - s ••••.proposod Shared Use Pats ii IE I ----' y �����+•--�,tl, i- Nei Van ie Kalb A �• _ Ped/Bike Bridge /�E�l.! ' ^- �1� �• SullivanIII xdl�,., � J �tLl �..-' �,A�';�' .s� I_ 'n.NU •�_ ____ Park a I E Proposed PcdtBikc Bridge -alan � / ' VP--;-7,00 ,__------ � -'' '' „ �Moraa q_��5 Valley Mission ] k�S Centennial Trail /,.,. Park dtl I � ^"" �' •�7 r� Fes�F:: i NA st•�Greenacrea'��_ E ® Trailheads MI •m PI ana LA `�INE Arg .p one s® ... o Schools Milli 1. Park oI ll MI r IM .�:a �PILrl �1�� ,fid�i niao rmet catalao "• •mo- rAp �*++++� Railroad gym. �m�. Pool � '..'.'ll�. n.r.�i� Ti MEN di MIENe" Milo . was Ems Alio MN WIN11111110 Other Municipalities „r1: __ -__ _ 45:71r Maps il° Mir '� ,1 (IBalfour �'; Opportunity Township et""4E7 la II ySe" City of Spokane Valley a' �� 1 Park Hxll � .: 41 - -: ''''4.41111111 '91era .11 �� d . ' • ( Parks lit. _ _ =1st • Ira ...049•...2A P�.1Lf• ° 3r. ,. .. Ri..lntl �` �', f m \ • .�� >♦ :MUM M _. .I'!!'``'' ' Aelley a g!. Water Bodies �+ - IM �gimbal �r� e3i]Lsai77 6�n� -�1 Lake AL 4T 8 sm •• :I v lit 91h r Edgeehff ,,,,, 11...............¢� MN TE. L ,, j...Park , - �� °�'�! 1� —.r' •h� `. - n !1��-- �n 04 • 2th 14m 5, w�v \ �E •3�R� '� ��� y 12th `�. ry- ,6F : -.R'i 1 - 4y j a�i\ill F5.'311. 1 M.El IMIL rearri—mfair, L. M Mb,• °®� •r. i= •�:D-1 ■ 18th 18th y9 1�\� Q® `�r� 11 I4 .- 'g F • -r. •_ t m rh a IlkAmon. _bin Te" VI. Park IE a.[u� " 5. h` `� a al manA 81 r. r `/Pioolx mm - •m•Po�io 21st to - �E•._� = ' �� :: sr '' 3enn;, raet>tcsj ` ' c r,.ai. ..n• �� 25th Qac �, ���. ogi II' 26t"zn R. - �d r` •• Map Location 27th �:° w.=Es= Browns I ::I z4m Adam.m 29th a e ELMS Park �1<; . ■I sutn.aa,xormsta °% 3 nd ,J 1., Eat 32nd 2 J Park iA AY," L 36th 11 _ . v q� ��,11kTn. 9,..1/1 OrdinanEffectivece No.:ate: 13-008 013 '41_ d1 37th®. vicb 5 i Ck..''A 11° �ji+ = 0 14 2 5Oil , xrn� 4pl ,.' •Belle Terre N c p € ` m� Spokane ..• :ilk' P.nd— �. 2Sy. € m eau ]Valley. , s aim ~42nd 44th o. 43rd :.4 w Marie - m s 45th Ba`�'e� a 0 1 2 Miles ENM ., ,4. 46th o i i Eh,' cartery •e _ `� s 0,7" Haman 61 g n. e� 04 s t . T� I r I t p nadj m :auesa m and nth],t -t t TheCnmake, aim a ey ARIL sass as guarantee,t about d a , fd p d a Po • LW It More p lyd I liability j d - t Lowell,. $ J ea •i; ii_,� May�"ox�' 7 : f ro 1 1d City fSp k Valley,C ry "0 D. l pm t D p t t D fPl g(509)921-1000. 5 e'> - a ie �� F Product of theCit,of SpokaneValle.,Comm it Development Department m U FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2014 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 01-14 THROUGH 10-14 March 27,2014 A. Background: J. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan) includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2'3 to November 1' of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November I'` in late winterfearly spring of the following year, with a decision by City Council in late spring/early summer. 2. For the 2014 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment cycle, the Community Development Department initiated one site-specific Comprehensive Plan amendment designated as CPA-01-14 and received two privately initiated requests for site-specific Comprehensive Plan amendments, designated as CPA-02-14 and CPA-03-14. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment will receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. The City initiated Comprehensive Plan text amendments to six Comprehensive Plan Elements: Chapter 2 - Land Use, Chapter 3 Transportation, Chapter 4 — Capital Facilities and Public Services, Chapter 6 —private and Public Utilities, Chapter 7 — Economic Development, and Chapter i 1 — Bike and Pedestrian. The Comprehensive Plan text amendments are designated as CPA-04-I4 through CPA-10-14. B. Pindings: 1. Spokane Valley Municipal Cede (SVMC) 17.80.140 provides the framework for the public to participate throughout the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, including notice and public hearing requirements. 2. On February 7, 2014, notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald and each site subject to a site-specific amendment was posted with a "Notice of Public Hearing"sign,with a description of the proposal. 3. Individual notice of the site-specific map amendment proposals were mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each affected site. 4. Pursuant to the State 'environmental Policy Act set forth in RCW 4121C (SEPA), environmental checklists were required for each proposed Comprehensive Plan map and text amendment. 5. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. Optional Determinations of Non-Significance (DNS) were issued for each of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments on February 7,2014. d. The ONS's were published in the City's official newspaper on February 7, 2014, consistent with SVMC Title 21, Environmental Controls. 7. On March 20, 2014, the Department of Commerce was provided a notice or intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. S, The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and SVMC Title 21 have been fulfilled. 9. The PIanning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments concurrently to evaluate the cumulative impacts. The review was consistent with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and RCW 3630A(Growth Management Act). Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Ccrnmission for proposed 2014 Comprehensive Flan Amandmants Page 1 of 2 10. On February 27, 2014 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on each of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments, The public hearing was continued to the March 13, 2014 meeting. After receiving public testimony, the Planning Commission deliberated and voted to forward to City Council CPA-U1-14 and CPA-03-14 with a recommendation for denial; CPA-02-14 with no recommendation; and CPA-04-14, CPA-OS-14, CPA-06-14, CPA-07-14, CPA-08-14, and CPA-10-14 with a recommendation for approval. 11. The Planning Commission hereby adopts and incorporates findings for CPA-01-14 (Attachment I), CPA-02-14 (Attachment 2), CPA-03-14 (Attachment. 3) and CPA-04-014 through CPA-l0-014 (Attachment 4), 12. The Planning Commission finds the proposed text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with Growth Management Act and do not result in internal inconsistencies within the Plan itself. 13. The Planning Commission finds the site-specific map amendments arc not suitable properties for the requested land use designations consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Conclusions: The Planning Commission finds compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H)— Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-04-14 through CPA-1014. These proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, and will promote the public health, safety,welfare,and protection of the environment. The Planning Commission does not find compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H) — Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-01-14 and CPA-03-14. These proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendments are not compatible with adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods and will not benefit the neighborhood or City. The Planning Commission vote on CPA-02-14 resulted in a tie and therefore the amendment is forwarded to the City Council with no recommendation. Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan text amendments CPA-04-14 through CPA-l0-14, and recommends the City Council deny CPA-01-14 and CPA-03-14. CPA-02-14 is forwarded without a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Approved this 27`" day of March,2014 Joe Story,Chairman ATTEST . (6U Vtielf4 ]heart a Horton,Planning Commission Secretary Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commmissinn for proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 2 vat Attachment I - Plarrrlin Ctimrtrission Findings end leretcrrs For CPA-01-14 SVMC 17.$0.140(1-11: Flndines a. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment are not served by the proposed amendment. The area is located adjacent to the Centennial Trail, is identified as Urban Natural Open Space in the City's Priority Habitat Map, and a portion lies within the Shoreline area. State Parks and Recreation has stated its preference that the parcel remain Parks/Open Space. Development impacts on this open space area would not serve the public. b. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is not consistent with Growth Management Act (GMA) Chapter 36.70A. Specifically, CMA Planning Goal 9 seeks to retain open space, enhance recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks and recreation facilities. c. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. Commercial/office development has occurred on the parcel adjacent to the north. dm However, substantial open space has been preserved in the area and development of community and recreation facilities has occurred west and south of the area with the construction of Mirabeau Meadows Parks, the Centennial Trail and the Center Place complex. e. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error, t: The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan- Factors: a. Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the City as the teal agency has determined that the proposed amendment does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. However,. the area has been identified in the City Priority Habitat Specks Map as Urban Natural Open Space, The Comprehensive Plan states urban landscaping, parks, and open spaces supplement natural areas in providing habitat for a wide variety of wildlife. Future development in the MIC zone would permit a building height of 60 feet, which would have visual and aesthetic impacts to and from Mirabeau Meadows Park, Centennial Trail and the Spokane River. b. A portion of the site lies within the shoreline area and is subject to the Shoreline Master Plan. The amendment area also lies within 200 feet of the Spokane River and riparian habitat. Buffers and development standards would minimize the impacts, but visual impacts on the Spokane River would be inevitable. c, Development requirements would mitigate impacts, but the park and trail would experience increased traffic, visual, aesthetic, and noise impacts from new development. Commercial development would riot be generally consistent with the surrounding parks, open space and natural area uses. The nearest neighborhood is nearly a mile west of the sight. The proposal would have minimal affect on neighborhoods. The property north of the site is a compatible office building that would not be affected, d Future development ef the site may impact traffic in the area. e. The loss of open space, wildlife habitat, and the„impact on surrounding uses would be an overall detriment to the community, f The proposed amendment would not increase population densities and does not require population analysis. g, The proposed amendment is not consistent with, and may negatively affect, the following chapters of the Comprehensive Plan: Chapter g - Natural Environment, Chapter 9 Parks, Recreation and Arts, and Chapter 11 —Bike and Pedestrian 1lement, Nanning Commission Findings and Fantwl CPA-c1-14 -Alraehmanr 1 Page I of Attachment 2 - Planning Commission Findings and Factors For CPA-92-14—SVNIC 27.80.140t11): Find hugs: a. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment tray he served by the proposed amendment. The applicant, Spokane Regional Animal Protection Services (SCRAPS) is a necessary community facility and is located on the property adjacent to and south of the proposed amendment property. Expansion of the SCRAPS facility would serve the greater community. Negative impacts may occur to the residential properties located north and east of the site. With a zone change to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU), a building up to a maximum height of 50 feet could be built on the site. SClkAPS has not stated any intention of placing a building on the site, however future property owners would be permitted that use if CPA-02-14 were approved, A building of that height would impact the single-family residential uses adjacent to the site. Impacts to the residential uses already occur from the light industrial and commercial uses located west and south of the residences. Twenty-foot setbacks and Type 1 screening would be required for any development on the amendment site. b. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Growth Management Act (OMA) Chapter 36.70A. Specifically the following planning goals; i. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities_ SCRAPS is a regiwial facility that may enhance the local economy by drawing people to the area who may patronize local businesses ii. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. SCRAPS is the property owner of the proposed amendment site and a denial will inhibit the use of the site as they intend. iii. Each city that is required or chooses to plan under GMA shall perform its activities and make capital budget decisions in conformity with its comprehensive plan. The City has a contract with SCRAPS to provide animal control, and the SCRAPS facility should be viewed as a regional capital faci I ity. iv. Cities required to plan under GMA shall ensure amendments to their comprehensive pians provide sufficient capacity of land suitable for development within their jurisdictions. This shall include the accommodation of medical, governmental, educational, institutional, commercial, and industrial facilities related to growth. c The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. The current SCRAPS facility located on Flora Road is outdated, unable to provide the required levels of service, and burdened by cost-prohibitive obstacles to expansion. Relocation of the facility was deemed the most appropriate option. The new location on Trent Avenue allows the SCRAPS facility to expand and enhance service without facing the difficult challenges of costly fire safety, transportation, development, and infrastructure improvements. Expansion of the CMU designation would allow full use of the property purchased by SCRAPS. d. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. e. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan, Factors; a. The amendment and lone change would potentially allow the construction of multi-family or commercial buildings to a height of 50 feet. This type of development may have a negative impact on the adjacent residential uses. The proposal would also allow SCRAPS to expand their facility into the area. SCRAPS stated an intention to exercise animals in the area and allow prospective new pet owners to walk and play with dogs in the area. Development requirements would mitigate the impacts to some extent, SV1ViC Planning Commission Findings and Factors CPA-02-14—A ttac I mrnt 2 Page 1 art 19.60.080(13)(6) prohibits animal shelters in the CMll zone from having outside runs, requires human supervision of all outdoor activities, must be located along an arterial street, and must meet the noise standards for commercial noise. In addition, the requirements contained in SVMC Title 22 must be met. Those requirements would include Type 1 screening and 20 foot setbacks far any building on the site. Type 1 screening consists of a six-foot sight obscuring fence with a five-foot wide landscaped area vegetated with sight obscuring bushes to create a dense sight-obscuring barrier of two-to-three feet in height, selected to reach six feet in height at maturity. b. The amendment and zone change has the potential to reduce open space if developed with buildings. The vacant lot is currently devoid of structures and covered with native vegetation, Some unwanted dumping has occurred on the site, No effect on streams, lakes, or rivers is anticipated. c. The amendment would be compatible with commercial and light industrial uses located south and west of the site. The SCRAPS facility is located south of the site. A manufacturing use with associated outside storage is located west of the site. A single-family residence Iies directly adjacent to the site along the northern'boundary, Several single-family residences lie across Bradley Road from the site. Development requirements would mitigate impacts to the single family uses but the single family uses may experience increased traffic,visual,aesthetic,and noise impacts from new development. d. The amendment would allow the expansion of the SCRAPS facility, which would provide space for dog walking and interaction with prospective adopters. This would benefit the SCRAPS operation. Trent Avenue is the primary four lane arterial road serving the site. If the site is developed as intended by SCRAPS, impact on public facilities such as transportation,water,and sewer would be minimal. e. The amendment would benefit pet owners, prospective pet owners, and animal welfare advocates throughout the region. The surrounding single family property owners may or may not benefit depending on the type of development that is undertaken on the site. f. The proposed amendment would not increase population densities and does not require population analysis. g. The proposed amendment is generally inconsistent with and may negatively affect the following chapters of the Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 10— Neighborhoods, The proposed amendment is generally consistent with and may positively affect the following chapters of the Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 4 — Capital Facilities and Public Services;Chapter 7—Economic Development Planning Commission t`itldings ertd i^uCtor� CPA42 14—Atiaehrnent 2 fiksie a orZ Attachment 3 - Plan taint;.Commission mmission Findings and Factors for CFA-03-14—SVMC 17.80.140 H): F'indItigs: a. The proposed amendment is detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment since it would increase density within an area of the Central Valley School District that has reached overcapacity of the neighborhood schools and does not support the neighborhood resident's desired quality of life by significantly changing residential character. b. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Chapter 36.7OA E.CW (Growth Management Act). c. The proposed amendment would allow construction of a multi-family development immediately adjacent to the intersection of two minor arterial streets and a collector which has experienced an increase of traffic as a result of significant growth in the area. However, the increase in traffic does not warrant the need for a transitional use to be constructed between the street and the existing single family development to act as a buffer. d. The proposed amendment dnes not correct a mapping error. e. The proposed amendment does address the identified deficiency of vacant 1-ll]R-designated large lots. However, expanding the HDR designation would allow for multi-story apartments in art area currently developed with one and two family residences,many of which are on large lots. Factors: a. Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the City as the lead agency has determined that the proposed amendment would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. b. The proposed amendment is a non-project amendment and would not affect open space,streams,rivers, and lakes, a. The proposed amendment is contiguous to single family development on all four sides with the exception of a church located on the southwest corner of the intersection. If granted, the amendment would create an island of LDR land. Development of two and three-story buildings would be inconsistent with the single family character of the area. d. Future development of the site may impact traffic in the area beyond that which would be generated by the current land uses allowed. The intersection currently experiences delays and is designated to be improved by 2019. Neighborhood schools are over maximum capacity and students are bussed out of the neighborhood; commercial services and public transportation services are approximately 1,000 feet to the north,which mai be beyond the desired walking distance to reach services. e. The proposed amendment would increase the amount of available. HDR lands within the City, but the location is not conducive to multifamily development since the nearest commercial services and public transit stop is approximately one quarter mile away. 1. The proposal is not consistent with the character of the neighborhood and the impacts of multifamily development cannot be mitigated by the bulk standards in the SVMC. g- The proposed amendment would increase population densities in the area and would increase the density from six dwelling units per acre up to 22 dwelling units per acre. A population analysis was not done to determine area impacts. h. The proposed amendment is inconsistent with the intent of the HDR land use designation, which is to act as a buffer between residential uses and higher intensity land uses such as commercial or office uses. The higher volume roadway does not warrant a buffer between the existing residential uses. Planning Commission Findings and Factors CPA.¢3-14—Attaehmcnt 3 Page I of I Attachment a - Plinnina Commission Findings and Factors for CPAs-04-14 through 10-14 - WNW 17.80,1401M; ; Findings: EL The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment is furthered by ensuring that the Comprehensive Plan reflects the changing conditions and preferences of the community, as well as ensuring consistency with regional policy and is current with other plans. b. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act)_ c. The proposed text amendments are not privately initiated site-specific requests and therefore do not address specific issues beyond a property owner's control, d. The proposed text amendments would not correct mapping errors or result in changes to specific properties. e. The proposed text and map amendments do not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan, but the residential infill policy language would provide direction for the development of regulations to address the challenges of redevelopment of underutilized lots and removing references to the City Center is consistent with community preferences. Factors: a. Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the City as the lead agency has determined that the proposed amendments would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. b. The proposed amendments are primarily policy oriented and non-project amendments. c. The proposed amendment to remove the City Center Land Use Plan concept supports the current land use pattern along the Sprague and Appleway corridor — no impacts to adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods are anticipated by maintaining current patterns. d. The City addresses adequacy of community facilities on a City-wide basis through capital facilities planning; annual updates to the Comprehensive Plan ensure that the City is adequately providing for the anticipated growth. e. The public benefit is furthered by ensuring the Comprehensive Planis reflective of regional policy and current with other internal plans. Removal of the City Center scenario has no bearing on regional policy. f. The proposed amendments are primarily policy oriented and do not address the quantity and location of land planned for land uses other than to update the land quantity analysis information with the latest population estimates and recent land development. g. The proposed amendments do not require population analysis, h. Removing the City Center concept and supporting references would result in a Plan that maintainsthe current land use patterns. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the Plan. :'fanning Cutnmission Finings and Factors CP -C4.14ihraughCPA 10-i4(Text aniand menus)—At[achmeni4 Page 1 or! CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 27,2014 Department Director Approval Item: Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑unfinished business ®new business ❑public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin.report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading - Proposed Ordinance No. 14-006 - Official Zoning Map amendments GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, SVMC 17.80.140 and 19.30.010. PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: Administrative Report April 15, 2014; Public Hearing May 6, 2014; Administrative Report May 13, 2014; Motion Consideration May 20, 2014. BACKGROUND: For the 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendment period, the Community Development Department received two privately initiated requests for site-specific Comprehensive Plan amendments and corresponding zoning classification amendments. In addition, the City proposed one site-specific Comprehensive Plan amendment and a corresponding zoning classification amendment. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments on February 27, 2014 and continued the hearing to the March 13, 2014 meeting. The Planning Commission recommendations on each proposed amendment are as follows: Project # Applicant Location Planning Commission Recommendation CPA-01-14 COSV Mirabeau Park Deny Trailhead CPA-02-14 SCRAPS Bradley Road Forwarded without a recommendation CPA-03-14 Whipple Engineering Barker and Sprague Deny An administrative report was presented to City Council on April 15, 2014, and a public hearing was conducted on May 6, 2014. The Council deliberated on the requests May 13, 2014 with no action being taken. On May 20, 2014 the Council voted on a motion for each amendment to place the request in an ordinance for approval at a subsequent Council meeting. The motion failed for CPA-03-14, but passed by majority vote for CPA-01-14 and CPA-02-14. CPA-01-14 and CPA-02-14 have been placed in the draft ordinance for adoption. CPA-03-14 is included in the ordinance stating that it will be denied. At this time the Council will consider the consolidated proposed zoning map amendments in one ordinance for final adoption at first and second readings with appropriate findings included. OPTIONS: Advance Ordinance No. 14-006 to second reading with or without modifications, or take other action deemed appropriate. 1 of 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance No. 14-006 to a second reading. STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1) Draft Ordinance No. 14-006 with attached map 2) See separate yellow notebook provided April 15, 2014: Contents include 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendments with individual Staff Reports, Planning Commission Meeting minutes, and comments received. Please note that the yellow notebooks will be used throughout this entire process, and at the end of the process they should be returned to Community Development for use in subsequent years'Comprehensive Plan amendments. 2 of 2 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 14-006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. 07-015 AND AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (City) adopted the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) and the Official City Zoning Map pursuant to Ordinance No. 07-015, on September 25, 2007; and WHEREAS, the SVMC and Official City Zoning Map became effective on October 28, 2007; and WHEREAS,the Washington State Growth Management Act(GMA) allows comprehensive plans to be amended annually(RCW 36.70A130); and WHEREAS, amendments to the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan) may be initiated by the Planning Commission (Commission), the City Council (Council), citizens, or by the Community Development Director based on citizen requests or when changed conditions warrant adjustments; and WHEREAS, the GMA requires comprehensive plans to be implemented with development regulations,including the zoning of property consistent with land use map designations; and WHEREAS, zone changes under consideration with the annual Comprehensive Plan amendments are to be considered as area-wide rezones pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140; and WHEREAS, consistent with the GMA,the City adopted Public Participation Guidelines to direct the public involvement process for adopting and amending comprehensive plans and area-wide rezones; and WHEREAS, the SVMC provides that amendment applications shall be received until November 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, the Official City Zoning Map has been amended by Ordinance 07-027, Ordinance No. 08-012, Ordinance No. 09-006, Ordinance No. 09-009, Ordinance No. 09-040, Ordinance No. 10- 008, Ordinance No. 11-002, Ordinance No. 11-008, Ordinance 11-010, Ordinance No. 12-015, Ordinance 12-019; Ordinance 13-008, and Ordinance 13-009; and WHEREAS, applications were submitted by the applicant, owner or by City staff to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; and WHEREAS, staff conducted an environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014, after reviewing the environmental checklists, staff issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposals, published the DNS in the Valley News Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 1 of 8 DRAFT Herald, and where appropriate posted the DNS on the sites and mailed the DNS to all affected public agencies; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014, notice of the Commission public hearing was published in the Valley News Herald; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2014 and February 11, 2014, notice of the Commission hearing was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject properties; and WHEREAS, on February 12, 2014,notice of the Commission hearing had been posted on all the subject properties; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2014, the Commission conducted a study session to review the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2014, the Commission received evidence, information, public testimony, and a staff report and recommendation at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2014, the Commission conducted a public hearing to consider proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and continued the public hearing to March 13, 2014. After receiving additional public testimony on March 13, 2014,the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-01-14 and CPA-03-14 to Council with a recommendation for denial; and CPA-04-14, CPA- 05-14, CPA-06-14, CPA-07-14, CPA-08-14, and CPA-10-14 to Council with a recommendation for approval. CPA-02-14 was forwarded to Council without a recommendation as the Commission vote ended in a tie; and WHEREAS,CPA-09-14 was withdrawn because it was not considered during the Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2014 cycle due to a delayed adoption date of the Parks Master Plan, and it will be added to the 2015 docket prior to the November 1 deadline; and WHEREAS, on March 20, 2014, the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 of the City's intentintent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2014, Council conducted a briefing to review the proposed amendments;and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2014,notice of the Council public hearing was posted on all the subject properties; and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2014, notice of the Council public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject properties;and WHEREAS, on May 6, 2014, the Council conducted a public hearing to consider proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on May 13, 2014, the Council discussed the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 2 of 8 DRAFT WHEREAS, on May 20, 2014, the Council voted on separate motions on whether to place CPA- 01-14, CPA-02-14, CPA-03-14, CPA-04-14, CPA-05-14, CPA-06-14, CPA-7-14, CPA-08-14, CPA-10- 14 in an ordinance for approval; and WHEREAS, on May 27 2014, Council considered a first ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on June 10, 2014, Council considered a second ordinance reading at which time Council approved written findings of fact setting forth the basis for recommending approval of the proposed amendments. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the Official Zoning Map, originally adopted through Ordinance No. 07-015 and as subsequently amended, in order to permit the property described herein to be used in a matter consistent with the same. Section 2. Findings. The Council acknowledges that the Commission conducted appropriate investigation and study and held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, and the Council hereby approves the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan map and text, with the exception that the motion to approve CPA-03-14 failed and is therefore denied. The Council has read and considered the Commission's findings. Council findings specific to each proposed amendment, if any, are contained in Section 4 below. The Council hereby makes the following general findings applicable to all proposed amendments: 1. Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.140 provides the framework for the public to participate throughout the Comprehensive Plan and Official City Zoning Map amendment process, including notice and public hearing requirements. 2. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act set forth in RCW 43.21C (SEPA), environmental checklists were required for each proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment. 3. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each Comprehensive Plan amendment. 4. On February 7, 2014, Determinations of Non-Significance (DNS) were issued for the requested Comprehensive Plan amendments. 5. On February 7, 2014, the DNS's were published in the City's official newspaper, the Valley News Herald,consistent with chapter 21.20 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). 6. The procedural requirements of SEPA and SVMC Title 21 have been fulfilled. 7. On February 7,2014,notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Valley News Herald. 8. On February 11, 2014, individual notice of the site-specific map amendment proposals were, or had been previously,mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each affected site. 9. On February 12, 2014 each site subject to a site-specific amendment was, or had been previously, posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing" sign,with a description of the proposal. Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 3 of 8 DRAFT 10. On March 20, 2014, the Washington State Department of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Official City Zoning Map. 11. The Commission and Council have reviewed the proposed amendments concurrently to evaluate the cumulative impacts. The review was consistent with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW. 12. On February 27, 2014, the Commission held a public hearing on each of the Comprehensive Plan amendments. After receiving public testimony, the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-01-14 and CPA-03-14 to Council with a recommendation for denial. CPA-02-14 was forwarded to Council without a recommendation as the Planning Commission vote ended in a tie. 13. The Commission adopted fmdings for CPA-01-14 through CPA-03-14. Such findings were presented to Council. Specific findings for CPA-01-14, CPA-02-14 and CPA-03-14 are contained in Section 4, below. 14. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, with the exception of CPA-03-14, are consistent with GMA and do not result in internal inconsistencies within the Comprehensive Plan itself. 15. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan were considered and the proposed amendments, except CPA-03-14 are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 16. Findings were made and factors were considered to ensure compliance with approval criteria contained in SVMC 17.80.140H(Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones). 17. The Comprehensive Plan land use map amendments will not adversely affect the public's general health, safety, and welfare. Section 3. Property. The properties subject to this Ordinance are described in Attachment "A" (map). Section 4. Map Amendments. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Map, as originally adopted through Ordinance No. 07-015 and as subsequently amended, is hereby amended as set forth in Attachment "A" (map). The Zoning Map amendments are generally described as follows: Map Amendments File No. CPA-O1-14: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Parks/Open Space (P/OS) with a Parks/Open Space (P/OS) zoning classification to a Mixed Use Center (MUC)designation with a Mixed Use Center(MUC)zoning classification. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, 11707 East Sprague Ave, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location: Parcel 45101.9068; generally located 800 feet east of Pinecroft Way and Mirabeau Parkway on the east side of Mirabeau Parkway as it bends to the south and east; further located in the NE 1/4 of Section 10, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington. Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 4 of 8 DRAFT Council Findings: 1. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment. 3. The amendment provides a suitable land use designation consistent with the City's GMA-compliant Comprehensive Plan. 4. The amendment is a reasonable extension of the existing Mixed Use Center designation located north of the property. 5. The surrounding land uses are complimentary in nature to the concept of mixed use development. 6. The amendment does not correct a mapping error. 7. The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 8. Any future development will be subject to SVMC Title 21, Environmental Controls which addresses the State Environmental Policy Act, Critical Areas, and the Shoreline Management Act. 9. The amendment is compatible with adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. 10. Community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools are adequate to support the amendment. 11. The neighborhood,City, and region would benefit by the amendment by providing for a desirable mix of commercial,office and parks/open space. 12. The amendment will have little impact on population density and does not demand population analysis. 13. The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. Council Decision: Change parcel 45101.9068 to Mixed Use Center (MUC) File No. CPA-02-14: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Low Density Residential(LDR)with a Single-Family Residential Suburban (R-2) zoning classification to a Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)designation with a Corridor Mixed Use(CMU)zoning classification. Applicant: Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Services,2521 North Flora Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216. Amendment Location: Parcel 35124.0813; generally located 500 feet north of the intersection of Trent Avenue and Bradley Road; further located in the SE I/4 of Section 12,Township 25 North,Range 43 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment may be served by the proposed amendment. The applicant, Spokane Regional Animal Protection Services (SCRAPS) is a necessary community facility and is located on the property adjacent to and south of the proposed amendment property. Expansion of the SCRAPS facility would serve the larger metropolitan community. 2. Impacts to the residential uses already occur from the light industrial and commercial uses located west and south of the residences. Twenty-foot setbacks and Type 1 screening would be required for any development on the amendment site. 3. Due to the surrounding land uses,the site is no longer suitable for single family development, allowed by current zoning. 4. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Growth Management Act (GMA) Chapter 36.70A. Specifically the following planning goals: a. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses,recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 5 of 8 DRAFT growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. SCRAPS is a regional facility that may enhance the local economy by drawing people to the area who may patronize local businesses. b. Each city that is required or chooses to plan under GMA shall perform its activities and make capital budget decisions in conformity with its comprehensive plan. The City has a contract with SCRAPS to provide animal control, and the SCRAPS facility should be viewed as a regional capital facility. c. Cities required to plan under GMA shall ensure amendments to their comprehensive plans provide sufficient capacity of land suitable for development within their jurisdictions. This shall include the accommodation of medical, governmental, educational, institutional, commercial, and industrial facilities related to growth. 6. The proposal would allow SCRAPS to expand its facility into the subject property. SCRAPS stated an intention to exercise animals in the area and allow prospective new pet owners to walk and play with dogs in the area. Development requirements would mitigate the impacts to some extent. SVMC 19.60.080(B)(6)prohibits animal shelters in the CMU zone from having outside runs,requires human supervision of all outdoor activities, that they be located along an arterial street, and that they meet the noise standards for commercial noise. In addition, the requirements contained in SVMC Title 22 must be met. Those requirements include Type 1 screening and 20 foot setbacks for any building on the site. Type 1 screening consists of a six-foot sight obscuring fence with a five-foot wide landscaped area vegetated with sight-obscuring bushes to create a dense sight-obscuring barrier of two-to-three feet in height, selected to reach six feet in height at maturity. 7. The amendment would be compatible with commercial and light industrial uses located south and west of the site. The SCRAPS facility is located south of the site. A manufacturing use with associated outside storage is located west of the site. A single-family residence lies directly adjacent to the site along the northern boundary. Several single-family residences lie across Bradley Road from the site. Development requirements would mitigate impacts to the single family uses. 8. Trent Avenue is the primary four lane arterial road serving the site. Development would have a minimal impact on public facilities such as transportation,water, and sewer. 9. The proposed amendment would not increase population densities and does not require population analysis. Council Decision: Change parcel 35124.0813 to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) File No. CPA-03-14: Proposal: Site-specific comprehensive plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) with a Single Family Residential (R-3) zoning classification to a High Density Residential (HDR) designation with a High Density Multifamily Residential (MF2) zoning classification. Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers Inc.,2528 North Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley,WA 99216. Amendment Location: 4 North Barker Road - Parcel #55173.1005 generally located at the NE intersection of Barker Road and Sprague Ave.; further located in the SE 1/4 of Section 17, Township 25 North,Range 45 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The proposed amendment is detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment since it would increase density within an area of the Central Valley School District that has reached overcapacity. Neighborhood schools are over capacity and students are bussed out of the neighborhood. 2. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW. 3. The proposed amendment would allow construction of a multi-family development immediately adjacent to the intersection of two minor arterial streets and a collector which has experienced an increase of traffic as a result of significant growth in the area. However, the increase in traffic does Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 6 of 8 DRAFT not warrant the need for a transitional use to be constructed between the street and the existing single family development to act as a buffer. 4. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendment does address the identified deficiency of vacant HDR-designated large lots. However, expanding the HDR designation would allow for multi-story apartments in an area currently developed with one and two family residences,many of which are on large lots. 6. Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls),the City as the lead agency has determined that the proposed amendment would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. 7. The proposed amendment is a non-project amendment and would not affect open space, streams, rivers,and lakes. 8. The proposed amendment is contiguous to single family development on all four sides with the exception of a church located on the southwest corner of the intersection. If granted,the amendment would create an island of LDR land. Development of two and three-story buildings would be inconsistent with the single family character of the area. 9. Future development of the site may impact traffic in the area beyond that which would be generated by the current land uses allowed. The intersection currently experiences delays and is designated to be improved by 2019. Commercial services and public transportation services are approximately 1,000 feet to the north, which may be beyond the desired walking distance to reach services and inconsistent with the intent of the designation criteria to place high density residential near services. 10. The proposed amendment would increase the amount of available HDR lands within the City,but the location is not conducive to multifamily development since the nearest commercial services and public transit stop is approximately 1,000 feet to the north. 11. The proposal is not consistent with the residential character of the neighborhood and the impacts of multifamily development cannot be mitigated by the bulk standards in the SVMC. 12. The proposed amendment would increase population densities in the area and would increase the density from six dwelling units per acre up to 22 dwelling units per acre. A population analysis was not done to determine area impacts. 13. The proposed amendment is inconsistent with the intent of the HDR land use designation,which is to act as a buffer between residential uses and higher intensity land uses such as commercial or office uses. The higher volume roadway does not warrant a buffer between the existing residential uses. Council Decision: The request is denied. Section 5. Zoning Map/Official Controls. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100, for the purpose of regulating the use of land and to implement and give effect to the Comprehensive Plan, the City hereby amends the Official City Zoning Map as set forth in Attachment "A". Section 6. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the SVMC, or any other law, rule, or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability, or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s), then such provision of the SVMC,or other law,rule,or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 7. Map - Copies on File-Administrative Action. The Zoning Map is maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance,including correcting scrivener's errors. Section 8. Liability. The express intent of the City is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This Ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 7 of 8 DRAFT Section 9. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of June,2014. Mayor, Dean Grafos ATTEST: City Clerk,Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 8 of 8 Zoning Map 4513334/81. Sb 45434.5079 xy• 45035 9123 ': [ •n ' d 5 03 [1$ 11\1/4 45115.9044. as 4€.0 33 f1N1.7 Miraht9au Pk. i _ Pir z- SPOKANE VALI. E ' t-..„6. 45111 :old. w 15105.911) r T 45101.90.38 51055.901) ti .:o ', : Ei.i ltlut... pirti .- J. 0 CPA-01-14 Request: Applicant: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation Department from Parks/Open Space to Mixed Use Center,MUC; Parcel #: 45101.9068 and Address: The site is vacant and is not addressed Subsequent Zoning change from Parks and Open Space, P/OS to Mixed Use Center, MUC. Zoning Map I 1 Li( r'ir t i i ix 1111 .A m.2n[1171e — — -z ti t 4 ,±, : ± ±.i. -.4.;±= = ...-... ,'-'-----_______,,,..,------=:„...,---- . a 1A 11 t ti s;x --'---,,,,,: '-------,,,,, -4, A CPA-02-14 Request: Applicant: Nancy Hill, Director, Spokane County Regional Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Animal Protections Services Low Density Residential, LDR to Corridor Mixed Use, CMU; Parcel #: 35124.0813 and Address: 2117 N Bradley Avenue Subsequent Zoning change from R-3, Single Family Residential to CMU, Corridor Mixed Use. Zoning Map v \ _v__,..---,--_--:::::,--_-_:--: \ti i Alt'',-.1.›.- -:".-- -,',7,,-;.-,N ."'",,,--s,--..> ---- i ---- \ --- _ ,_. - , ,..-,z..,,,.'`--.. ':• -—,‘,..4,.,,-"'''Z.''-,••.S-N-L,.--••., ., ,,‘%.,.,,,'.'"-.-'''',..—.,,., -.`:.->.•.... k Lr. Y +- ,....'•:113.c....,c0.1 cs„.j • -------1 ,..„4,7-7,,,_).0-..,;r_,:z....,:-.--sn,,,...,-,-..-<-.„-.:...„-..-,z-,,...,7...•:-.:„.. .,,,,..., 71, ,,,,,,,... �, 55111.4 35•06.• SII , -; n u I I I I _ - V I _ II 551:41.241[1 55aS4.Zu4 I f t:15 I III I i 55173-10!19 — I�� i IN 3 ., 1 MF-I. I I c`. 551&1.41}25 I 11 I 5513 1018 1111� x II II —- • �I r — ._ Ftivcrs{de=adv — --- w •' KANE VALLEY — -__- m I � -- - L I ! :3 CO III 'MIR .551 S4,.4C12 • -. 5517 _S{M75 jib- Lr m -' I m ,� 77 I r s I J-. :r — — 1 L— __ — ._ — Seri a A4+ _ ,f __ Li, r., , r.., T I 552 ',0301 I I ,, , , , to • fl I I 55202.07302 rLp, o I I I — I I 55191-0516, I I I w V. I 1 {3202..0343 I I I — I 55202.0103 : = I I I _ — _ 1 -- I--- — — �_I— - I_ 551914502 I — — 55202.03 I I „ I u - U' I 55191.4540 - —I I kr. w I 4 I I I 5521 2.03ti15 o I I r� o I I - - I 55f.9J.4531 IP c g r Lry I I I I I LP 55202 030G 1 I I F---- ---=-1.1.-..— CPA-03-14 — 55191.0532 a _ nd Pcv_ —. ! --- 2 — - —_ -.. CPA-03-14 Request: Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers, INC Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Parcel #: 55173.1005 Low Density Residential, LDR to High Density Residential, HDR; Address: 4 NBarker Road and Subsequent Zoning change from R-3, Single Family Residential to MF-2 High Density Residential. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 27, 2014 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Bid Award —Appleway Blvd Street Preservation Project, CIP # 0202 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: October 8, 2013 First Reading 2014 Budget. October 22, 2013 Adopted 2014 Budget, Resolution 13-016. BACKGROUND: The project was listed as one of the recommended street preservation projects in the Fund 311 Pavement Preservation Fund budget within the 2014 Budget. Staff prepared plans, specifications and a bid package for the Appleway Boulevard Street Preservation Project to resurface Appleway Boulevard between Thierman Rd and Park Rd. Bids were advertised on May 9 and May16, 2014. Bids are scheduled to be opened on Friday, May 23rd. A copy of the bid tabulation will be provided at the council meeting. OPTIONS: 1) Award the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, 2) Not award the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, or 3) provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to award the Appleway Boulevard Street Preservation Project, CIP #0202 to in the amount of $ and to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Council approved $3,595,521 in the Fund 311 Budget for the 2014 Street Preservation projects. The project budget is $400,000 to be paid out of Fund 311. There are sufficient funds in the 2014 Budget to cover the cost for this project. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, PE — Senior Capital Projects Engineer Eric Guth, PE — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulations to be provided at the Council meeting CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 27, 2014 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business ® new business [' public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Approval of 2015-2020 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 90.48, Chapter 173-200 WAC, Title 33 U.S.C. 1251-1376; Storm and Surface Water Utility: Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.80; RCW 36.36.040; PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Information to Council May 6, 2014 regarding proposed draft of 2015-2020 Stormwater CIP; Council consensus on May 20, 2014 for staff to add the proposed 2015-2020 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan to the May 27, 2014 Council agenda for consideration and approval. BACKGROUND: Staff has developed a Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan (SW CIP) that organizes and prioritizes top stormwater problems and concerns based on public health and safety needs and balances those needs with available local, state, and federal resources. The program identifies a list of projects that will make improvements to address or remedy top problems. Funding for projects in the SW CIP could come through grants, available capital funds in the Stormwater Utility 402 account, and the Aquifer Protection Area (APA) Fund 403. It includes a goal to balance working capital to $1 M in reserves in the 402, and $500k in the 403 accounts. Fund strategy includes maximizing local funds to the highest extent through grant applications for outside funding of the highest priority projects. If the City does not receive grants in the amounts required for certain projects, the City could decide to proceed with the project with added local funds or delay the project until funding comes available. OPTIONS: The Council may approve the Plan, deny the Plan, or request changes. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I move to approve the 2015-2020 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan and authorize the City Manager to make application for grants to assist in funding the Plan." BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Impacts include 2015 budget requests and discussion for future budget years in the 402 and 403 funding accounts. STAFF CONTACT: Eric Guth, Public Works Director; Art Jenkins, Stormwater Engineer ATTACHMENTS: 2015-2020 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan 2015-2020 STORMWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN MAY 2014 Spokane FValley® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STORMWATER UTILITY OVERVIEW The 2015-2020 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan (SW-CIP) was developed to give Utility staff and City leaders guidance and direction on what priority projects should be advanced for design and construction during the next six years. As adopted by City Council, the plan allows Utility staff to apply for grants to assist in funding the projects listed in the plan. It also helps in the preparation of annual budgets in future years. This document outlines the current goals of the Capital Improvement Program, the 2015-2020 plan development, immediate year proposed budget levels, project summary listing, and proposed project locations, descriptions, and planning level cost estimates. CAPITAL PROGRAM GOALS The 2015-2020 plan developed with the following program goals in mind: 1. Improve failing locations or areas that show the highest possibilities of flood damage. 2. Reduce the number of City-owned stormwater outfalls to surface waters in half by 2020. 3. Eliminate or reduce the highest potential threats to groundwater from stormwater facilities. 4. Maximize impact of local funding available for stormwater projects by receiving available grant funding. IMPROVEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT The plan's basis came about through the review, assessment, and evaluation of current needs and the assumed availability of future resources. IDENTIFIED NEEDS Needs identified included improvement of water quantity and quality benefits. The needs list came from the following: 1. Citizen action requests dealing with street runoff. These were investigated and evaluated for the seriousness and legitimacy of the cases reported. 2. A State Department of Ecology required assessment and retrofit plan of City-owned drywells to reduce threats to groundwater. 3. The NPDES Permit requiring improvements to protect surfaces waters of the State. 4. Staff identified problem locations in storm drainages, flood ways, and floodplains that run through, and infiltrate within the City limits. Conceptual ideas to mitigate or make improvements to address priorities furthered project lists. Additional development of concepts produced general information regarding size and scope of projects and included a planning level estimate. Many estimates in this plan do not have a complete project definition and therefore have a range of accuracy of 100% more or 50% less than incurred actual costs. As projects are defined better in upcoming years, accuracies will improve. FORECASTED AVAILABILITY OF FUTURE RESOURCES Future resources identified included grant funding, local stormwater utility fees, and aquifer protection fees: • Current levels of grant funding have increased over the past several years as the City seized on opportunities available through State Department of Ecology grants. The City continues to successfully apply for and receive up to $1,000,000 per eligible project. It appears that the State will continue to offer these types of grants, although the total amount available to the City is up to the Legislature, a competitive selection process, and the City's ability to compete. The Department of Ecology's changes this year to its process for awarding stormwater grants is a significant change that will result in a longer schedule to award projects. The 2015-2020 Stormwater CIP considers this change and moves several projects to the 2016 year for construction, even when the majority of design work is schedule to be completed in 2014. • In light of the fact that the City has enjoyed a well-managed and healthy capital fund balance in the Stormwater Utility fund each year, the City continues to be highly competitive for these types of grants due to the typical 13.5%to 25% required local match for many opportunities. The health of the City's capital funding through local match from the 402 Stormwater Utility fund are moderately threatened as operational costs are expected to increase. Pressures on the recurring budget include inflation, responding to the large backlog of structural cleaning needs, and to adequately deal with the maintenance needs of an increasingly aging infrastructure. Local stormwater utility fees and budgets in the past have offered in the range of $200,000 to $400,000 each year towards Stormwater Improvements. Finding increased efficiencies in the past have allowed the utility to experience savings on the recurring budget side, allowing for additional capital project work to be completed, as demonstrated recently in additional expenditures to bring the reserve account down in the neighborhood of$1,000,000. However, the additional constraints on the recurring (operations) side of the budget may continue to erode the availability of capital on the non-recurring side of the budget. This may become even more apparent in the next several years as additional stormwater structure cleaning (vactoring) is employed to get caught up with the backlog of cleaning the City faces. It is suggested that within the next few years, the Stormwater Utility perform a rate study to determine if scheduled needs and non-recurring capital needs can be adequately addressed under the current funding levels and programs. • Aquifer Protection Fees were previously estimated to generate approximately$500,000 each year for the City, but actuals received from the County in 2013 were less. Adjustments to the 2015 suggested budget show this change in projected revenue amount to reflect the slight reduction. Of note for this funding source, the Aquifer Protection fees will sunset in 2025 under the arrangement passed by voters in 2004. During the next 6 years, it is suggested that the Stormwater Utility look at if there are projects needed and warranted to be funded in part by this funding mechanism past the 2025 curfew. 2015 - 2020 STORMWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SUMMARY Project 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Grant? APA Annual Small Works Projects 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800 x Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800 x x Broadway, Havana to Fancher SD Retrofit 1,200 1,200 x x Havana-Yale Diversion 280 280 x x Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion 230 230 x x Chester Cr Wetland Overflow Improvements 40 160 200 x x Wellhead Protection Study and Pre-Design 80 80 x x Dishman-Mica Infiltration Facility Plan 40 40 x x Glenrose Surface Water Diversion 280 280 x x Montgomery, Argonne to Mansfield Retrofit 115 1,185 1,300 x x Petroleum Transport Routes, Spill Protection 200 200 x x NW Yardly Retrofits (Area NW of Fancher/Broadway) 100 1,150 1,250 x x Dishman-Mica, 16th to Appleway Retrofits 300 300 x x NE Yardly Retrofits (Area East of Fancher& North of 1-90 100 900 1,000 x x Veracrest Groundwater/Stormwater Conveyance 350 350 x x Argonne, 1-90 to Montgomery Retrofits 400 400 x x Sloan's Addition (15th/Stanley) 250 250 x Heather Park (16th & Rocky Ridge) SD Improvements 300 300 x Bowdish, 32nd to 20th SD Improvements 600 600 x x Totals: 1,920 1,905 2,285 2,100 2,150 1,500 11,860 402 STORMWATER UTILITY FUND PROPOSED NON-RECURRING 2015 BUDGET REVENUE Total 2014 projected working capital balance (reserve) 1,356,078 Grant reimbursements (est. additional to 2014 budget) 170,000 Anticipated savings from 2014 projects 75,000 Total Fundin. Available: 1,601,078 EXPENDITURES Total Small works projects 300,000 Retrofits w/pavement preservation projects 300,000 Total Ex•enditures: 600,000 403 APA FUND PROPOSED NON-RECURRING 2015 BUDGET Total U Projected 2015 beginning working capital (reserve) 594,050 Spokane County 480,000 Grant reimbursements 1,060,000 Total Fundin. Available: 2,134,050 —11111M EXPENDITUR Total Broadway, Havana to Fancher SD Retrofit 1,200,000 Chester Cr Wetland Overflow Improvements 40,000 Wellhead Protection Study/Pre-design 80,000 Total Expenditures: 1,320,000 2015-2020 Stormwater CIP Project Detail Sheets Sheet 1 of 29 Proposed Start: 2015 Project: 2015 Stormwater Small Works Projects Description: Improvements of stormwater facilities at various locations throughout the City on an annual basis. These projects were developed and prioritized from Stormwater Action Requests that staff have evaluated. Typically designed and managed by utility staff. Category: Flood Mitigation Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $30,000.00 2014 Design 2014 $30,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $270,000.00 2015 Design 2015 $0.00 Total $300,000.00 Construction 2015 $270,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ ' Ilir Grant Received ❑ " ...______ .. _ _ 7 --71 j! IN NNW ' =i1 M 1 f • ' f • May 2014 Sheet 2 of 29 Proposed Start: 2015 Project: 2015 Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects Description: Annual program to address stormwater improvements on Arterials associated with the Pavement Preservation Program. Based on pavement preservation project list and the UIC Retrofit Plan. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $40,000.00 2014 Design 2014 $40,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $260,000.00 2015 Construction 2015 $260,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ •.J • • City of ipokarle NM I 1111 i 5 tin May 2014 Sheet 3 of 29 Proposed Start: 2014 Project: Broadway, Havana to Fancher SD Retrofit Description: Project will provide a needed UIC retrofit. This project will improve or abandon existing drywells by providing conveyance and treatment facilities. Ranks as the top UIC retrofit project after the Sprague UIC Retrofit, Park to Thierman project. Project is a strong candidate for State stormwater grants. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Design 2014 $100,000.00 Ecology Grant $60,000.00 2014 Construction 2015 $1,200,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $60,000.00 2014 Total $1,300,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $250,000.00 2015 Ecology Grant $930,000.00 2015 Total$1,300,000.00 Grant Candidate W Grant Received ❑W jam—_- *"' M FSR.'r ' - r May 2014 Sheet 4 of 29 Proposed Start: 2014 Project: Havana-Yale Diversion Description: Intercept possible discharges to City of Spokane Sewer System. Route stormwater discharges out of Spokane sewer to new stormwater swale, and provide infiltration to ground. Will help the City meet current stormwater permit requirements. Grant candidate. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Outfall Elimination Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2016 Design 2014 $20,000.00 Ecology Grant $20,000.00 2014 2016 $280,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $70,000.00 2016 Total $300,000.00 Total $90,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� E 10th Ave Grant Received ❑ Spokane Valley •vP E14thAve E City of Spokane ti v E t5171 Am. E 1S i Awc �4rg E14thAve I 4 E 15th Ave Ogre 1•2I 701 May 2014 Sheet 5 of 29 Proposed Start: 2014 Project: Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion Description: Route existing stormwater discharges currently going to the Chester Creek to project constructed stormwater treatment and provide infiltration to ground. Would help the City meet current stormwater permit requirements. Grant candidate. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Outfall Elimination Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2016 Design 2014 $20,000.00 Ecology Grant $20,000.00 2014 Construction 2016 $230,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $57,500.00 2016 Total $250,000.00 Total $77,500.00 . . a Grant Candidate D Grant Received ❑ 4I. ` r IF ,i' 1, « . leek .ire. May 2014 Sheet 6 of 29 Proposed Start: 2015 Project: Chester Creek Wetland Overflow Improvements Description: Project to replace existing embankment overflow channel with a concrete embankment overflow channel to mitigate vegetation clogging the current flow path from the existing wetland area. This work will help decrease the overflows from the wetland area across Thorpe Road during heavy runoff volumen periods in Chester Creek. Within City-owned easement. Possible candidate for a FEMA flood grant. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Flood Mitigation Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2016 Design 2015 $40,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $40,000.00 2015 Construction 2016 $160,000.00 Total $40,000.00 Total $200,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ ■. _ v� s Fn_- • May 2014 Sheet 7 of 29 Proposed Start: 2015 Project: Wellhead Protection Study and Pre-Design Description: Study work would identify and develop projects that would meet upcoming wellhead protection parameters. Projects will help protect water purveyor's wells from possible contamination from existing City Utility stormwater infiltration systems. Generate list of projects, develop possible solution alternatives, and provide cost estimates. Possible Centennial Water grant candidate. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost APA- Fund 403 $20,000.00 2015 Pre-Design 2015 $80,000.00 Total $20,000.00 Total $80,000.00 Grant Candidate W Grant Received ❑ .M "moi`` - ~ Aye+► .M ± 7.4- a OAF •le•..Mf 1I" May 2014 Sheet 8 of 29 Proposed Start: 2016 Project: 2016 Stormwater Small Works Projects Description: Improvements of stormwater facilities at various locations throughout the City on an annual basis. These projects were developed and prioritized from Stormwater Action Requests that staff have evaluated. Typically designed and managed by utility staff. Category: Flood Mitigation Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $20,000.00 2015 Design 2015 $20,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $280,000.00 2016 Design 2016 $10,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Construction 2016 $270,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ Grant Received ❑ of ,,,PPP • fi • =a4irr_411- • . 4. May 2014 Sheet 9 of 29 Proposed Start: 2016 Project: 2016 Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects Description: Annual program to address stormwater improvements on Arterials associated with the Pavement Preservation Program. Based on pavement preservation project list and the UIC Retrofit Plan. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $40,000.00 2015 Design 2015 $40,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $260,000.00 2016 Construction 2016 $260,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ •.J • • City of ipokarle NM I 1111 i 5 tin May 2014 Sheet 10 of 29 Proposed Start: 2016 Project: Dishman-Mica Infiltration Facility Plan Description: Determine current capacity of infiltration pit located near Dishman-Mica and 28th Ave, provide routine inspection and maintenance plan. Upgrade facility with suggested recommendations. Grant candidate under Ecology Centennial Water. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Operations Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2016 Pre-Design 2016 $40,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $10,000.00 2016 Total $40,000.00 Total $10,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ • May 2014 Sheet 11 of 29 Proposed Start: 2016 Project: Glenrose Surface Water Diversion Description: Route existing stormwater discharges currently going to Glenrose Drainage to new treatment facilities. Negotiate easements, improve existing facilities, and provide infiltration to ground. Will help the City meet current stormwater permit requirements. Grant candidate. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Outfall Elimination Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2016 Design 2016 $60,000.00 Ecology Grant $20,000.00 2014 Construction 2016 $240,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $70,000.00 2016 Total $300,000.00 Total $90,000.00 Grant Candidate W . ' i � "-'• I r ` r. Grant Received ❑ I i T' A 1 ^,V�1b. f J'1 j r 11/4 'i i il4r1 -. t. �c j t" " i L + O • 4 i `• 412. L.. z:,-74,4,....,„ ;' 4w,791111 , r i . s f1 \ r ".t rr_. '' ri " * ~%E filli ,r' ''. -s'. - May 2014 Sheet 12 of 29 Proposed Start: 2016 Project: Montgomery, Argonne to Mansfield Retrofit Description: Project will retrofit and install treatment to drywells identified in UIC Assessment and Retrofit Plan. Strong candidate for State stormwater grant funding. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2017 Design 2016 $115,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $115,000.00 2016 Construction 2017 $1,185,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $185,000.00 2017 Total $1,300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate W - - - t .0.--- w...+..' Grant Received ❑ s 1 �1~"'— 1. -.-'' z t ' I r...•4.• r n.,.., 11211 ��� a r .t. frNAIM ` [[ t , .. •,.........„.• • • 1 I.. y ... ....r .......,.. 0 ... • t ...r- a I z t Yr..Om 3 "'lip"' ' 7 3 / 111«..rr May 2014 Sheet 13 of 29 Proposed Start: 2016 Project: Petroleum Transport Routes, Spill Protection Description: Identify major petroleum transport routes, size and install spill protection on existing city drywells on those routes. Good candidate for State stormwater grant. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2016 Design 2016 $20,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $50,000.00 2016 Construction 2016 $180,000.00 Total $50,000.00 Total $200,000.00 Grant Candidate W • / 11 J' Grant Received ❑ /� f it . 1 - i .= _ 4¢ —NI -4T'. + . ' s d.r= • r' May 2014 Sheet 14 of 29 Proposed Start: 2017 Project: 2017 Stormwater Small Works Projects Description: Improvements of stormwater facilities at various locations throughout the City on an annual basis. These projects were developed and prioritized from Stormwater Action Requests that staff have evaluated. Typically designed and managed by utility staff. Category: Flood Mitigation Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $20,000.00 2016 Design 2016 $20,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $280,000.00 2017 Design 2017 $10,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Construction 2017 $270,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ Grant Received ❑ • '- -- • May 2014 Sheet 15 of 29 Proposed Start: 2017 Project: 2017 Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects Description: Annual program to address stormwater improvements on Arterials associated with the Pavement Preservation Program. Based on pavement preservation project list and the UIC Retrofit Plan. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $40,000.00 2016 Design 2016 $40,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $260,000.00 2017 Construction 2017 $260,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ •.J • • City of ipokarle NM I 1111 i 5 tin May 2014 Sheet 16 of 29 Proposed Start: 2017 Project: NW Yardly Retrofits (Area NW of Fancher/Broadway) Description: A number of locations have ongoing drainage problems due to narrow pavement and truck parking areas along existing roadways. Project will retrofit and install treatment to drywells identified in UIC Assessment and Retrofit Plan. Strong candidate for State stormwater grant funding. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2018 Design 2017 $100,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $100,000.00 2017 Construction 2018 $1,150,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $150,000.00 2018 Total $1,250,000.00 Total $250,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ Y May 2014 Sheet 17 of 29 Proposed Start: 2017 Project: Dishman-Mica, 16th to Appleway Retrofits Description: Project will retrofit and install treatment to drywells identified in UIC Assessment and Retrofit Plan as needing improvements. Possible use of existing railroad right of way to take stormwater from roadway and treat in new swales to be built with the project. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2017 Design 2017 $50,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $75,000.00 2017 Construction 2017 $250,000.00 Total $75,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate Grant Received ❑ _ 7-71= �.•11.. t May 2014 Sheet 18 of 29 Proposed Start: 2017 Project: NE Yardly Retrofits (Area East of Fancher & North of 1-90) Description: A number of locations have been ongoing drainage problems due to narrow pavement and truck parking areas along existing roadways. Project will retrofit and install treatment to drywells identified in UIC Assessment and Retrofit Plan as needing improvements. Project will convey and treat stormwater prior to using existing infiltration facilities. Strong candidate for State stormwater grant funding. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Ecology Grant 2019 Design 2017 $100,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $100,000.00 2017 Construction 2019 $900,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $150,000.00 2019 Total $1,000,000.00 Total $250,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ I 4-'m 12!06/2004 May 2014 Sheet 19 of 29 Proposed Start: 2018 Project: 2018 Stormwater Small Works Projects Description: Improvements of stormwater facilities at various locations throughout the City on an annual basis. These projects were developed and prioritized from Stormwater Action Requests that staff have evaluated. Typically designed and managed by utility staff. Category: Flood Mitigation Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $20,000.00 2017 Design 2017 $20,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $280,000.00 2018 Design 2018 $10,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Construction 2018 $270,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ - - ' '° • * "' Grant Received ❑ %-*"- ,-� May 2014 Sheet 20 of 29 Proposed Start: 2018 Project: 2018 Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects Description: Annual program to address stormwater improvements on Arterials associated with the Pavement Preservation Program. Based on pavement preservation project list and the UIC Retrofit Plan. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $40,000.00 2017 Design 2017 $40,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $260,000.00 2018 Construction 2018 $260,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ •.J • • City of ipokarle NM I 1111 i 5 tin May 2014 Sheet 21 of 29 Proposed Start: 2018 Project: Veracrest Groundwater/Stormwater Conveyance Description: Secure conveyance and treatment easement(s), install groundwater drains, install pretreatment and stormwater pipe, connect to existing Stormwater Treatment Ponds. This work would likely coincide with a roadway rebuild project. Subsurface drainage improvements would help preserve the roads longer. Funding could come from Stormwater Utility 402, formation of an RID, or new Neighborhood "Drainwater Account" that would pay back the Stormwater fund over a series of years for the improvements installed. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Groundwater Conveyence Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $350,000.00 2018 Design 2018 $70,000.00 Total $350,000.00 Construction 2018 $280,000.00 Total $350,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ Grant Received ❑ }: May 2014 Sheet 22 of 29 Proposed Start: 2019 Project: 2019 Stormwater Small Works Projects Description: Improvements of stormwater facilities at various locations throughout the City on an annual basis. These projects were developed and prioritized from Stormwater Action Requests that staff have evaluated. Typically designed and managed by utility staff. Category: Flood Mitigation Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $20,000.00 2018 Design 2018 $20,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $280,000.00 2019 Construction 2019 $260,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Total $280,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ Grant Received ❑ • • rI II W A f. 44 [ •.. Y • J I. -• 11/09/2006 May 2014 Sheet 23 of 29 Proposed Start: 2019 Project: 2019 Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects Description: Annual program to address stormwater improvements on Arterials associated with the Pavement Preservation Program. Based on pavement preservation project list and the UIC Retrofit Plan. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: SW Utility- Fund 402 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $40,000.00 2018 Design 2018 $40,000.00 SW Utility- Fund 402 $260,000.00 2019 Construction 2019 $260,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑� Grant Received ❑ •.J • • City of ipokarle NM I 1111 i 5 tin May 2014 Sheet 24 of 29 Proposed Start: 2019 Project: Argonne, 1-90 to Montgomery Retrofits Description: This project is an identified need from the UIC Assessment and Retrofit Plan. Includes estimated costs for stormwater improvements for grant applications for possible street rebuild or PCC project. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost Other 2019 Design 2019 $80,000.00 APA- Fund 403 $100,000.00 2019 Construction 2019 $320,000.00 Total $100,000.00 Total $400,000.00 Grant Candidate W1.r ` �`-.-, Grant Received ❑ -' >- ' =°1 ,I. / _ �p ' 1 i A.. May 2014 Sheet 25 of 29 Proposed Start: 2019 Project: Sloan's Addition (15th/Stanley) Groundwater/Stormwater Conveyance Description: Secure conveyance and treatment easement(s), install groundwater drains, connect to existing structures in 15th one block away that appear to be working adequately. This work would likely coincide with a roadway rebuild project. Subsurface drainage improvements would help preserve the roads longer. Funding could come form Stormwater Utility, formation of an RID, or though the formation of a new Neighborhood "Drainwater Account" that would pay back the Stormwater fund over a series of years for the improvements installed. Planning level estimate Category: Groundwater Conveyence Managing Fund: APA- Fund 403 FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $250,000.00 2019 Design 2019 $50,000.00 Total $250,000.00 Construction 2019 $200,000.00 Total $250,000.00 •Grant Candidate ❑ •7_41A104211P."- '141111 . Grant Received ❑ - _ •_ sew • _ 'CA air or— May 2014 Sheet 26 of 29 Proposed Start: 2019 Project: 2020 Stormwater Small Works Projects Description: Improvements of stormwater facilities at various locations throughout the City on an annual basis. These projects were developed and prioritized from Stormwater Action Requests that staff have evaluated. Typically designed and managed by utility staff. Category: Managing Fund: FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $300,000.00 2020 Design 2019 $20,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Design 2020 $20,000.00 Construction 2020 $260,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ Grant Received ❑ 4 c �� --' h l 1 r .4 rr.. • - -•,__ k-, [ city!of ne rae!._ 1 - n JJ .{�~; I N.,,,m, May 2014 Sheet 27 of 29 Proposed Start: 2019 Project: 2020 Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects Description: Annual program to address stormwater improvements on Arterials associated with the Pavement Preservation Program. Based on pavement preservation project list and the UIC Retrofit Plan. Category: Managing Fund: FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $300,000.00 2020 Design 2019 $20,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Design 2020 $10,000.00 Construction 2020 $270,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate W Grant Received ❑ i 1 �� --' rr.. i rte. k-, •... _ ! JJ i JJ I May 2014 Sheet 28 of 29 Proposed Start: 2020 Project: Heather Park (16th & Rocky Ridge) SD Improvements Description: Secure conveyance and treatment easement(s), install groundwater drains, install pretreatment and stormwater pipe, convey to existing functioning ponds or drywells. This work would likely coincide with a roadway rebuild project. Subsurface drainage improvements would help preserve the roads longer. Funding could come form Stormwater Utility or though the formation of a new Neighborhood "Drainwater Account" that would pay back the Stormwater fund over a series of years for the improvements installed. Planning level estimate Category: Groundwater Conveyence Managing Fund: Un-Funded List FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost SW Utility- Fund 402 $300,000.00 2020 Construction 2020 $300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Total $300,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ isp ;p Grant Received ❑ �. t "pis 41 tg• #.s} ,. May 2014 Sheet 29 of 29 Proposed Start: 2020 Project: Bowdish, 32nd to 20th SD Improvements Description: Install conveyance, treatment, storage, and discharge facilities to improve Bowdish road corridor. Improve or decommission existing drywells. Planning level estimate shown. Category: Aquifer Protection - UIC Retrofit Managing Fund: Un-Funded List FUNDING ESTIMATED COSTS Fund Amount Fund Yr Phase Year EstCost APA- Fund 403 $600,000.00 2020 Construction 2020 $600,000.00 Total $600,000.00 Total $600,000.00 Grant Candidate ❑ Grant Received ❑ • 4. 3 May 2014 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 5/27/14 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Solid Waste Transfer Station/Transport/Disposal GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.11.020 Powers vested in Legislative Bodies of Code Cities; RCW 35A.13 — Non-charter code city; RCW 35A.21 Provisions affecting All Code Cities; RCW 70.95 — Solid Waste Management — Reduction & Recycling; RCW 70.105 — Hazardous Waste Management; Interlocal Agreement between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley — RE: Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, expires November 16, 2014. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council has adopted goals related to solid waste in the 2012, 2013 and 2014 budgets. The 2014 goal adopted by Council is to "Implement solid waste alternatives for collection, transport and disposal in the best interest of the City of Spokane Valley." Council has been briefed and/or discussed solid waste on a number of occasions. The following is a synopsis of those meetings but is not all inclusive: On January 22, 2013, Council approved the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Spokane Valley, the City of Spokane, and Spokane County, to jointly conduct the Solid Waste Analysis; on February 6, 2013, Council participated in a joint meeting with Spokane County Commissioners to discuss alternatives; on February 26, 2013, Council discussed solid waste in detail at the Council Workshop; on August, 28, 2013, Council attended the presentation of an analysis of solid waste alternatives completed by HDR; On September 3, 2013, Council discussed the draft solid waste study completed by HDR; on September 4, 2013, Council hosted a joint meeting with Spokane County Commissioners to discuss alternatives and make a specific proposal to the County; on October 3, 2013, Council discussed solid waste alternatives and approved sending Spokane County Commissioners a letter re-emphasizing Spokane Valley's position to reconsider the specific option offered by Spokane Valley at the joint meeting; on February 24, 2014, Council hosted a joint meeting with Spokane County Commissioners to continue discussions on solid waste alternatives and to review/discuss Spokane County's proposed draft of the Interlocal Agreement for joining its system; on February 27, 2014, Council attended the Regional Solid Waste meeting at CenterPlace; and on February 28, 2014, Council attended the Council of Governments where solid waste was one of many topics. On March 11, 2014 Council discussed three primary topics including development of a solid waste plan and continuing to pursue public private options as well as reviewing Spokane County's draft Interlocal Agreement for Solid Waste. Council reviewed the proposed Interlocal and discussed talking points to provide to the County Commissioners. On March 20, 2014 the City sent a letter to the County Commissioners enumerating the City's concerns. On March 31, 2014, the Commissioners responded with a letter speaking to the City's concerns and provided a revised draft Interlocal addressing some, but not all of the City's points. Staff briefed Council at the May 13, 2014 Council meeting about the available private option (Sunshine Recyclers), and presented to Council on May 20, 2014, an administrative report on two potential service providers, Sunshine Recyclers Inc. and Spokane County, with a motion consideration to Council on May 27, 2014. 1 BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley has been actively pursuing options for solid waste disposal since the extension of the Interlocal Agreement with the City of Spokane Valley, City of Spokane and Spokane County was approved by our City Council on October 25, 2011. The purpose of the extension was to allow time for the various cities and Spokane County to determine solid waste alternatives. The various alternatives have evolved over the last 3 years from the possible continuation of the existing solid waste system, to Spokane being a vendor only, to the current status where an Interlocal Agreement was signed between the City of Spokane and Spokane County and Spokane County is proposing to own and operate a solid waste system. Spokane Valley had formally offered to partner with Spokane County (September 4 and October 3, 2013) prior to Spokane County moving independently to negotiate with the City of Spokane and making a decision to purchase the Colbert and Spokane Valley transfer stations from the City of Spokane and continue to send waste to the City of Spokane's waste to energy incinerator. The City of Spokane Valley received a proposed Interlocal Agreement for Solid Waste Services from Spokane County on Monday, February 24, 2014. On that same day the City met in joint session with Spokane County Commissioners to discuss solid waste. This was followed by a meeting of County Commissioners, Spokane Valley, Liberty Lake, Airway Heights, Deer Park and other stakeholders on Thursday, February 27, 2014 at CenterPlace to further discuss the proposed Spokane County solid waste system and Interlocal agreement. The City of Spokane Valley is now faced with decisions regarding solid waste. As highlighted by the Department of Ecology at the February 27, 2014 meeting, the November 16, 2014 termination creates some very time-sensitive decisions which the City of Spokane Valley has addressed. The City of Spokane Valley Staff is working with the consulting firm of Green Solutions to develop a Solid Waste Plan for the City of Spokane Valley. Staff is working with the Department of Ecology and the consultant in the development of the plan. Staff worked with Council to develop terms and conditions and conveyed those concepts to Spokane County. The County has responded to the City and has made a number of changes to the Interlocal Agreement. However, on some significant points, the County has determined not to make changes and has conveyed those to the City as well. Staff has continued to investigate public-private partnerships and has narrowed down the list of potential private transfer station operations that can be in place by November 16, 2014 to one, which is Sunshine Recyclers Inc., with an existing transfer station located in Spokane Valley at University and Montgomery. Staff has been working to develop the draft service contract with Sunshine. OPTIONS: Authorize the City Manager to finalize a contract with either Sunshine Recyclers Inc. or Spokane County Solid Waste System or request additional information (Note: Spokane County has requested that we notify them of our decision by May 31, 2014). RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move that we authorize the City Manager to finalize a contract with , and that finalizing the contract contemplates that remaining contingencies would be removed to the satisfaction of the City Manager. Final award of the contract would be done by motion at the Council meeting on June 3, after which the City Manager will execute the contract. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The City currently does not have a revenue source for solid waste other than the general fund. Costs to date include the HDR study developed through an MOU with 2 Spokane County and the City of Spokane, follow-up work by City Manager with solid waste consultants Shaw Environmental and Green Solutions. The reduction in rates, if any, would directly benefit the residents and businesses of Spokane Valley. The City itself would not benefit directly because we would not pay directly for transfer, transport and disposal of solid waste services. The City could recover administrative costs as noted in the PowerPoint Re. Solid Waste 5/20/14. STAFF CONTACT: City Manager - Mike Jackson ATTACHMENTS: Powerpoint Presentation of 5/20/2014 Letter from City of Spokane Valley to Spokane County Commissioners Re: City of Spokane Valley Comments to proposed Interlocal agreement. Letter from Spokane County to City of Spokane Valley Re: Responses to City of Spokane Valley Comments Proposed Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement. DRAFT Interlocal Agreement Spokane County for Solid Waste Transfer and Disposal and other Matters Related Thereto DRAFT Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer, Transport, and Disposal Services — Sunshine Recyclers, Inc. 3 Collection , . 1CI =4 _ , ) . Oty of Spokane Valley - lit Solid Waste Transfer Station ii ill '11 . ii Lioff: p - PUN 1 5 ri4 Disposal - g 1,1 o .A..._ i -Advil". 4 Transport PI , 11 _ if IF _— •_k,. 0) _ Solid Waste 2014 Council Goal "Implement solid waste alternatives for collection, transport and disposal in the best interest of the City of Spokane Valley" Council CORE BELIEFS Section 8: We solicit the City Manager's support in conducting the affairs of the City with due regard for: (d) Seeking creative ways to contain or impede the rising cost of governmental services, including examination of private sector alternatives in lieu of governmentally provided services. Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 3 Factor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. Contract County Interlocal Agreement Services Transfer, transport & disposal of Transfer, transport & disposal of trash, trash, organics/green waste, organics/green waste, construction construction /demolition waste, /demolition waste, recyclables, recyclables, moderate risk - moderate risk — household hazardous household hazardous waste, & waste, & white goods. Self-haul. white goods. Self-haul. Transfer Station 2405 N University Rd, Spokane Spokane Valley Transfer Station, 3941 N Locations Valley, WA 99206 Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Spokane North Transfer Station, 22123 N Elk Chattaroy Rd, Colbert, WA 99005 Hours Seven days per week, Seven days per week, 7:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. 7:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. a / ' w Spokane Vi. s „/aIIey J--- I . • _ / T Transf6r City of .aN. Millwood c•�nm.m•N.. — / -- T-1 i / __...---z �.) � e _1Iins;:i: .1 _ IP 'iron --mum- --_ City tri ..M. Spokane N.e 11111 IN. L' I 011 I 1447 L ME a7W. if II - ) ir mos It� r/ 4 5 Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY Factor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. Contract County Interlocal Agreement Term 10 years 7 years Renewals Two 3-year extensions, mutually Four 5-year extensions, agreeable mutually agreeable Early opt-out of No After 3 years (but alternate contract option would have to be identified, evaluated and implemented) Improvements Sunshine has indicated it will need Need for site improvements to make site improvements in not anticipated to existing order to provide the required transfer stations in the near services term Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 6 Factor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. Contract County Interlocal Agreement Municipal Solid Waste Two landfill facilities proposed Waste to Energy Facility - Ash Disposal (Roosevelt Landfill and Wenatchee to landfill (Bypass, if any, to Landfill). landfill) Opt-out potential at 3 years but County would have to pay outstanding balance on Transfer Stations within 12 months Organics Disposal Accepted - transported for Accepted - transported for (Clean Green) composting composting Contingency Emergency operations plan. Two transfer stations. Sunshine to provide access to back-up transfer station. Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 7 Factor Suns me Recyclers nc. Coun y n erlocal Agreement Contract Insurance Auto - $1,000,000; Insurance requested by County RFP: Commercial - "Transfer Station Operator required to provide $1,000,000/$2,000,000; Worker's Compensation; Umbrella - $5,000,000; Employer's Liability ($1,000,000); Environmental Liability - Auto Liability Insurance ($1,000,000); $5,000,000 Commercial General Liability ($5,000,000 each occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate); Coverage for the City of Professional Liability/Errors and Omissions Spokane Valley. Liability ($1,000,000); Environmental Pollution ($3,000,000 per claim and $6,000,000 aggregate)" Coverage for Spokane County. City of Spokane Valley not named as additional insured. Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 8 Factor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. Contract County Interlocal Agreement Surety $1,000,000 performance bond or No performance bond or liquidated letter of credit. damages; however, since County Liquidated damages: $4,000/day for would be responsible for solid major defaults, $1,000/day for waste, management, these would minor defaults. Performance not necessarily be appropriate. standards included in contract Reporting No audited financial Statements Annual Audit by State; Annual bank letter Comprehensive Annual Financial Debt Service Ratio Report and Financial Records; Annual reports of tonnage, trips, Statement of Income and Expenses customer service, inquiries, and annually, provided to the SWAC. extraordinary services Records of the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund only. Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 9 Factor unshine Recyc ers Inc. on ract oun y Interlocal Agreement Service Fees ($/ton) Trash = $92.00/ton (minimum charge of Trash — To Be Determined (TBD) $15.20 per visit); - County estimates the rate will City administration/education = match current rate; a minimum $125,000/year (approx. $2.75/ton). charge of $15.23 for first 300 State Solid Waste Tax (3.6 %) = $3.40/ton. pounds. $104.59/ton at transfer Total fee to rate payers = $98.15/ton stations. Services incorporated (service fee + admin fee + State tax). in total fee. Organics = $50.00/ton, minimum charge Organics — TBD - County of $10.00 per visit (organic's fee does not estimates the rate will match apply to commercial food waste loads) current rate of $47/ton (minimum charge of $5.00 - (Fees paid to contractor not to the City) 220Ibs. Additional 47 cents for each 20 lbs. above 220) Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 1 . Factor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. County Interlocal Agreement Contract Escalation 90 % of CPI (first escalation on Not known. December 1, 2015) WTE component will increase at CPI. Transfer station operations may increase based on CPI and labor index. Transport costs may increase based on CPI and fuel index. Customer Service Resolution through Sunshine, Resolution through the County upward through management, and then to the City Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 11 Factor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. iii County Interlocal Agreement Contract Control over rate Rate increases as specified in Not known. City would have a 1 increases contract and are automatic based representative on the SWAC committee. on 90% of CPI. SWAC committee will provide comments & recommendations to BoCC. I Pricing dependent No Not known. Pricing may depend on on tonnage? number of cities that sign ILA. Flow control City to require designated City to adopt flow control ordinance requirements haulers to use Sunshine facility in similar to County's ordinance. hauling contracts. City to enforce Enforcement may be City or County -- LI hauling contract requirement. still to be determined. Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 12 actor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. Contract County Interlocal Agreement RFP for long-haul After 10 years. Potentially within 3 years (but transport & disposal County's contract for transfer station operations is 10 years) Ownership of Transfer Sunshine County (Purchased from the Stations City of Spokane - $9.9m) Regional Aspects Cooperative Services provision in Unclear how this is a regional contract allows other system. municipalities to "piggyback" onto City's contract. Won't impact City's pricing. Comprehensive Required to be done by City Required to be done by County Planning but City could develop its own plan. Comparison of Options: PRIVATE vs. COUNTY 13 Factor Sunshine Recyclers Inc. Contract County Interlocal Agreement Revenue to City Right-of-way maintenance fee: Sharing of potential utility tax $1.00/ton for all waste handled at revenues based on proportionate transfer station in excess of 45,500 tonnage delivered by tons per year. (fee does not apply to cities/County. commercial recyclables brought to Sunshine for baling, marketing and/or processing) Solid Waste Education Required to be done by City. Required to be done by County. Potential for grant funding. Grant funding available. Full control and City would manage performance County would be responsible for management contract with Sunshine. control and management of solid responsibility for solid waste. I waste I-4CITY pokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 1 Spokane VaEley WA 99206 509.921.1000 1 Fax: 509.921.1008 1 cityhall®spokanevalley.org March 20,2014 Honorable Chairman Al French and Board of County Commissioners Spokane County Courthouse 1116 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 Re: City of Spokane Valley comments to proposed interlocal agreement To the Board of County Commissioners: Thank you for providing the proposed interlocal agreement to join and participate in the • Spokane County Solid Waste System. The City received the proposed interlocal on February 24,2014, and participated in several meetings with Spokane County during the week of February 24 on the County's new solid waste system, The City of Spokane Valley City Council conducted a discussion on the proposed interlocal agreement at its March 11,2014 regular meeting. Additionally, City staff has reviewed the proposed_ interlocal agreement. As you previously indicated, the proposed interlocal agreement is a starting draft and you are seeking comments and input into the draft and for the establishment of the County's proposed system. Based on City Council discussion and staff review, I met with Chairman Al French to discuss Spokane Valley's comments and offered to provide those in writing. As discussions progress some comments may be revised or new issues may develop. The City of Spokane Valley has identified the following comments, concepts and issues of importance to our consideration for participation in the County's proposed system: 1. Given the time constraints on all parties,the City desires to work to general agreement on the concepts below. The City believes that the parties already concur on many of the issues and anticipates that those will be incorporated into the next draft of the proposed interlocal agreement by the County. The City desires to enter into a memorandum of understanding ("MOU") on resolving the others. After the MOU is executed, the parties may then work through details to include the other concepts in the proposed interlocal agreement once they are resolved. 2. The City of Spokane Valley(the "City") desires to have an actual rate or guaranteed rate ceiling incorporating all costs (capital costs, operating costs,program costs, and overhead costs)prior to executing the proposed interlocal agreement. 3. The City believes that combining transfer station operations with transport and disposal will result in the lowest cost overall for the system. In order to do so,the City desires the County to issue an immediate Request for Proposals for combined transfer station operations,transport services, and disposal services to allow transition in three years to the lowest cost option. The City recognizes that the County is seeking a contractor to operate the transfer stations under a 10-year term and that an early termination clause will be included in the operating contract. 4. The City desires to have future handling of solid waste tonnage from the West Plains area clearly delineated, including what transfer station,transport and disposal options will be utilized. The City has concerns about what may happen if the new County system pays off the transfer stations after three years and utilizes an option other than the City of Spokane's Waste-to-Energy facility. Specifically,the City believes a new West Plains transfer station is not necessary as there are alternatives (use of the existing transfer stations) and a new West Plains station would result in excessive additional costs for the entire system. In any case,the City of Spokane Valley does not believe that all system users should support the development of a West Plains transfer station. 5. The City desires to establish a governing body with authority to set rates, service levels, and other operational authority and control for the regional system, including local jurisdiction participation on such body. Other issues for consideration include possibly setting a rate ceiling, setting or removing the minimum load charge for self-haulers, and possible ownership issues. The City has remained consistent in regards to governance as it is critical to the City's commitment of representing our citizens through rate setting and cost control authority. 6. The City requests a commitment from the County to always seek and obtain the lowest price option,with an opt-out available for the City if the County pursues higher-priced options. If ownership is part of the agreement, the City would seek either buy-out or recovery of the City's portion towards the capital investment. The City also seeks dialog on recovery of operational and other enterprise fund reserves should the City withdraw at any time. 7. The City requests that if an intermodal facility or rail transloader is developed related to solid waste, it must have direct access at the same location to both Burlington Northern and Union Pacific rail lines in order to take advantage of competition for landfill disposal. Also,future competitive bids should not be restricted to a specific transport mode or specific intermodal system. System users should not directly fund the development of rail facilities. These facilities should be funded by the private sector or other public/private partnerships. 8. The City desires a clear and transparent accounting of all aspects of operation, including any interfund transfers or other comingling of County resources, revenues, or expenses. 9. The City requests the County to give consideration to local jurisdictions and their ability to provide certain services such as recycling or education in order to allow local jurisdictions more control over rates. 10. The City desires the gate rate to be reduced by the amount of the capital payment when the transfer stations are paid off. Specifically, the City desires that the 2 interlocal agreement will clearly show a direct correlation between capital purchase payoff and rate reduction(e.g., if capital payment amount is equal to $11 per ton, upon pay off,the gate rate will be reduced by$11 per ton). 11, The City desires to discuss the possibilities for ownership and equity in system facilities. The City would like clarification on what ownership,buy-in, and buy- out would mean,how it could be accomplished, and how it would work for rate payers of various jurisdictions. Additionally, the City would like to understand how system control would be tied to ownership. 12. The City desires to have strict limits on any rent, lease, or depreciation costs included for the period of the agreement, including limits on what may be imposed after the facilities are fully paid. Additionally,the City desires to clearly identify any equipment or facility replacement or maintenance funds that may be required throughout the term of the agreement. Finally,the City desires to identify how future capital costs, including any reserve funds,will be applied to the gate rates. 13. The City desires to see the final rates (or rate estimates)with(1)all County, City and other local jurisdiction waste, and(2) all waste except for the City in order to understand the impact of the City joining the system. 14. The City desires to have revenue sharing options included in the interlocal agreement,in the event there is ever a utility tax or revenue component. Additionally,the City desires clarification on how revenue sharing would work with any revenues distributed by the City of Spokane under the County's interlocal agreement with Spokane. 15. The City desires that the County or system will enforce all flow control requirements. Another possibility may be for the system to pay for all flow control enforcement. 16. The City must have the ability to submit an RFP prior to termination in the event that it desires to go with a non-system alternative. In that RFP, the City would contemplate siting of a new transfer station. The City would require that section C(1)(ii) be amended to allow this. 17. City will want to discuss mutual indemnification further depending on its involvement in and level of control and responsibility for system. If the City has no or little control over the system and rates, it should not be required to indemnify the County. 18. The City desires to get reports of City of Spokane Valley tonnage going forward. 19. The City requests clarification on how the County envisions flow control working with the City of Spokane, especially if there are price differences and the Waste- to-Energy facility is cheaper than the system. Further,how much of the City of Spokane's waste goes to the transfer stations currently, and has the City of Spokane committed to continuing such deliveries? 20. The City desires clarification on how the County would make the required balloon payment in the event it opts-out at the end of three years and what impact it would have on signatory cities. 3 21, The proposed interlocal agreement broadly defines solid waste to include materials such as industrial wastes, sewage sludge, abandoned vehicles, and contaminated soils. Will such materials be accepted at the transfer stations? 22. The City intends to develop and adopt its own comprehensive solid waste management plan. 23. The City desires information on the status of the legacy landfills, including projected costs for ongoing closure maintenance,projected rate impacts, and projected final closure date. 24. The City requests a term of three years, although depending on County's agreement to implement cheaper alternatives at the three year opt-out,the City may be willing to discuss a possible longer term. Further, the City desires ability to exit without mutual agreement by providing reasonable advance notice. The City would consider possible limits on when this might be allowed (e.g., at the three-year buy-out period). 25. The City desires to discuss equity issues if the City of Spokane desires to join the County system in the future. As indicated, these are issues identified by the City specific to the handling of City of Spokane Valley solid waste. It is my understanding the County is revising the draft interlocal to be re-sent to prospective members. I encourage you to incorporate the City's comments or contact me for discussion/clarification. I believe we already concur on many of the comments and issues while some comments will require negotiation and discussion. The City would be happy to meet and discuss these with you. Finally,the City of Spokane Valley has made the determination to develop its own Comprehensive Solid Waste Plan. This plan will be developed with alternatives for inclusion in the County's system and possible public/private partnerships. Our objective is to develop an interlocal that will allow for final comparison and timely decisions on our part as soon as County rates are provided. Sincer,- , s Mike :ckson, City Manager c: Dean Grafos, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Rod Higgins, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Bill Bates, Councilmember 4 . �c• • ,t SP L- ® K A N E Ota Cap m = ui t O U N I I OFFICE OF COUNTY coMAIISSIoNERS TODD MIF.I.KE,1ST DISTRICT•SI TELLY O'QuINN,2ND DISTRICT•AI.FRENCH,3RD DISTRICT March 31,2014 Mr.Mike Jackson,City Manager City of Spokane Valley • 11707 E Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley,WA.99206 • RE: Responses to City of Spokane Valley Comments Proposed Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement Dear Mr.Jackson, Thank you for your letter of March 20, 2014, wherein you present the City's comments, concepts, and issues of importance relative to consideration of participation in the County's Regional Solid Waste System. We have made a number of modifications to the Interlocal Agreement(ILA) in response to the comments that we received at the meeting at CenterPIace on February 27th and the comments presented in your letter. Updated versions of the ILA are enclosed for your consideration. Note that we have included a version in"track changes"format,as well as a"clean"version. Modifications to the ILA include the following: 1. We have modified "SECTION NO. 2: DURATION/TERMINATION" to allow for termination of the agreement by the City after 3 years,without penalty. 2. We have modified ATTACHMENT "C" to clarify the purposes of the solid waste enterprise fund,and to address the disposition of assets in the unlikely event that this fund is ever dissolved. 3. We have modified ATTACHMENT "C" to expand the responsibilities of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee to include participation in the budgeting process for the system, and providing recommendations regarding Gate Fees. 4. We have modified ATTACHMENT "C" to clarify the County's intent to further investigate alternatives for solid waste disposal during the term of the ILA, including the issuance of an RFP in approximately May of 2016. 5. We have added language to ATTACHMENT "C" clarifying that any utility taxes paid to the County by the City of Spokane pursuant to the City/County Agreement will be distributed to the participating jurisdiction proportionately based on tons of solid waste. Below, we have provided responses to each of the comments and questions included in your letter. We believe that these responses will clarify the County's position. As evidenced by the ILA modifications noted above,we have agreed to some of the City's proposals. However,there are some proposed changes to which we remain philosophically opposed. 1 1 16 WEST BROADWAY AVENUE • SPOKANE,WASHINGTON 99260-0100 • (509)477-2265 Mr.Mike Jackson March 31,2014 Page 2 1. Given the time constraints on all parties, the City desires to work to general agreement on the concepts below. The City believes that the parties already concur on many of the issues and anticipates that those will be incorporated into the next draft of the proposed interlocal agreement by the County. The City desires to enter into a memorandum of understanding("MOLT') on resolving the others. After the MOU is executed, the parties may then work through details to include the other concepts in the proposed interlocal agreement once they are resolved. RESPONSE: The County believes, in light of the mounting time constraints, that it is more appropriate to resolve all issues and include them with the ILA as opposed to the MOU/ILA concept. 2. The City of Spokane Valley (the "City") desires to have an actual rate or guaranteed rate ceiling incorporating all costs (capital costs, operating costs, program costs, and overhead costs)prior to executing the proposed interlocal agreement. RESPONSE: The County is more than willing to provide the City with an "estimate". At present, we believe that the gate fees will be at or below the present fees. It is not appropriate to provide a guaranteed fee to the City of Spokane Valley. This would place all the risk on the County and the other participating jurisdictions. The gate fees finally adopted will take many factors into account, and will depend in large part on the commitment of flow from the various jurisdictions. 3. The City believes that combining transfer station operations with transport and disposal will result in the lowest cost overall for the system. In order to do so, the City desires the County to issue an immediate Request for Proposals for combined transfer station operations, transport services, and disposal services to allow transition in three years to the lowest cost option. The City recognizes that the County is seeking a contractor to operate the transfer stations under a 10-year term and that an early termination clause will be included in the operating contract. RESPONSE: The County respectfully disagrees. We believe that other disposal options will be available within a 3 to 5 year time frame,which will provide a more competitive bidding climate. We further believe that a 10-year term will provide for more competitive rates for operation of the transfer stations. • 4. The City desires to have future handling of solid waste tonnage from the West Plains area clearly delineated, including what transfer station, transport and disposal options will be utilized. The City has concerns about what may happen if the new County system pays off the transfer stations after three years and utilizes an option other than the City of Spokane's Waste-to-Energy facility. Specifically, the City believes a new West Plains transfer station is not necessary as there are alternatives (use of the existing transfer stations) and a new West Plains station would result in excessive additional costs for the entire system. In any case, the City of Spokane Valley does not believe that all system users should support the development of a West Plains transfer station. Mr.Mike Jackson March 31,2014 Page 3 RESPONSE: The County is responsible for providing a regional system, The rates will be comparable for all customers. For example,the County's agreement with the City of Spokane stipulates that the City of Spokane will continue to deliver historical flows to the Colbert Transfer Station,and will pay the same gate fees as any other customer, including the component that pays for the transfer stations. Similar to the way in which landfill closure costs are paid for by all rate payers, capital costs for new or existing transfer stations (including the Valley Transfer Station) will be paid for by all rate payers on a system wide basis, S. The City desires to establish a governing body with authority to set rates, service levels, and other operational authority and control for the regional system, including local jurisdiction participation on such body. Other issues for consideration include possibly setting a rate ceiling, setting or removing the minimum load charge for self- haulers, and possible ownership issues, The City has remained consistent in regards to governance as it is critical to the City's commitment of representing our citizens through rate setting and cost control authority, RESPONSE: The approach described here is essentially the "Alliance" approach. This approach was unsuccessfully pursued several years ago. At this juncture,the County has decided to own and operate the regional system in a conventional fashion, in the same manner as other systems are set up throughout the state. The County does not agree that a separate governing body should be established. However, in the revised ILA,we have expanded and further clarified the role of Solid Waste Advisory Committee(SWAC). 6. The City requests a commitment from the County to always seek and obtain the lowest price option, with an opt-out available for the City if the County pursues higher priced options. If ownership is part of the agreement, the City would seek either buy-out or recovery of the City's portion towards the capital investment. The City also seeks dialog on recovery of operational and other,enterprise fired reserves should the City withdraw at any time. RESPONSE: The County shares the City's desire to keep rates as low as possible. At this point in time,the County will retain ownership and risk for the entire regional system and joint ownership is not contemplated. 7. The City requests that if an intermodal facility or rail transloader is developed related to solid waste, it must have direct access at the same location to both Burlington Northern and Union Pacific rail lines in order to take advantage of competition for landfill disposal. Also, future competitive bids should not be restricted to a specific transport mode or specific intermodal system. System users should not directly find the development of rail facilities. These facilities should be funded by the private sector or other public/private partnerships. RESPONSE: It is not contemplated that the Regional Solid Waste system will own or operate an intermodal facility. If private industry builds an intermodal facility, then private industry will determine its location. Mr,Mike Jackson March 31,2014 Page 4 8. The City desires a clear and transparent accounting of all aspects of operation, including any inteifund transfers or other comingling of County resources, revenues, or expenses. RESPONSE: Funds from the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund will not be co-mingled with any other County funds. The ILA has been revised to provide: "COUNTY shall provide a statement of County Regional Solid Waste System income and expenses to the SWAC at the end of each fiscal year or on such other periodic basis as necessary for the SWAC to make a recommendation..." 9. The City requests the County to give consideration to local jurisdictions and their ability to provide certain services such as recycling or education in order to allow local jurisdictions more control over rates. RESPONSE: The Regional Solid Waste System will provide services on a regional basis. It is not in the best interests of the Regional Solid Waste System for the system to offer an "a la carte" approach from which member jurisdictions would choose various services/program(s). However, this is an example of a topic which could be brought before SWAC. 10. The City desires the gate rate to be reduced by the amount of the capital payment when the transfer stations are paid off. Specifically, the City desires that the interlocal agreement will clearly show a direct correlation between capital purchase payoff and rate reduction (e.g., if capital payment amount is equal to $11 per ton, upon pay off, the gate rate will be reduced by$11 per ton). RESPONSE: Clearly,once the transfer stations are paid for,the transfer station payment component will not be included in the calculation of the gate fees, However, the"cost of service" rate-setting approach will consider all anticipated capital costs and replacement costs for the regional solid waste system,as is typical. II. The City desires to discuss the possibilities for ownership and equity in system facilities. The City would like clarification on what ownership, buy-in, and buyout would mean, how it could be accomplished, and how it would work for rate payers of various jurisdictions. Additionally, the City would like to understand how system control would be tied to ownership. RESPONSE: It has been determined that the County will own all regional solid waste system facilities. All funds and equipment of the regional solid waste system will be held in the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund. The Solid Waste Enterprise Fund will not be co- mingled with any other County funds. Although the County hopes that all jurisdictions will initially join the regional solid waste system, in the event some do not, then an equitable buy-in will need to be negotiated with any jurisdictions that join later. • Mr.Mike Jackson March 31,2014 Page 5 12. The City desires to have strict limits on any rent, lease, or depreciation costs included for the period of the agreement, including limits on what may be imposed after the facilities are fully paid Additionally, the City desires to clearly idents any equipment or facility replacement or maintenance funds that may be required throughout the term of the agreement.Finally, the City desires to identify how future capital costs, including any reserve funds, will be applied to the gate rates. RESPONSE: The ILA has been revised in Section C. 2 to provide for SWAC's recommendation(s) relative to financial matters regarding the County Regional Solid Waste System. 13. The City desires to see the final rates(or rate estimates)with (1) dl County, City and other local jurisdiction waste, and(2)all waste except for the City in order to understand the impact of the City joining the system. RESPONSE: There are numerous factors that affect gate fees. At this point in time,the County has not calculated gate fees for the various scenarios associated with participation in the regional solid waste system by certain jurisdictions. Some of the components of the gate fee can be adjusted by scaling back services on a geographical basis, and changing hours of operation for the transfer stations. 14. The City desires to have revenue sharing options included in the interlocal agreement, in the event there is ever a utility tax or revenue component. Additionally, the City desires clarification on how revenue sharing would work with any revenues distributed by the City of Spokane under the County's interlocal agreement with Spokane. RESPONSE: The County has added language to Section C.3 of the ILA addressing this item. 15. As a participant of the regional system, each jurisdiction is required to adopt and enforce the County's flow control ordinance. The City desires that the County or system will enforce all flow control requirements. Another possibility may be for the system to pay for all flow control enforcement. RESPONSE: The County is not opposed to regional flow control enforcement. However the costs of regional flow control enforcement could have an effect on the gate fee. 16. The City must have the ability to submit an RFP prior to termination in the event that it desires to go with a non-system alternative. In that RFP, the City would contemplate siting of a new transfer station. The City would require that section C(1)(ii) be amended to allow this, RESPONSE: The County revised Section C: 1 of the ILA to address this concern. However, it should be noted that the siting of a transfer station is subject to the Essential Public Facilities siting process. Mr.Mike Jackson March 31,2014 Page 6 17. City will want to discuss mutual indemnification further depending on its involvement in and level of control and responsibility for system. If the City has no or little control over the system and rates, it should not be required to indemnift the County. RESPONSE: The liability language in the ILA is self limiting. That is to say,the City is only liable to the extent it negligently or intentionally performs or fails to perform any of its obligations under the ILA. 18. The City desires to get reports of City of Spokane Valley tonnage going forward. RESPONSE: The County is happy to provide this information to the extent that it is available. The tonnages may not be exact as collection routes do not necessarily conform to individual City corporate boundaries. 19. The City requests clarification on how the County envisions flow control working with the City of Spokane, especially if there are price differences and the Waste-to- Energy facility is cheaper than the system. Further, how much of the City of Spokane's waste goes to the transfer stations currently, and has the City of Spokane committed to continuing such deliveries? RESPONSE: The City of Spokane has mandatory garbage collection. The ILA between County and City of Spokane includes the following language address these concerns: G. Municipal Flow Control Interference: Both the CITY and the COUNTY recognize flow control to the Transfer Stations and to the City Waste To Energy Facility provides consistency to the CITY and the COUNTY and should not be intentionally disrupted by either the CITY or the COUNTY. The CITY and the COUNTY agree not to intentionally interfere with the other's attempt to meet all solid waste flow control requirements established within this Agreement. Specifically, neither party will intentionally interfere with Interlocal Agreements executed with other jurisdictions both within Spokane County and outside Spokane County during the term of this Agreement. The CITY and the COUNTY further agree to continue to cause the solid waste delivered to the Transfer Stations and to the Waste To Energy Facility respectively by the PARTIES to remain at historical volumes to the extent practicable through the term of this Agreement. (Emphasis added.) O. Gate Fees: For the purpose of transparency to the citizens of Spokane County, it is the intent of the CITY and the COUNTY to charge similar gate fees at the Transfer Stations and the Waste To Energy Facility Mr.Mike Jackson March 31,2014 Page 7 throughout the term of this Agreement; however, both PARTIES understand that this subsection is not binding on either Party. The PARTIES shall give each other at least sixty (60) calendar days advance written notice in the event either determines to charge a gate fee which is not similar to the gate fee of the other party. 20. The City desires clarification on how the County would make the required balloon payment in the event it opts-out at the end of three years and what impact it would have on signatory cities. RESPONSE: There are several options. One option would be for the County to sell bonds to make the balloon payment. Debt service on the bonds would then replace the monthly transfer station payment to the City of Spokane. Another option would be for the County to borrow money from the Spokane County Investment Pool. A third option might be a combination of the above options. CIearly the County would only be implementing one of these options if it would result a reduction in the gate fee. 21. The proposed interlocal agreement broadly defines solid waste to include materials such as industrial wastes, sewage sludge, abandoned vehicles, and contaminated soils. Will such materials be accepted at the transfer stations? RESPONSE: Although the items mentioned are identified as solid waste under the County Flow Control Ordinance, the transfer stations are not equipped to handle them, since they are not municipal solid waste. However, the SCCSWMP identifies where these types of solid wastes are properly handled, 22. The City intends to develop and adopt its own comprehensive solid waste management plan. RESPONSE: This is the first official communication wherein the City has notified the County that it intends to develop and adopt its own comprehensive solid waste management plan. Based on this information,the County is not intending to plan for the City in conjunction with preparing out Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. Note that the County must move forward with the extensive preparations for the new system, including, among others, the negotiations for a comprehensive planning contract and an operations contract, selection of a consultant for a rate study, hiring of staff, and agreements for various services. The scope and costs of all these activities will be directly affected by the extent to which jurisdictions opt to join the regional system. Therefore, in the interest of time and resources, we must require that all jurisdictions joining the system sign an ILA with the County by April 30, 2014. At this time, the County has made no provision within its planning process to accommodate the addition of any other jurisdiction after April 30,2014, 23, The City desires information on the status of the legacy landfills, including projected costs for ongoing closure maintenance, projected rate impacts, and projected final closure date, Mr.Mike Jackson March 31,2014 Page 8 RESPONSE: Long term closure activities for the legacy landfills continue. The County's annual Operation & Maintenance (O&M) budget for our 3 legacy landfills is approximately $700K/year. Assuming the O&M was fully funded by the gate fees, the impact would be$5/Ton. It is difficult to predict a closure date for any of the sites due to the fact that the refuse remains buried on-site. 'Additionally,we are continuing to manage landfill gas, impacted groundwater, landfill cover systems and storm water. The County operates under the assumption that we will continue these activities for 20 years. Every 5 years EPA and Ecology perform a review of the remedial actions at each site and can adjust the site requirements. 24. The City requests a term of three years, although depending on County's agreement to implement cheaper alternatives at the three year opt-out, the City may be willing to discuss a possible longer term. Further, the City desires ability to exit without mutual agreement by providing reasonable advance notice. The City would consider possible limits on when this might be allowed(e.g., at the three-year buy-out period). RESPONSE: The County has modified SECTION NO. 2 of the ILA to allow the City to terminate any time after November 16, 2017 without any penalty and without receiving any payment from the County. The City will be required to provide a 12-month notice prior to such termination. 25. The City desires to discuss equity issues if the City of Spokane desires to join the County system in the future. RESPONSE: The City of Spokane is a participant in the Regional System through their ILA with the County. By the end of April, the County must finalize the list of participating jurisdictions and move forward, in order to stay on schedule with the development of the new system. We understand that the City of Spokane Valley has hired a planning consultant to prepare a comprehensive solid waste management plan. However,we intend to meet Ecology's time frame and cannot delay, At this time, the County has made no provision within its planning process to accommodate the addition of any other jurisdiction after April 30,2014. Please review the changes that the County has made to the ILA. We encourage the City of Spokane Valley to execute the document by the end of April. We would welcome the City's participation in the Regional Solid Waste System. Sincerely, Lei' • UI_ ' 1�t Al Fren i 'hair d Mielke,Vice-Chair arl '1'Quin Commissioner • Enclosures(2) 9(.2-P‘ INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN SPOKANE COUNTY AND FOR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into by and between Spokane County,a political subdivision of the State of Washington,having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY" and the a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at ,_ , Washington 99 , hereinafter referred to as"CITY,"jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES." RECITALS: WHEREAS,the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System("System")was created in 1988 by interlocal agreement between the City of Spokane and Spokane County entitled"AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM". There are 14 member jurisdictions which represent all of incorporated and unincorporated Spokane County. Nearly all interlocal agreements and contacts related to the System expire November 16,2014;and WHEREAS, the current System is administered as a department of the City of Spokane. The System's facilities consist of four primary facilities: a waste-to-energy ("WTE") facility, a transfer station in Spokane Valley ("Valley Transfer Station"), a transfer station in unincorporated north Spokane County ("North County Transfer Station")(jointly referred to as the "Transfer Stations") and the North side Landfill. All System facilities are currently operated and owned by the City of Spokane; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has entered into an interlocal agreement with the City of Spokane entitled "IN 1'ERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND SPOKANE COUNTY REGARDING TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE" ("City/County Interlocal Agreement"). The purpose of the City/County Interlocal Agreement is, among other matters, to (i) formally terminate the System 1988 interlocal agreement as of November 16,2014, (ii)provide for the transfer of ownership on November 17, 2014 of the Valley Transfer Station and North County Transfer Station to the COUNTY, and(iii) establish the terms and conditions for the delivery and disposal of all solid waste collected by the COUNTY at the Transfer Stations to the City of Spokane's WTE facility for disposal for a term of seven(7)years ("County Regional Solid Waste System"). Provided,the COUNTY reserved the right to terminate the City/County Interlocal Agreement after an initial three (3) year time frame upon one years written notice to the City of Spokane in which instance,the solid waste collected at the Transfer Stations would be,;truck hauled to regional landfills for disposal, truck hauled to intermodal facilities combined with rail haul to regional landfills or some other disposal option;and. Page 1of13 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 70.95.080(1), each county within the state,in cooperation with the various cities located within such county, shall prepare a coordinated, comprehensive solid waste management plan. The purpose is to plan for solid waste and materials reduction, collection, and handling and management services and programs throughout the state, as designed to meet the unique needs of each county and city in the state;and WHEREAS,pursuant to the provisions of RCW 70.95.080(3),each city shall: (a) Prepare and deliver to the county auditor of the county in which it is located its plan for its own solid waste management for integration into the comprehensive county plan;or (b) Enter into an agreement with the county pursuant to which the city shall participate in preparing a joint city-county plan for solid waste management; or (c) Authorize the county to prepare a plan for the city's solid waste management for inclusion in the comprehensive county. ' and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 70,95.080(1), the COUNTY is in the process of preparing a Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan to replace the 2009 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan;and WHEREAS, the CITY desires to designate RCW 70.95.080(3)(c) as its choice in conjunction with the COUNTY preparing a Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan as well as any subsequent amendments, revisions or updates thereto to replace the 2009 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan;and WHEREAS,the CITY in consideration of the COUNTY handling disposal of the CITY's solid waste at the County Regional Solid Waste System as of November 17, 2014, agrees to exercise its police powers to designate the County Regional Solid Waste System as the sole site for disposal of solid waste under its control;and WHEREAS,pursuant to the,provisions of chapter 39.34 RCW,two or more public entities may jointly cooperate between each other to perform functions which may individually perform. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth hereinafter, the above recitals which are incorporated herein by reference, and as authorized by RCW 70.95.080 and chapter 39.34 RCW,the PARTIES do mutually agree as follows: SECTION NO. 1: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to: (1) Reduce to writing the PARTIES' understandings as to the terms and conditions under which the COUNTY will prepare a Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan ("SCCSWMP") as provided for in RCW 70.95.080(1) as well as any Page 2 of 13 subsequent amendments, revisions or updates thereto to replace the 2009 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and in conjunction therewith the CITY will select RCW 70.95,050(3)(c)as its option with respect to its solid waste management planning. RCW 70.95.050(3)(c)provides as follows: (c)Authorize the county to prepare a plan for the city's solid waste management for inclusion in the comprehensive county. and (2) Establish participation by the CITY in the County Regional Solid Waste System as one of the Regional Cities. SECTION NO.2:DURATION/TERMINATION This Agreement shall commence as of 12:01 A.M. November 17, 2014 and run until 11:59 P.M. on December 31, 2021. PROVIDED, however, the CITY may terminate this AGREEMENT upon twelve (12) months written notice as provided for in A.2 prior to the effective date. Under no circumstances shall this Agreement be terminated prior to December 31,2017. Upon termination of this Agreement for any reason whatsoever, the CITY shall not be entitled to any part of the County Regional Solid Waste System enterprise fund provided for in C. 2 nor shall it be responsible for any unpaid amount owing and due on the acquisition of the Transfer Stations provided for in the City/County Interlocal Agreement. This Agreement may be extended in five(5)year increments for a period of twenty(20)years,or terms otherwise agreed upon, by mutual written agreement of the PARTIES. Provided, further the CITY acknowledges that in the event of termination, it will be obligated to prepare its own solid waste management plan pursuant to RCW70.95080(3)(a). SECTION NO.3 AGREEMENT DOCUMENTS The rights and obligation of the PARTIES to this Agreement are governed by this Agreement and the attachments incorporated herein by reference (the "Agreement Documents"). The Agreement Documents include: (1) This Agreement, (2) Attachment"A"-General Terms and Conditions, (3) Attachment 13" -Special Terms and Conditions with respect to the City's selection of Option under RCW 70.95.080(3) in conjunction with Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan update-",and Page 3 of 13 (4) Attachment "C"-Special Terms and Conditions with respect to PARTIES' obligations with regard to the County Regional Solid Waste System. In the event of an inconsistency among the above listed Agreement Documents, the more specific shall control. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the PARTIES have caused this Agreement to be executed on date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON AL FRENCH,Chair ATTEST Clerk of the Board TODD MIELKE,Vice-Chair Daniela Erickson SHELLY O'QUINN,Commissioner DATED: CITY OF By: Attest: Title: City Clerk Page 4of13 ATTACHMENT"A" GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. 1:DEFINITIONS As used in this Agreement,the following words shall have the following meanings,unless the context dictates otherwise: a. CITY shall mean the City executing this Agreement. b. City/County Interlocal Agreement shall mean that agreement executed between the City of Spokane and Spokane County entitled "INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND SPOKANE COUNTY REGARDING TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE c. Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan or SCCSWMP shall have the same meaning as set forth in chapter 70.95 RCW,applicable WAC regulations and Guidelines for Development of Local Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and Plan Revisions (February 2012-Publication No. 10-07-005) as they presently exist or as they may be hereinafter amended. d COUNTY shall mean Spokane County or any vendor contracted with by the COUNTY for services related to the management of solid waste. e. Flow Control Ordinance shall mean Ordinance No:85-0398 of the COUNTY,adopted on May 14, 1985,as amended under Resolution No. 88-1268 of the County adopted on December 20, 1988 and Resolution No. 92-1500 of the COUNTY adopted on October 20, 1992 and as maybe further amended from time to time. f Regional Cities or Signatory Regional City shall mean all incorporated cities and towns in Spokane County executing this Agreement to participate in the County Regional Solid Waste System. g. County Regional Solid Waste.System includes (1) transfer and disposal of all solid waste collected at the Transfer Stations for all of unincorporated Spokane County as well as transfer and disposal of all solid waste collected at the Transfer Stations for incorporated municipalities in Spokane County who have executed an interlocal agreement with Spokane County to participate in the County Regional Solid Waste System, (2) ancillary services related to solid waste management as required under chapter 70.95 RCW as well as litter control,and(3)all facilities associated with the performance of the activities addressed in(1)and(2)above. h. Solid Waste shall mean all putrescible and nonputrescible solid and semisolid wastes including, but not limited to, garbage, rubbish, ashes,industrial wastes, swill, sewage sludge, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles or parts thereof, contaminated soils and contaminated dredged material, and recyclable materials. i. Transfer Stations shall mean the solid waste facility known as the North County Transfer Station,located at 22123 North Elk-Chattaroy'Road, Colbert, WA 99005, Spokane County Assessor Parcel No.37036.9060, and the solid waste facility known as the Valley Transfer Station, located at 3941 North Sullivan, Spokane. Valley, WA 99206, Spokane County Assessor Parcel No. 45024.9027 including all structures and site improvements. j. Waste To Energy Facility or Facility or WTE shall mean that solid waste facility located at 2900 South Geiger Boulevard, Spokane,WA 99224, including the solid waste incinerator and the portion of the facility that serves the general public for disposal of household hazardous waste, recyclables, solid waste, yard debris,and other waste products. Page 5 of 13 k. Gate Fee shall mean the amounts charged per ton of solid waste by the City of Spokane or the COUNTY for disposal of solid waste by customers at the Waste To Energy Facility and at the Transfer Stations. Customers include private self-haulers and commercial haulers who bring solid waste to the facilities. The gate fee charged by either the City of Spokane or the COUNTY shall be inclusive of all costs, including applicable taxes. All other capitalized terms used herein,which are not defined, shall have the same meaning given in the City/County Interlocal Agreement. A.2:NOTICE All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (i)the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery;or(ii)the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery,postage prepaid addressed to the COUNTY or the CITY at the address set forth hereinabove such party,or at such other address as either party shall from time-to-time designate by notice in writing to the other party. A.3:COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts,each of which,when so executed and delivered,shall be an original,but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. A.4:ASSIGNMENT No party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other party. Provided,however,this does not prohibit the COUNTY from contracting for all or a portion of the preparation of the SCSWMP or maintenance and operation of the County Regional Solid Waste System. A.5:LIABILITY The COUNTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the CITY, its officers and employees from all claims, demands, or suits in law or equity arising from the COUNTY's intentional or negligent acts or breach of its. obligations under the Agreement. The COUNTY's duty to indemnify shall not apply to loss or liability caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the CITY,its officers and employees. The CITY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officers and employees from all claims, demands,or suits in law or equity arising from the CITY's intentional or negligent acts or breach of its obligations under the Agreement. The CITY's duty to indemnify shall not apply to loss or liability caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the COUNTY,its officers and employees. If the comparative negligence of the PARTIES and their officers and employees is a cause of such damage or injury, the liability, loss, cost,or expense shall be shared between the PARTIES in proportion to their relative degree of negligence and the right of indemnity shall apply to such proportion. Where an officer or employee of a party is acting under the direction and control of the other party,the party directing and controlling the officer or employee in the activity and/or omission giving rise to liability shall accept all liability for the other party's officer or employee's negligence. Each party's duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement. Each party waives,with respect to the other party only, its immunity under RCW Title 51,Industrial Insurance and only as necessary to make this indemnity provision enforceable with respect to claims relating to the death or injury Page 6 of 13 of CITY and/or COUNTY employees acting within the scope of this Agreement. The PARTIES have specifically negotiated this provision. COUNTY initials CITY initials A.6: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES The PARTIES intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. The COUNTY shall be an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of the CITY.The CITY is interested only in the results to be achieved and the right to control the particular manner, method and means in which COUNTY obligations are performed is solely within the discretion of the COUNTY. Any and all employees of the County who provide obligations to the CITYunder this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the COUNTY. The COUNTY shall be solely responsible for the conduct and actions of all employees under this Agreement and any liability that may attach thereto. Likewise,no agent,employee,servant or representative of the CITY shall be deemed to be an employee,agent, servant or representative of the COUNTY for any purpose. A.7:MODIFICATION This Agreement may be modified in writing by mutual written agreement of the PARTIES. A.8:PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in conjunction with either party meeting its responsibilities under this Agreement shall remain with the party acquiring the property or equipment regardless of the source of funds unless mutually agreed by the PARTIES to the contrary. Upon termination, the COUNTY shall own the County Regional Solid Waste System and all of its assets. A.9:ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN/BINDING EFFECT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PARTIES. The PARTIES agree that there are no other understandings,oral or otherwise,regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, No changes or additions to this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the PARTIES unless such change or addition is in writing, executed by the PARTIES. This Agreement shall be binding upon the PARTIES hereto,their successors and assigns. A.10:DISPUTE RESOLUTION Any dispute between the PARTIES which cannot be resolved between the PARTIES shall be subject to arbitration. Except as provided for to the contrary herein,such dispute shall first be reduced to writing. If the COUNTY CEO and the CITY cannot resolve the dispute it will be submitted to arbitration. The provisions of chapter 7.04A RCW shall be applicable to any arbitration proceeding. The COUNTY and the CITY shall have the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a third arbitrator. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be binding on the PARTIES and shall be subject to judicial review as provided for in chapter 7.04A RCW.The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the PARTIES. A.11 VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it mutually understood and agreed by each party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State Page 7 of 13 of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law,suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto,shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County,Washington. A.12:SEVERABILITY The PARTIES agree that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal,the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part,term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington,then the part,term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. A.13:HEADINGS The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to,and shall not be deemed to define,limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. A.14:TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT Time is of the essence of this Agreement and in case either party fails to perform the obligations on its part to be performed at the time fixed for the performance of the respective obligation by the terms of this Agreement,the other party may,at its election,hold the other party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. A. 15: FILING The CITY shall file this Agreement with its City Clerk or alternatively place the Agreement on the CITY's website or other electronically retrievable public source. The COUNTY shall file this Agreement with the County Auditor, or, alternatively,place the Agreement on the COUNTY's website or other electronically retrievable public source. A.16:EXECUTION AND APPROVAL The PARTIES warrant that the officers executing below have been duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the party for purposes of confirming this Agreement. A. 17:COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The PARTIES shall observe all federal,state and local laws,ordinances and regulations,to the extent that they maybe applicable to the terms of this Agreement. A.18:NON-DISCRIMINATION No individual shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefit of,subjected to discrimination under, or denied employment in the administration of or in connection with this Agreement because of age, sex, race, color, religion, creed, marital status, familial status, sexual orientation, national origin, honorably discharged veteran or military status,the presence of any sensory,mental or physical disability,or use of a service animal by a person with disabilities. A.19:NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES Nothing in this Agreement is intended to give, or shall give, whether directly or indirectly, any benefit or right, greater than that enjoyed by the general public,to third persons. Page 8 of 13 A.20: INSURANCE During the term of the Agreement,the COUNTY shall maintain in force at its own expense,each insurance noted below: a. Worker's Compensation Insurance in compliance with RCW 51.12.020, which requires subject employers to provide workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers and Employer's Liability or Stop Gap Insurance in the amount of not less than$1,000,000. b. General Liability Insurance on an occurrence basis,with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. It shall include contractual liability coverage for the indemnity provided under this Agreement. c. Automobile Liability Insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent of not less than $1,000,000 each accident for bodily injury and property damage,including coverage for owned,hired and non-owned vehicles. d. Professional Liability Insurance with a combined single limit of not less than$1,000,000 each claim, incident or occurrence. This is to cover damages caused by the error, omission, or negligent acts related to the professional services to be provided under this Agreement. The coverage must remain in effect for two years after the Agreement is completed. There shall be no cancellation, material change,reduction of limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverage(s) without at least 30 days written notice from the COUNTY or its insurer(s)to the CITY. A.21:SUPERSEDES This Agreement shall supersede any prior agreement between the PARTIES with respect to the purpose of this Agreement as set forth in Section No. 1. A.22:RCW 39.34 REQUIRED CLAUSES a. PURPOSE: See Section No. 1. b. DURATION: See Section No.2. c, ORGANIZATION OF SEPARATE ENTITY AND ITS POWERS: No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this Agreement. d. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES: See provisions within Contract Documents. e. AGREEMENT TO BE FILED: See A.15. f. FINANCING: See provisions within Contract Documents. g. TERMINATION: See Section No.2. h. PROPERTY UPON TERMINATION: See A.8. Page 9 of 13 ATTACHMENT"B" SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO CITY'S SELECTION OF OPTION UNDER RCW 70.95.080(3)IN CONJUNCTION WITH COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE B. 1 CITY's SELECTION OF OPTION UNDER RCW 70.95.080(3)IN CONJUNCTION WITH COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN The CITY hereby selects the following option as provided for in RCW 70.95.080(3)(c) in conjunction with its solid waste management,namely: Authorize the COUNTY to prepare a plan for the CITY's solid waste management for inclusion in the Comprehensive Solid Waste Manage Plan. With regard to this option,the CITY: a. Authorizes the COUNTY to prepare a plan for the CITY'ssolid waste management as well as any amendments,revisions or updates thereto for inclusion in the SCCSWMP consistent with chapter 70.95 RCW, applicable WAC regulations and Guidelines for Development of Local Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and Plan Revisions (February 2012- Publication No. 10-07-005), b. Agrees to provide information to the COUNTY in conjunction with the preparation of the draft SCCSWMP or any amendments,revisions or updates thereto, c. Agrees to provide timely comments on any draft SCCSWMP or any amendments,revisions or updates thereto, d. Agrees to timely adopt the draft SCCSWMP or any amendments, revisions or updates thereto and in writing notify the COUNTY, e. Authorizes the COUNTY to submit the draft SCCSWMP or any amendments, revisions or updates thereto on behalf of the CITY and COUNTY to Washington State Department of Ecology("WDOE') for its approval under RCW 70.95.094,and E Agrees that when the SCCSWMP or any amendment, revisions or update thereto is finally adopted by WDOE it shall be binding upon the CITY in its solid waste management. With regard to this option,the COUNTY: Page 10 of 13 a. Shall prepare a plan for the CITY's solid waste management as well as any amendments, revisions or updates thereto for inclusion in the SCCSWMP consistent with chapter 70.95 RCW, applicable WAC regulations and Guidelines for Development of Local Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and Plan Revisions (February 2012- Publication No. 10-07-005), b. Shall submit the draft SCCSWMP or any amendments,revisions or updates thereto to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee for its review and comments, c. Shall submit the draft SCCSWMP or any amendments, revisions or updates thereto on behalf of the CITY and COUNTY to WDOE for its approval under RCW 70.95.094,and d. Shall pay for the all costs of preparing the SCCSWMP or any amendments, revisions or updates thereto. The COUNTY will seek financial aid from WDOE for preparing the SCCSWMP or any amendments, revisions or updates thereto as provided for in RCW 70.95.130. Provided,however, the PARTIES agree that any moneys expended by the COUNTY is preparing the SCCSWMP or any amendments, revisions or updates thereto in excess of WDOE financial aid,at the sole option of the COUNTY, shall be included in establishing any "gate fee" to be charged to individuals disposing of solid waste at COUNTY owned transfer stations and ultimately reimbursed to the COUNTY. The COUNTY shall maintain records of any all costs incurred in preparing the SCCSWMP or any amendments,revisions or updates thereto. (This space intentionally left blank.) Page 11 of 13 ATTACHMENT"C" SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO PARTIES' OBLIGATIONS WITH REGARD TO THE COUNTY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE SYSTEM C. 1: CITY's OBLIGATION WITH REGARD TO THE COUNTY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE SYSTEM CITY joins the County Regional Solid Waste System. CITY hereby covenants, agrees and contracts to exercise its police and contractual powers and authority as may now or hereafter be recognized in contract or at law to direct the deposit of Solid Waste generated within its geographical boundaries to the County Regional Solid Waste System. In conjunction with this obligation, the CITY will adopt and enforce the COUNTY's Flow Control Ordinance within its jurisdiction. During the term of this Agreement, subject to the exceptions currently in effect contained in the Flow Control Ordinance,the CITY(i) shall designate the County Regional Solid Waste System as its sole disposal site at all times, and (ii) shall enforce the Flow Control Ordinance continuously. In executing this Agreement, the CITY is designating the County Regional Solid Waste System as its sole disposal site at all times as required by the preceding sentence. C.2: COUNTY'S OBLIGATIONS WITH REGARD TO THE COUNTY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE SYSTEM COUNTY shall own, maintain and operate the County Regional Solid Waste System. COUNTY shall additionally establish and maintain an enterprise fund for the County Regional Solid Waste System. All revenues,expenditures,liabilities, and assets, including Transfer Stations,belonging to the Regional Solid Waste System will be accounted for in the enterprise fund in compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. In the unlikely event that the County Regional Solid Waste System is ever dissolved, all assets within the enterprise fund will be transferred to the Landfill Closure Fund and used to mitigate landfill closure liabilities and expenses. COUNTY shall establish and set the gate fee to be charged for the delivery of all solid waste to the Transfer Stations. The City of Spokane shall establish and set the gate fee to be charged for the delivery of all solid waste to the WTE. The Transfer Stations gate fee may include a component to address the cost of closure, postclosure and cleanup of pre-existing landfills. For the purpose of this section, the terminology pre-existing landfills shall mean COUNTY owned Solid Waste disposal sites that have been closed and includes Colbert Landfill, Greenacres Landfill,Mica Landfill, as well as the County owned portion of the Old Marshall Landfill. COUNTY shall establish and maintain a Solid Waste Advisory Ceommittee as provided for in RCW 70.95.165. The SWAC and its composition/membership will be established by the Board Page 12 of 13 of County Commissioners. Each Signatory Regional City/Town shall have representation on the SWAC during the term of its Agreement with the COUNTY. The purpose of the SWAC shall be to create a forum for discussion between the COUNTY and the participating jurisdictions concerning the System and to create a body to which information concerning the System can be provided. The SWAC shall have no independent decision-making authority. The SWAC shall have the following responsibilities along with any additional responsibilities directed by the COUNTY: (1) assist in the development of programs and policies concerning solid waste handling and disposal, (2) review and comment upon proposed rules, policies, or ordinances prior to their adoption,and (3) review and make a recommendation to the COUNTY on the amount of the Gate Fee to be charged by the COUNTY for disposal of solid waste by customers at the Transfer Stations. In conjunction with making any recommendation on the Gate Fee, the SWAC shall include at least the following cost factors; (i) disposal costs; (ii) the acquisition costs of the Transfer Stations; (iii) operating and debt service reserves; (iv) debt service; (v)the operation and maintenance expenses of the Transfer Stations; (vi) Landfill Closure costs; and (vii) County Regional Solid Waste System Program costs, including but not limited to programs to educate and promote the concepts of waste reduction and recycling pursuant to RCW 70.95.090(7), litter control programs, and moderate-risk waste management pursuant to chapter 70.105 RCW. COUNTY shall provide a statement of County Regional Solid Waste System income and expenses to the SWAC for each fiscal year upon closure of the financial records or on such other periodic basis as necessary for the SWAC to make a recommendation on the amount of the Gate Fee. COUNTY shall provide the SWAC with three(3) months advance notice of any proposed change in the Gate Fee. Failure of the SWAC to make a recommendation to the COUNTY on any change to the Gate Fee after notice shall not preclude the COUNTY from enacting any change to the Gate Fee. C.3: POTENTIAL FUTURE TRANSPORT AND DISPOSAL OPTIONS During the term of this Agreement, the COUNTY plans to further investigate the cost- effectiveness of various alternatives for Solid Waste disposal. The COUNTY anticipates that it will issue an RFP for long haul disposal in approximately May 2016.. C.4 PAYMENTS FROM THE CITY OF SPOKANE Any payments received by the COUNTY from the City of Spokane pursuant to Section 4.J. ("Utility Taxes") of the City/County Agreement shall be shared proportionately, after the deduction of all appropriate and reasonable administrative costs, based upon the tons of solid waste delivered to the County Regional Solid Waste System from the COUNTY and the signatory regional cities. Page 13 of 13 ATTACHMENT "B" SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO CITY'S SELECTION OF OPTION UNDER RCW 70.95.080(3) IN CONJUNCTION WITH COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE B. 1: CITY'S SELECTION OF OPTION UNDER RCW 70.95.080(3) IN CONJUNCTION WITH COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN The CITY may elect to either(A) adopt its own Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for integration into the COUNTY'S Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan as provided for in RCW 70.95.080(3)(a), or (B) authorize the COUNTY to prepare a plan for the CITY'S solid waste management for inclusion in the Comprehenvise Solid Waste Management Plan under RCW 70.95.080(3)(c). The CITY shall provide notice of the option selected within 14 days of the date the CITY executes this Agreement or June 18, 2014, whichever is the earlier date. Regardless of the planning option selected by the CITY, all other provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. With regard to the option under RCW 70.95.080(3)(c),the CITY: C. 1: CITY's OBLIGATION WITH REGARD TO THE COUNTY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE SYSTEM CITY joins the County Regional Solid Waste System for the term of this Agreement, as provided in Section No. 2. CITY hereby covenants, agrees, and contracts to exercise its police and contractual powers and authority as may now or hereafter be recognized in contract or at law to designate the County Regional Solid Waste System as its sole disposal site at all times and to direct the deposit of Solid Waste generated within its geographical boundaries to the County Regional Solid Waste System. In conjunction with this obligation, the CITY hereby authorizes the COUNTY to enforce the COUNTY'S Flow Control Ordinance within the CITY'S jurisdiction during the term of this Agreement. The CITY shall adopt the COUNTY'S Flow Control Ordinance, and shall take any and all necessary action, including but not limited to adoption of any ordinances, revocation or non-renewal of any licenses or franchises, or execution of any interlocal agreements required to authorize and allow COUNTY enforcement. During the term of this Agreement, subject to the exceptions currently in effect contained in the Flow Control Ordinance, the COUNTY shall enforce the Flow Control Ordinance continuously within the CITY'S boundaries. In executing this Agreement, the CITY is designating the County Regional Solid Waste System as its sole disposal site at all times for the term of this Agreement as required by this section. New language: C.5: CITY UTILITY TAXES In the event that the CITY imposes a utility tax in the future on Solid Waste received at the Transfer Stations and originating from within the CITY's corporate limits, the COUNTY shall collect that tax in conjunction with the collection of the Gate Fee. Within thirty (30) calendar days of the end of each month this Agreement is in effect, the COUNTY shall remit the utility taxes so collected in the previous month to the CITY, after the deduction of all appropriate and reasonable administrative costs of the Solid Waste System, including any costs associated with the implementation, administration, and management of the collection of the tax. DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE TRANSFER,TRANSPORT,AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SUNSHINE RECYCLERS,INC. THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Spokane Valley, a code City of the State of Washington, hereinafter"City" and Sunshine Recyclers, Inc., dba Sunshine Disposal &Recycling,hereinafter"Contractor,"jointly referred to as "Parties." RECITALS WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 70.95 RCW, a local government is responsible for the management of solid waste within its jurisdictional boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City has undergone an extensive research and review process, which has included multiple studies of various options for solid waste transfer, transport, and disposal management; and WHEREAS, the City's current interlocal agreement with the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System expires on November 16, 2014; and WHEREAS, the City is required by law to provide solid waste transfer, transport, and disposal services by November 17, 2014; and WHEREAS, after due consideration of the options available, the City Council of the City has determined it is in the best interests of its citizens and for the public health, safety, and welfare for the City to assume responsibility of managing solid waste generated within its boundaries; and WHEREAS, after due consideration of the options available, the time constraints and the needs of the City and its citizens, the City Council of the City has determined it is in the best interests of its citizens and for the public health, safety, and welfare for the City to provide for solid waste transfer, transport, and disposal services through a contract with a private provider; and WHEREAS, the Contractor will be able to provide solid waste transfer, transport, and disposal services by November 17, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Parties have, in good faith, negotiated this Agreement and commit to attempting to resolve any future contract disputes, if any should occur, in good faith. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the terms and conditions contained herein,the Parties agree as follows: Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 1 of 46 ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS 1.1 Defined Terms. All capitalized terms utilized in this Agreement are intended to have the meaning defined in this Article 1 whether or not the term is defined prior to its use in this Agreement. The following definitions shall apply to the entirety of this Agreement unless it is clear from the context that another definition applies. 1.2 Definitions. "Acceptable Waste" means all Solid Waste excluding Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and Unacceptable Waste. "Agreement" means this Agreement between the City and Contractor and all mutually adopted amendments thereto. "Business Days" means Monday through Friday, excluding designated holidays listed on Exhibit"A". "C&D Waste" refers to "construction and debris waste" and means Solid Waste generated in the course of construction, demolition, and remodeling, which includes, but is not limited to concrete, brick, masonry, bituminous concrete, plastic (PVC), reinforcing steel, dimensional wood, plaster (sheet rock), fiberglass insulation, composition roofing, roofing paper, metal roofing, metal fencing, copper, white goods and appliances (without CFC and Freon), and similar non-hazardous construction, non-paper or textile materials. "City"means the City of Spokane Valley, Washington. "City Representative"means the representative of the City identified in Section 16.3. "Consumer Price Index" or "CPI" means the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), West Region, 1982-84=100, published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics ("BLS"). The Parties may refer to the BLS Internet Site or other BLS source to determine the applicable CPI Index. "Contractor"means Sunshine Recyclers, Inc., dba Sunshine Disposal &Recycling and all successors and assigns. "Customer Service Plan" means the plan established by the Contractor to direct customer service standards, goals, and plans for implementing new procedures in response to customer service issues and complaints, as provided in Section 3.9. "Days" means calendar days unless the time period called for is five days or less, in which case it shall mean the standard Business Days of Monday through Friday, and excluding designated holidays listed on Exhibit"A". Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 2 of 46 "Designated Haulers" means commercially operated Solid Waste haulers with which the City has a Solid Waste contract. "Disposal Facility"means the facility or facilities to dispose of all Acceptable Waste, and any disposal facilities, recycling facilities, or composting facilities for disposal, recycling, or composting of Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, MRW, and Special Waste. "Disposal Services" means those services provided by the Contractor under this Agreement to finally dispose of, recycle, or compost the Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and Special Waste. "Effective Date"means , 2014. "Food Scraps"means all compostable pre- and post-consumer food waste, such as whole or partial pieces of produce, meats, bones, cheese, bread, cereals, coffee grounds, or egg shells, and food-soiled paper, such as paper napkins, paper towels, paper plates, coffee filters, paper take-out boxes, pizza boxes, or other paper products accepted by the Contractor's selected composting site. Food Scraps shall not include dead animals, plastics, diapers, kitty litter, liquid wastes, ashes, pet wastes, or other materials the selected composting facility is not permitted to compost or that are identified in the future by the selected composting facility with advance written notice provided to the City of such identification by Contractor after Contractor receives such notice. "MRW"means moderate risk Solid Waste that is hazardous and produced by households, businesses, and institutions, but is exempt from regulation under chapter 70.105 RCW because it is generated in quantities below the thresholds set forth in chapter 70.105 RCW and associated regulations as currently adopted and as hereafter amended. MRW refers to both "hazardous household waste" and"conditionally exempt small quantity generator waste". "Organics" means all Source-Separated Yard Waste and Food Scraps separately or combined. "Recyclables"means those Solid Wastes that are Source-Separated for recycling or reuse, such as papers, plastics, metals and glass, which are identified as recyclable material pursuant to a local comprehensive solid waste plan. "Self Haulers" means all citizens and entities located or operating within the City other than Designated Haulers that dispose of Solid Waste with the Contractor. "Solid Waste" means all putrescible and non-putrescible solid and semisolid wastes including, but not limited to, garbage, rubbish, ashes, demolition and construction wastes, yard wastes, and recyclable materials generated by public, private, industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations. "Solid Waste Services" means the Transfer Services, Transport Services, and Disposal Services provided by the Contractor pursuant to this Agreement. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 3 of 46 "Source-Separate" means certain food, organic and reclaimable materials that are separated from Acceptable Waste by the generator for recycling, reuse, or composting, including but not limited to Recyclables, Organics, and other materials. "Special Waste" means Solid Waste that is otherwise considered Acceptable Waste, but by virtue of its unique properties, size, weight, composition, type, applicable legal requirements, or other characteristics, requires special handling or extraordinary management for transfer, transport, and disposal distinct from the level of handling and management required for Acceptable Waste, and is thereby subject to special compensation. Examples include,but are not limited to, tires, fluff, white goods, appliances, large quantities of ash, asbestos, and concrete, rocks or stumps over three feet in diameter. "Surety" means the surety required pursuant to Section 3.16 to guarantee performance of the Solid Waste Services under this Agreement. "Transfer Facility"means the total of all facilities at one or more locations located within the City's boundaries that are operated by the Contractor to accept and process Solid Waste under this Agreement. "Transfer Services" means those services provided by the Contractor under this Agreement to collect and process Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and Special Waste from Designated Haulers and Self Haulers at a Transfer Facility so that such Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and Special Waste may be transported to a Disposal Facility and processed or finally disposed. "Transport Services" means those services provided by the Contractor under this Agreement to transport processed Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and Special Waste from the Transfer Facility to the Disposal Facility. "Unacceptable Waste" means all Solid Waste not authorized for disposal at the Transfer Facility and/or Disposal Facility by those governmental entities having jurisdiction over such facilities, or any waste, the disposal of which would constitute a violation of any governmental requirements pertaining to the environment, public health, or safety, or which, in the Contractor's reasonable opinion, would be considered Unacceptable Waste and/or would not be accepted for disposal by the operator of the Disposal Facility. Unacceptable Waste includes any waste that is now or hereafter defined by federal, state or local law or by the disposal jurisdiction as radioactive, dangerous, hazardous, or extremely hazardous waste. Unacceptable Waste includes Solid Waste that is or contains any infectious waste, radioactive, volatile, corrosive, flammable, explosive, biomedical, bio-hazardous or toxic material. Unacceptable Waste may also include ashes, asbestos, swill, sewage sludge, other biosolids, and industrial wastes. "Uncontrollable Circumstances" means events and circumstances commonly known as "force majeure", acts of God, or other circumstances reasonably beyond the control of either Party. The term includes riots, wars, civil disturbances, insurrections, acts of terrorism, epidemics, natural disasters, severe weather conditions, explosions, fires, severe floods, strikes Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 4 of 46 reasonably beyond the control of either Party, and other similar events that directly affect the ability of either Party to provide the Solid Waste Services as contemplated herein. Typical snow, ice, and flooding conditions that affect road conditions, rail conditions, or the operations of the Transfer Facility or Disposal Facility shall not be considered Uncontrollable Circumstances, provided that such conditions do not make the roads and rail impassable or the Transfer Facility or Disposal Facility inaccessible. "Yard Waste" means plant and vegetative waste commonly created in the course of maintaining yards and gardens, and through horticulture, gardening, landscaping, or similar activities that is free from chlopyralid or other similar substances that are identified in the future by the Disposal Facility with advance written notice provided to the City of such identification by Contractor after Contractor receives such notice, and which cause the Disposal Facility not to accept such Yard Waste for composting. Yard Waste includes but is not limited to grass clippings, leaves, branches, brush, weeds, flowers, roots, windfall fruit, vegetable garden debris, holiday trees, and tree pruning debris. ARTICLE 2 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 2.1 Representations, Warranties, and Covenants of the Contractor. The Contractor covenants, represents and warrants to and for the benefit of the City, unless otherwise expressly specified,that as of the date of this Agreement and throughout its term: A. Organization of the Contractor. The Contractor is a duly organized and validly existing corporation under the laws of the State of Washington and Contractor is in good standing under the laws of the State of Washington and prior to the commencement of services under this Agreement will be in good standing with and duly licensed to do business in the State of Washington and the states in which any Transfer Facility and any Disposal Facility are located. B. Subcontractors Duly Licensed. The Contractor hereby agrees and covenants that it shall not hire, employ, or contract with any subcontractor for the provision of any part of the Solid Waste Services under this Agreement unless such subcontractor is duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the state in which it is incorporated or created, and it is duly licensed to do business in the State of Washington and in the states in which it is providing the Solid Waste Services on behalf of Contractor. C. The Contractor's Power to Execute. The Contractor has full legal right, power and authority to execute, deliver, and perform its obligations under this Agreement, and has duly authorized the execution and delivery of this Agreement. This Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by the Contractor and constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Contractor enforceable against the Contractor in accordance with its terms except as such may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, fraudulent transfer or other laws affecting creditors' rights generally, the exercise of judicial discretion in granting or denying equitable relief, the principles of commercial reasonableness, good faith and fair dealing, waiver, estoppels and unconscionability and by general equitable principles. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 5 of 46 D. No Violations or Conflicts. To the best of the Contractor's knowledge, neither the execution nor delivery by the Contractor of this Agreement, the performance by the Contractor of its obligations hereunder, nor the fulfillment by the Contractor of the terms and conditions hereof: 1. Conflicts with, violates or results in a breach of any applicable law, ordinance, permit, approval, governmental approval or regulation; or 2. Conflicts with, violates or results in a breach of any term or condition of any judgment, order or decree of any court, administrative agency or other governmental authority, or any agreement or instrument to which the Contractor is a party or by which the Contractor or any of its properties or assets are bound, or constitutes a default thereunder. E. Unethical Conduct. The Contractor has not engaged in any type of unethical conduct including, without limitation, collusion, the rigging of proposals, offers or other responses or the submission of a proposal, offer or other response which is intentionally high or noncompetitive for the purpose of giving the appearance of competition. F. No Conditions Precedent to Execution. No approval, authorization, license, permit, order or consent of, or declaration, registration or filing with any governmental or administrative authority, commission, board, agency or instrumentality is required for the valid execution and delivery of this Agreement by the Contractor. G. Appropriate Approvals. The Contractor holds, or is expressly licensed to use, all patents, rights, licenses, approvals and franchises necessary or appropriate to operate and maintain the Transfer Facility and to provide the Solid Waste Services pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. H. Right to Use Facilities and Equipment. 1. As of November 17, 2014, the date of commencement of Solid Waste Services under this Agreement, the Contractor owns, leases or has binding and enforceable contractual rights to use all facilities and equipment necessary or appropriate for the Contractor to fulfill its duties and responsibilities under this Agreement, and the Contractor shall deliver to the City, upon its request,proof satisfactory to the City of such ownership, lease or contractual rights. 2. During the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall own, lease, or maintain ongoing binding and enforceable contractual rights to use all facilities and equipment necessary or appropriate for the Contractor to fulfill its duties and responsibilities under this Agreement, and the Contractor shall deliver to the City, upon its request, proof satisfactory to the City of such ownership, lease or contractual rights. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 6 of 46 I. Truth and Accuracy. The information the Contractor supplied to the City as part of the process to enter into this Agreement was true and accurate when made and, as of the date of this Agreement, remains true and accurate. J. No Change in Financial Condition. There has been no material adverse change in the Contractor's financial condition since the issuance date of the bank commitment letter submitted by the Contractor to the City. K. Contractor is Experienced. The Contractor is fully experienced in each of the areas under which it will have duties and obligations under this Agreement and has adequate personnel and experience to fully, properly and satisfactorily discharge its duties and obligations under this Agreement. The City is specifically relying on representations from the Contractor that it has the skill, experience and means to provide the services set forth in this Agreement. L. Proceedings Against the Contractor. As of the date of this Agreement there is not and shall not be any action, suit, proceeding or, to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, investigation, at law or in equity, before or by any court or governmental authority, commission, board, agency or instrumentality pending or, to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, threatened, against the Contractor, wherein an unfavorable decision, ruling or finding, in any single case or in the aggregate, would materially or adversely affect the performance by the Contractor of its obligations hereunder or which, in any way, would adversely affect the validity or enforceability of this Agreement or any other agreement or instrument entered into by the Contractor in connection with this Agreement. M. Provision of Solid Waste Services. The Contractor has the ability to and will inspect, accept, process, transfer, transport, dispose of, recycle, and compost all Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and Special Waste received by Contractor in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The Contractor has approved and executed all necessary contracts with any third-party providers, including any providers of Transport Services and Disposal Services. 2.2 Representations, Warranties, and Covenants of the City. The City covenants, represents and warrants to and for the benefit of the Contractor, unless otherwise expressly specified,that as of the date of this Agreement and throughout its term: A. Organization of City. The City is a non-charter code city, duly organized and validly existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington, with full legal right, power, and authority to enter into, execute, and deliver this Agreement, and perform its obligations under this Agreement. B. City's Authority to Execute. The City has duly authorized the execution and delivery of this Agreement and this Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by it and constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the City enforceable against the City in accordance with its terms except as such may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, fraudulent transfer or other laws affecting creditors' rights generally, the exercise of judicial discretion in granting or denying equitable relief, the principles of commercial reasonableness, Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 7 of 46 good faith and fair dealing, waiver, estoppels and unconscionability and by general equitable principles. C. No Violations or Conflicts. To the best of the City's knowledge, neither the execution nor delivery by the City of this Agreement, the performance by the City of its obligations hereunder,nor the fulfillment by the City of the terms and conditions hereof: 1. Conflicts with, violates or results in a breach of any applicable law, ordinance, permit, approval, governmental approval or regulation; or 2. Conflicts with, violates or results in a breach of any term or condition of any judgment, order or decree of any court, administrative agency or other governmental authority, or any agreement or instrument to which the City is a party or by which the City or any of its properties or assets are bound, or constitutes a default thereunder. D. No Conditions Precedent to Execution. No approval, authorization, license, permit, order or consent of, process, procedure, or declaration, registration or filing with any governmental or administrative authority, commission, board, agency or instrumentality is required for the valid execution and delivery of this Agreement by the City, except: (1) approval and authorization from the City Council is necessary to execute this Agreement; and (2) the Parties agree that due to time constraints, the City cannot adopt its Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan prior to execution of this Agreement. The Parties agree that City shall commence development of its Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and shall diligently pursue completion, approval, and adoption of the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and adoption of any Spokane Valley Municipal Code Provisions necessary to implement the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. E. Proceedings Against the City. As of the date of this Agreement, there is not and shall not be any action, suit,proceeding or, to the best of the City's knowledge, investigation, at law or in equity, before or by any court or governmental authority, commission, board, agency or instrumentality pending or, to the best of the City's knowledge, threatened, against the City, wherein an unfavorable decision, ruling or finding, in any single case or in the aggregate, would materially or adversely affect the performance by the City of its obligations hereunder or which, in any way, would adversely affect the validity or enforceability of this Agreement or any other agreement or instrument entered into by the City in connection with this Agreement. F. Contractor as Sole Provider. During the term of this Agreement, City shall not contract with any other entity to provide the Solid Waste Services provided by Contractor herein. City shall not be precluded from undertaking a procurement process and entering into a contract with another entity prior to the completion of the term of this Agreement in order to ensure there is no interruption of services after the completion of the term of this Agreement; provided that any such entity shall not commence providing services until the term of this Agreement is completed and this Agreement is terminated as provided herein. Nothing herein shall modify the City's rights of termination or remedies in the event of a default under Article 11. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 8 of 46 2.3 Independent Representations and Warranties. The covenants, representations and warranties described in this Article are not exclusive and shall not be construed to exclude or limit those required elsewhere in this Agreement or to modify, limit or lessen in any way, any rights or remedies that either Party may have against the other or the Surety provider. ARTICLE 3 CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES 3.1 Provide Transfer Services. During the term of this Agreement, the Contractor shall be responsible for and shall provide Transfer Services for Self Haulers and the Designated Haulers at the Transfer Facility. The Transfer Facility shall be identified on Exhibit "A". Transfer Services shall include, but are not limited to the following services, requirements, and conditions: A. Acceptable Waste. The Transfer Facility shall be at such location and of such size and capacity so as to process all Acceptable Waste generated in the City, currently estimated at 50,000 tons annually. Further,the Transfer Facility shall be at such location and of such size and capacity so as to allow Self Haulers and Designated Haulers to deliver Acceptable Waste during the times and days specified in Exhibit "A" without unreasonable delay or interruption to the Designated Haulers' collection service. The Contractor shall ensure that during peak operations there is no obstruction of traffic on any streets surrounding the Transfer Facility other than obstructions arising from Uncontrollable Circumstances. The amount of tonnage is strictly an estimate agreed to by the Parties to determine the size and capacity needed for the Transfer Facility and no specific tonnage of Acceptable Waste is guaranteed by such statement. B. Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and MRW. The Contractor shall provide, as part of the Transfer Facility, programs and means for accepting and processing Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and MRW, as appropriate, so as to allow Self Haulers and Designated Haulers to deliver such wastes and Recyclables at the times and days specified in Exhibit "A" without unreasonable delay or interruption to the Designated Haulers' collection service except to the extent such interruption or delay arises from Uncontrollable Circumstances. Contractor shall be entitled to separate and commercially use Acceptable Waste and C&D Waste delivered to the Transfer Facility; provided any separation activities shall not cause unreasonable delay or disruption of delivery and acceptance of Solid Waste at the Transfer Facility. C. Special Waste. Contractor shall make all reasonable efforts to accept and process Special Waste; provided, Contractor may make additional charges for, or fix new or additional rates for the handling or disposal of Special Waste. In the event that applicable legal requirements or excessive cost of processing would preclude Contractor from reasonably processing Special Waste, Contractor may reject such Special Waste. D. No Delay of Services. The Contractor, at its sole direction and expense, shall keep or shall ensure that the Transfer Facility and Transfer Services equipment are in good working order and repair so as to provide Transfer Services without interruption or unreasonable delay of services except to the extent such interruption or delay arises from Uncontrollable Circumstances. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 9 of 46 E. Right to Refuse Service. Contractor reserves the right to refuse to any business patron the right of access to the Transfer Facility or Disposal Facility when the customer has violated the facility's rules and policies and/or rules and regulations prescribed by law or the customer is delinquent more than 30 days on account of any money due the Contractor for Solid Waste Services. 3.2 Screening for Unacceptable Waste. A. Screening. The Contractor shall not be required to receive, handle, transport, or dispose of any Unacceptable Waste. The Contractor shall establish and maintain appropriate equipment and a program of operating, monitoring, and screening procedures for the Transfer Facility to prevent the receipt, handling, shipping or disposal of Unacceptable Waste. The Contractor shall inspect and screen all Solid Waste delivered to the Transfer Facility for all Unacceptable Waste prior to transport and disposal at the Disposal Facility. Contractor may decline any Unacceptable Waste and may require the hauler attempting to dispose of such Unacceptable Waste to remove the Unacceptable Waste in accordance with federal, state and local law. B. Training. Transfer Facility staff shall be properly instructed and trained on screening for Unacceptable Waste in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws. C. Liability for Unacceptable Waste. The Contractor shall be financially and otherwise liable for the handling and disposal of any Unacceptable Waste that is accepted by it. The City shall in no event be financially or otherwise liable for any Unacceptable Waste accepted, processed,transported, or disposed of by the Contractor. 3.3 Provide Transport Services. The Contractor shall be responsible for and shall provide Transport Services for all Acceptable Waste, C&D Waste, Recyclables, Organics and accepted Special Waste from the Transfer Facility to the Disposal Facility to which the applicable waste is delivered for processing or disposal. The Contractor may utilize any lawful means for providing Transport Services, including contracting with third-party transport service providers. The Contractor, at its sole direction and expense, shall ensure that Transport Services are provided at all times without interruption or unreasonable delay of services except to the extent such interruption or delay arises from Uncontrollable Circumstances. 3.4 Provide Disposal Services. A. Acceptable Waste and Special Waste. The Contractor shall be responsible for and shall provide Disposal Services for all Acceptable Waste and accepted Special Waste at a Disposal Facility permitted to accept such waste in compliance with all federal, state, and local regulations. The Contractor may utilize any lawful means for providing Disposal Services, including contracting for use of a third-party Disposal Facility. The Disposal Facility or facilities shall be initially identified on Exhibit "A". The Contractor, at its sole direction and expense, shall ensure that Disposal Services are provided without interruption or unreasonable delay except to the extent such interruption or delay arises from Uncontrollable Circumstances. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 10 of 46 B. Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, and MRW. As part of its provision of Disposal Services, Contractor shall recycle all Recyclables, compost all Organics, and dispose all C&D Waste and MRW in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws. The Contractor shall ensure that all Source-Separated Recyclables delivered to and accepted at the Transfer Facility are recycled and all Source-Separated Organics delivered to and accepted at the Transfer Facility are composted and are not disposed of as Acceptable Waste, unless otherwise approved by the City in writing, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The Contractor shall identify to City in writing all facilities used to recycle Recyclables, compost Organics, and dispose of C&D Waste, and MRW. 3.5 Primary Services. The Contractor shall provide Transfer, Transport and Disposal Services to the City in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The Contractor may accept and process legally acceptable Solid Waste from sources other than City that is not otherwise prohibited to be delivered to the Transfer Facility, but at no time shall any acceptance or processing of Solid Waste from sources other than the City limit the Contractor's ability to provide Solid Waste Services to the City and its Designated Haulers and Self Haulers in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Should the ability of the Contractor to process Solid Waste generated within the City and other Solid Waste become limited, whether due to decreases in capacity at the Transfer Facility or Disposal Facility or otherwise, the Contractor shall first limit the receipt and processing of Solid Waste from sources other than the City to allow as much Solid Waste generated within the City to be handled as is required under this Agreement. 3.6 Education. Upon request by the City, the Contractor shall assist the City in providing solid waste education, including but not limited, public outreach to educate City residents and businesses regarding the transition to the use of the Contractor's Transfer Facility, education regarding options for recycling, Organics, and MRW, and other educational outreach efforts identified by either Party as set forth in Exhibit "B"; provided, the City shall be responsible for all costs of providing education. The City may request additional education services and the Parties shall negotiate in good faith any necessary changes to Service Fees to cover costs or expenses for the additional education. 3.7 Cooperation. Contractor shall cooperate with the City, Designated Haulers, any third-party providers of Transfer Services, Transport Services and Disposal Services, and the Disposal Facility provider to ensure that Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, MRW, and Special Waste is legally, efficiently, promptly, and without unreasonable delay or interruption of service accepted, transferred, transported, disposed of, recycled and composted in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, except to the extent such interruption or delay arises from Uncontrollable Circumstances. 3.8 Performance Standards. The Contractor shall provide all Solid Waste Services in compliance with the performance standards provided in Exhibit"C". Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 11 of 46 3.9 Customer Service. A. Contractor shall comply in all respects with the customer service standards contained herein. B. Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors shall conduct themselves in a manner to create a positive image of the Contractor and City. Contractor shall provide a customer service telephone line, website, and representative to handle any customer service complaints or questions during the normal business hours of the Transfer Facility. 1. The Contractor shall maintain a toll-free or collect call telephone access line which will be available to customers twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. A customer service representative shall be available to respond to customer inquiries by such telephone line during the normal business hours of the Transfer Facility. After normal business hours, the access line shall be answered by a service or automated response system, including an answer machine. Inquiries received after hours shall be responded to on the following Business Day. 2. The Contractor shall maintain a website which will be available to customers twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. The website shall contain current Service Fee and Organics Fee rates, as well as any pending changes to such rates. The website shall contain contact information for the telephone access line. The website shall contain waste acceptance standards and educational materials as provided herein. C. Customers shall have the right to speak to a supervisor in the event the customer is not satisfied with the response from the customer service representative. The City shall direct any customer inquiry to the customer service representative or supervisor if the customer has not already done so. In the event the customer is not satisfied with the response after speaking with the supervisor and contacts the City, a Contractor liaison shall promptly meet with the City to attempt to resolve the issue. D. Contractor shall develop a Customer Service Plan, to be approved by the City, which shall identify and outline customer service standards, customer service goals, and strategies and plans for implementing new procedures in response to customer service issues or complaints. The Customer Service Plan shall include reasonable times for responses to complaints. The City shall approve the Customer Service Plan and any updates thereto, which is included as Exhibit "D". The Contractor shall review the Customer Service Plan periodically, but not less than once per year, and update as necessary. E. All customer service complaints or concerns shall be documented and provided as part of the Contractor's annual report and to the City within seven Business Days after request by the City. F. Contractor shall ensure that all contracts between it and the Designated Haulers are commercially reasonable and comply with all terms contained herein, including the Performance Standards and Customer Service Plan. Contractor may include any terms that are commercially Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 12 of 46 reasonable, including penalties, interest fees, late charges and service limitations and restrictions for late or non-payment or violation of rules; provided, however, all Designated Haulers, including Designated Haulers that may be owned, operated, or are subsidiaries of Contractor shall be charged the same rates, penalties, and fees and be subject to the same service limitations and restrictions. 3.10 Notice of Disruption of Service. Contractor shall notify the City Representative of any construction, maintenance, or other activity or occurrence which could disrupt, slow or otherwise impact the provision of Solid Waste Services immediately after Contractor becomes aware of such activity or occurrence. 3.11 Notice of Other Facilities. Contractor may notify the City in writing in the event that the Contractor obtains access to alternative transfer or disposal facilities or desires to use other methods of waste disposal which could be utilized in carrying out this Agreement. In the event Contractor desires to use alternative transfer or disposal facilities or disposal methods, Contractor shall provide a written transition plan demonstrating how the transition would occur and any impacts to the provision of Solid Waste Services at the alternative or new facilities. Transition to and use of any alternative facility shall not result in any cost to the City nor any increase in Service Fee or Organics Fee rates. The City may, in its sole discretion, approve the use of alternative transfer or disposal facilities. 3.12 Ongoing Maintenance of Financial Condition. The Parties have agreed that Contractor's ongoing financial health and stability are vital to the continued provision of Solid Waste Services for the term of this Agreement. Solely to demonstrate financial health as it relates to the provision of Solid Waste Services hereunder, within 30 days of the end of the calendar year, Contractor shall provide a letter or other formal statement from the Contractor's designated bank to the City demonstrating that Contractor has met all financial covenants, including the debt service coverage ratio and financial reporting, and made all prior payments timely, required by the bank for financing related to the provision of Solid Waste Services herein. 3.13 Necessary Contracts. The Contractor shall provide for City review, but not approval, all third-party service contracts necessary for Contractor to provide Solid Waste Services, including but not limited to third-party contracts for Transport Services and Disposal Services and with any Disposal Facilities. Contractor may redact any cost or fee schedules, special terms not applicable to this Agreement and other proprietary, trade secret or confidential information from such contracts prior to providing to the City, provided that Contractor shall not redact the names of the parties to the contract, the term of the contract, insurance requirements, and indemnity provisions. All such contracts shall be provided no later than 60 days prior to November 17, 2014. The Contractor shall provide any amendments or new contracts within 30 days of their execution. 3.14 Business Registration. Contractor shall register with the City as a business prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 13 of 46 3.15 Commencement of Service. The Contractor shall begin accepting Solid Waste generated within the City on November 17, 2014. 3.16 Surety. Prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Contractor shall provide to the City a contract performance Surety in the form of a performance bond or letter of credit for the term of this Agreement. The amount of the Surety shall be $1,000,000. The Surety shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement and be substantially in the form set forth in Exhibit "E" to this Agreement, or such other form customary in the industry which the City approves in writing, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. 3.17 Public Records; Confidentiality. A. The Parties agree that all records of the Contractor and of the City which are related to this Agreement and the Solid Waste Services provided hereunder and which are prepared, owned, used, or retained by the City are public records under the Public Records Act (chapter 42.56 RCW) and may be subject to disclosure unless a statutory exemption applies. The City agrees to not intentionally waive any statutory exemptions from disclosure available for such records under the Public Record Act. The City shall, if possible, notify the Contractor before any disclosure, and provide the Contractor an opportunity to intervene through judicial process to resist release of such records. The City agrees not to object to the Contractor's intervention in any judicial proceeding in which the City resists the release of the records in question so long as the Contractor's request to intervene is limited to resisting the release of the records. The City shall have no duty to resist release of any Contractor records, except to provide notice to Contractor of the request for and disclosure of such records as previously described. B. All reports, educational materials, and other records prepared by the Contractor and provided to the City pursuant to this Agreement are and shall be the property of the City and shall be subject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW or other applicable public records laws. The written, graphic, mapped, photographic, or visual documents prepared by Contractor under this Agreement and provided to the City shall, unless otherwise provided, be deemed the property of City. City shall be permitted to retain these documents, including reproducible camera-ready originals of reports, reproduction quality mylars of maps, and copies in the form of computer files, for the City's use. The City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute and otherwise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data, drawings, images or other material prepared under this Agreement that Contractor provides to the City pursuant to this Agreement; provided City shall not publish, disclose, or distribute any financial information provided under Section 3.12 without prior notice to Contractor of its intent to do so or without providing the Contractor an opportunity to intervene through judicial process to resist release of such records; and provided further that Contractor shall have no liability for the use of Contractor's work product outside of the scope of its intended purpose. City shall provide Contractor with notice of any public records requests under Section 3.17(A). C. The City, or as requested and authorized by state law, State Auditor, or any of their representatives shall have full access to and the right to examine during normal business hours all of Contractor's records with respect to all matters that are directly related to and covered in this Agreement and are required to be provided by Contractor to the City under Section 3.22 or Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 14 of 46 to support fee adjustments under Section 5.3, including tonnages received and revenues received by Contractor from Solid Waste generated within the City. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such records for a period of three years from the final date of this Agreement, provided that such representatives shall hold such matters in strictest confidence and not disclose them except in accordance with the limitations on disclosure set forth in this Section 3.17. Contractor may request an independent third-party accountant or other professional to review any document that it believes is not directly related to this Agreement. In the event the independent third-party determines a document is not directly related to this Agreement, such document shall not be subject to review by the City or State Auditor. D. Contractor may, from time to time, receive information which the City designates in writing to be confidential. Contractor shall not disclose such information without the prior express written consent of City or upon order of a Court of competent jurisdiction. 3.18 Compliance with Laws and Regulations. The Contractor agrees that in providing the Solid Waste Services and the performance of its duties and obligations under this Agreement, the Contractor will qualify under, and comply with, any and all federal, state and local laws, requirements, regulations, licenses, certificates, approvals and permits now in force and which may hereafter be enacted and become effective, which are applicable to the Contractor, its employees, agents or subcontractors. 3.19 Permits, Licenses, etc. The Contractor and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain, at their sole expense, all permits, licenses, certificates and approvals required by federal, state and local law for its operations and activities under this Agreement. Contractor shall file with the City a list of all such permits, licenses, certificates and approvals designating the issuing authority, the dates of issuance, the expiration of those permits, licenses, certificates and approvals and shall file a copy of all current permits, licenses, certificates and approvals with the City. The Contractor shall be solely liable for all fines or penalties that may be imposed by any regulatory agency or other governmental authority for violations of permits, laws, approvals, certificates or regulations; the City shall not be liable for and shall not reimburse the Contractor for payment of any fines or penalties. 3.20 Tariffs, Surcharges, Taxes and Fees. Except under the limited circumstances expressly set forth in this Agreement, the Contractor shall be responsible and liable for payment of all federal, state and local taxes and fees, tariffs and surcharges of every form and description including, without limitation, those that apply to any and all persons, property, income, equipment, materials, supplies, structures or activities that are involved in the performance of this Agreement. 3.21 Notification of Violations — Full Disclosure. This Section shall not apply to notification and reports of customer service complaints that occur in the normal course of business, which shall be handled in accordance with Section 3.9. Within 10 days of receiving notice of any other complaint, accident, appeal, claim or notice of violation, or other judicial or administrative action, formal or informal relating in any way to the provision of services under this Agreement, filed against the Contractor, the Transfer Facility, or any subcontractor or third- Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 15 of 46 party service provider, or within 10 days of filing, receiving or otherwise learning of any bankruptcy proceeding filed by or against the Contractor, any of its owners or any entity related to the Contractor, the Contractor shall notify the City of the same in writing. The Contractor shall notify the City of the existence, filing, or receipt of any reports or other documents in any manner related to groundwater, without limitation, including the sampling or the testing thereof. The Contractor shall provide copies of any complaints, accidents, appeals, claims or notices of violation, or other judicial or administrative action, formal or informal, responses thereto, and any reports or documents related to groundwater, as requested by the City within seven days of the City's request, or if the request is made prior to a response, within seven days of such response. Contractor shall provide notice of final resolution of any such complaint, accident claim, appeal, claims or notices of violation, or other judicial or administrative action to the City within 10 days of such resolution. This Section 3.21 contemplates full and forthright disclosure by the Parties. 3.22 Reports. The Contractor shall keep accurate records of all transactions connected with this Agreement including, but not limited to, all correspondence and invoices, transaction/weight tickets and receipts issued to or at the Transfer Facility and Disposal Facility for Solid Waste generated in the City. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, the City shall have the right to review and audit the Contractor's records to which the City has access under Section 3.17(C), above. The Contractor shall provide, in a form acceptable to the City, an annual report for the preceding reporting period summarizing routine and extraordinary activities relating to Solid Waste generated in the City during the prior reporting period and plans and schedules for future activities. The annual report shall provide data by monthly increments. The report shall include: A. Tonnage. The tonnage by type of waste (total Solid Waste, Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, C&D Waste, MRW, Special Waste, and Unacceptable Waste) or other material generated within the City and accepted at the Transfer Facility and the tonnage processed as part of the Contractor's Transport and Disposal Services. Tonnages shall be based upon actual tonnages as measured by a scale system legally calibrated and certified to be accurate by the appropriate governmental entity or agency, or if no such agency is conducting calibrations or certifications, an independent contractor,to certify such scales; B. Trips. The number of trip visits to the Transport Facility by: (1) Designated Haulers, and(2) Self Haulers; C. Customer Service Inquiries. The number of customer service inquiries handled by customer service representatives from Designated Haulers or Self Haulers by month and by the following categories: (1) Fee issues; (2) issues with interactions with Contractor staff; and (3) provisions of services (e.g., wait times, acceptance of waste, etc.); and D. Extraordinary Occurrences. Any extraordinary occurrences affecting the Contractor's performance of this Agreement including, but not limited to, incidents of inadvertent acceptance of Unacceptable Waste generated within the City known to Contractor, and occurrences affecting or caused by the Transfer Facility, any subcontractor or third-party service provider. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 16 of 46 ARTICLE 4 CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES 4.1 Delivery of Acceptable Waste. No minimum amount of Acceptable Waste tonnage is guaranteed under this Agreement. However, the City shall, in its contracts with Designated Haulers, obligate, to the maximum extent allowed by law, the Designated Haulers to haul and deliver all Acceptable Waste collected pursuant to such contracts to the Contractor's Transfer Facility for processing. The City shall diligently enforce, to the maximum extent allowed by law, all obligations in its contracts with Designated Haulers, including, without limitation, those related to the collection, hauling and delivery of Acceptable Waste to the Transfer Facility. The provisions of the City's contracts with the Designated Haulers shall not restrict Contractor's right to enforce the terms of its agreements with the Designated Haulers described in Section 3.9(F). In the event the City chooses to provide for Acceptable Waste collection through the use of City staff and resources, the City shall haul and deliver all such Acceptable Waste collected to the Contractor's Transfer Facility for processing. The City's obligation to contractually obligate and enforce its collection, hauling, and delivery obligations with its Designated Haulers as outlined above does not create any obligation or requirement for the City to impose mandatory collection from all of its residents and commercial businesses. 4.2 Cooperation with Contractor. The City shall use its best efforts to cooperate with the Contractor and to respond to the Contractor's reasonable requests for information and assistance, consistent with the provisions of this Agreement. As part of its cooperation, the City shall provide all necessary information to assist with educational components. 4.3 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. City shall implement and maintain a Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan in accordance with chapter 70.95 RCW, as now adopted or hereafter amended. The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement will be executed prior to the development and adoption of the City's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. The City shall include a description of the Solid Waste Services provided under this Agreement in the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, including a description of the Transfer Facility and Disposal Facility utilized herein as the only such facilities for which the City has contracted and the obligations of Designated Haulers to haul and deliver Acceptable Waste to the Transfer Facility as set forth in Section 4.1. Subject to the requirements of applicable law, the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan adopted by the City and any amendments thereto shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement. The City shall include the Contractor in public discussions and development of the City's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan to the extent permitted by law during the term of this Agreement. In the event any inconsistency is determined between the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and this Agreement, the City shall notify the Contractor and the Parties shall in good faith negotiate an amendment to this Agreement, which shall include adjustments to the Fees payable to Contractor to fairly reflect additional or reduced services, costs and expenses or reductions or increases in waste arising from such amendments, so that the provision of Solid Waste Services under this Agreement does not violate the City's Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. In the event the Parties cannot come to agreement on modified fees,the Parties shall resolve such fee dispute in accordance with the provisions of Article 12—Disputes. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 17 of 46 4.4 Compliance with Laws and Regulations. City agrees that in the performance of its duties and obligations under this Agreement, the City shall comply with any and all federal, state and local laws, requirements, regulations, licenses, certificates, approvals and permits now in force and which may hereafter be enacted and become effective, which are applicable to the City or its officers, employees or agents and which are related to the provision of Solid Waste Services as provided herein. ARTICLE 5 FEES 5.1 Load Limits. There shall be no per load minimum or maximum tonnage of Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, or C&D Waste required for acceptance of such wastes and Recyclables at the Transfer Facility. 5.2 Fees. For the Contractor's performance of its obligations under this Agreement it shall be entitled to the sum of the Service Fee, Organics Fee, and Special Waste Fees as follows: (A) (1) Service Fee. $92.00 per ton of Acceptable Waste and C&D Waste. Contractor may impose a minimum charge for Acceptable Waste and C&D Waste of up to $15.20. (2) Customers may deliver up to four non-Class 8 truck tires in a single load of Acceptable Waste without a separate charge. (3) Customers may deliver up to one tree stump in a single load of Acceptable Waste without a separate charge. (B) Organics Fee. $50.00 per ton of Organics. Contractor may impose a minimum charge for Organics of up to $10.00. The Organics Fee shall only apply to routes and loads delivered from Self-Haulers and Designated Haulers consisting of Organics derived from within the City with no more than a small amount of Organics derived from outside the City. The Organics Fee shall not apply to routes and loads delivered from Self-Haulers and Designated Haulers with more than a small amount of commercially-derived Food Scraps. (C) Special Waste Fees. Except as otherwise provided in Subsection A above with respect to tires and stumps, Contractor shall have sole discretion to set the rates for handling and disposal of Special Waste, provided, however, such rates shall be reasonable based upon costs for acceptance,processing, transport and disposal of such Special Waste. Contractor is obligated to provide for the handling and disposal of Special Waste as provided herein. The Parties agree that the Service Fee is comprised of and includes any and all costs associated with acceptance, processing, transport, disposal, and recycling of Recyclables, MRW, and, if it is accepted by Contractor, Unacceptable Waste. Contractor shall not charge any fee to Designated Haulers or Self Haulers for acceptance, processing, transport, disposal, and recycling of Recyclables and MRW. Contractor shall retain any revenues received from recycling of all Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 18 of 46 Source-Separated Recyclables, composting of Source-Separated Organics, and salvage of commercially usable Acceptable Waste and C&D Waste. All Service Fees, Organics Fees, and Special Waste Fees shall be charged to Designated Haulers and Self Haulers and collected by Contractor at the time such waste is accepted at the Transfer Facility, or by invoice to the Designated Haulers in the event the Contractor has separate agreements with the Designated Haulers. Except as provided below, Contractor shall not be entitled to and the City shall not be required to make any payments to Contractor for any reason under this Agreement, except as otherwise provided in Article 8 — Indemnification and Article 11 — Default. In the event City provides for collection and delivery of Solid Waste generated by the City with its own staff and delivers it to the Transfer Facility, the City shall be charged and pay the same rates as all other customers as set forth herein unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the Parties. 5.3 Adjustment of Fees. A. Annual Adjustment. Effective on December 1, 2015 and on December 1st of each year thereafter during the term of this Agreement, the then current Service Fee and Organics Fee, as previously adjusted under this Section 5.3(A), shall be automatically increased by 90% of the percentage change in the average CPI for the 12 month period July 1 through June 30 of the calendar year the adjustment becomes effective as compared to the CPI average for the preceding twelve month period and multiplying the result by the then applicable Service Fee and Organics Fee. B. Adjustment for Government Taxes. The Contractor may increase the fees payable under Section 5.2 for reasonable actual increased costs resulting from changes in government, health district and/or department, or other agency taxes, fees, and surcharges that are assessed upon Contractor for its operations and Solid Waste Services hereunder that occur or are increased after the Effective Date of this Agreement. Such changes shall include solid waste utility taxes and other taxes, fees, surcharges and impositions relating to solid waste or solid waste processing, handling and disposal. Such changes do not include real estate taxes, ad valorem taxes, telecommunications taxes, water and sewer connection fees or water and sewer user fees, sales or income taxes, host fees, other utility taxes, and any other similar fees, taxes, surcharges, and assessments. The Contractor shall provide notice to the City at least 10 days prior to increasing such fees and the City may request documentation of the reasonable actual increased costs resulting from such changes. If the City requests documentation and Contractor does not or cannot provide such documentation, the Contractor may not increase fees until Contractor provides such documentation. After-enacted government taxes, fees, and surcharge increases or decreases are not subject to the annual adjustment contained in Section 5.3(A). Any dispute regarding the appropriateness of increases shall be resolved pursuant to Article 12 - Disputes. C. Adjustment for Changes in Federal, State and Local Law. The Contractor may increase the fees payable under Section 5.2 for reasonable actual increased costs resulting from changes in federal, state, or local law. For purposes of this Section, "change in law" means any of the following that are related to and required for the provision of Solid Waste Services hereunder, and which become effective at any time after the Effective Date: (1) any new, changed, or revised law, statute, rule, code, regulation, ordinance, or decision, order, decree, or Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 19 of 46 judgment, or (2) the imposition of any material conditions or requirements on the continuation, issuance, or renewal of any permit, license or approval. "Change in law" excludes any change in tax, fee, or surcharge as provided for in Section 5.3(B). The Contractor shall provide notice to the City at least 10 days prior to increasing such fees and the City may request documentation of the reasonable actual increased costs resulting from such changes. If the City requests documentation and Contractor does not or cannot provide such documentation, the Contractor shall not increase fees until Contractor provides such documentation. Any dispute regarding the appropriateness of increases shall be resolved pursuant to Article 12 -Disputes. D. Adjustment for Uncontrollable Circumstances. Upon reasonable agreement of the Parties, the Contractor may increase the fees payable under Section 5.2 for reasonable actual increased costs resulting from Uncontrollable Circumstances. The Contractor shall provide immediate notice of such Uncontrollable Circumstances to the City. The City may request documentation of such reasonable actual increased costs resulting from Uncontrollable Circumstances. The Parties shall work diligently and reasonably towards agreement and shall not unreasonably withhold or delay agreement on any fee increase. The agreed upon fees shall include all actual reasonable increased costs incurred from the date of the Uncontrollable Circumstances. Any dispute regarding the appropriateness of increases shall be resolved pursuant to Article 12 -Disputes. E. Reduced Fees for "Most Favored Customer." Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary herein, the Contractor may use the Transfer Facility to process Solid Waste of any governmental or private entity or person other than the City, Designated Haulers, and Self Haulers. In the event the Contractor enters into an agreement with any governmental entity other than the City to process Solid Waste that requires the Contractor to perform all of the same Solid Waste Services the Contractor is required to perform under this Agreement in the same manner and to the same extent as required under this Agreement, the Contractor shall reduce the Service Fee or Organics Fee under this Agreement to the lower amount provided to the other governmental entity. F. Services Under Emergency Operations Plan. In the event the Contractor implements the emergency operations plan under Article 6, the Service Fee and Organics Fee shall not increase above the rate in effect immediately prior to the date and time of such implementation. G. No Payment for Services Not Performed. The Contractor shall receive no payment for services required under this Agreement which are not provided by the Contractor or its subcontractors, even if such failure is caused by events or occurrences of a nature commonly known as "force majeure" or acts of God or strikes beyond the Contractor's control. 5.4 Fees and Taxes Payable to the City. A. The Contractor shall pay an annual administrative fee to the City equal to $125,000 to compensate the City for costs associated with administration of this Agreement and management of Solid Waste within the City. Such fee shall be paid in quarterly installments due within 30 days of the completion of the first calendar quarter of 2015 and within 30 days of the completion of each calendar quarter thereafter throughout the term of the Agreement. The City may alter the Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 20 of 46 fee once each year and shall notify the Contractor of such alteration by December 31 of each calendar year. Any alteration shall not take effect until the first day of the calendar quarter that starts at least 60 Days following such notification. B. The City shall have the right to request review and/or audit of all records related to the tonnages received from Solid Waste generated within the City and delivered to the Contractor and amounts payable and due under Section 5.4(A) at any time. C. The administrative fee payable to the City may be added, as applicable, to the fees set forth in Section 5.2, as adjusted, to make up the total tipping fees that Contractor charges to Designated Haulers and Self Haulers. The-amount added to fees shall be based upon the annual projected tonnage of Acceptable Waste. Contractor shall have the right to direct any questions regarding the administrative fee to the City and the City shall be responsible for handling all complaints and inquiries about such administrative fee. Contractor shall be responsible for the collection and delivery of the administrative fee to City to the extent of the amount owed based on total tonnage of Acceptable Waste collected from City Self Haulers and Designated Haulers. Contractor shall collect the City's administrative fee as agent for the City from Designated Haulers and Self Haulers and shall deliver the amount collected to the City as provided in Section 5.4(A). For purposes of calculating taxes on the collection and delivery of the administrative fee, the City's administrative fee is not the income or asset of Contractor for any reason and is paid to and received by the City exclusively because of the exercise of its governmental functions. Contractor shall not have any personal liability to the City for the administrative fee other than the obligation to collect and deliver the administrative fee to the City as set forth in Section 5.4(A). Contractor shall maintain books and records showing that Contractor is acting as agent for the City and that the City is the actual owner of the City administrative fee funds collected by Contractor. D. In addition to the annual administrative fee, if the Contractor receives more than 45,500 tons of Solid Waste at the Transfer Facility, excluding tonnage from loads which consist substantially of commercial Recyclables that are brought to the Transfer Facility for baling, marketing and/or processing, during any calendar year starting with 2015, because of the effect of that volume of tonnage on the facilities in the City, the Contractor shall pay the City a"Right- of-Way Maintenance Fee" equal to $1.00 for each ton of Solid Waste received at the Transfer Facility, except for tonnage from excluded Recyclables as provided above in this Section 5.4(D), during such calendar year over 45,500 tons of such waste. On or before March 15 of each year, commencing March 15, 2016, the Contractor shall pay the City the Right-of-Way Maintenance Fee that is payable based upon the number of tons of Solid Waste that are received at the Transfer Facility, except for tonnage from the excluded Recyclables as provided above in this Section 5.4(D), during the prior calendar year. E. In the event the City imposes a solid waste utility tax or other business and occupation tax on the provision of Solid Waste Services by the Contractor or the Contractor's operation of its solid waste business, the Parties agree that such tax is an after-enacted government tax under Section 5.3(B) and Contractor shall be entitled to increase the fees payable under Section 5.2 for the actual increased costs resulting from such tax. Such tax shall be paid to the City at such time and in such manner as specified in the ordinance imposing such tax. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 21 of 46 ARTICLE 6 EMERGENCIES 6.1 Notification. Any Party with knowledge of circumstances or potential circumstances which could impact the availability of Acceptable Waste, the ability of the Transfer Facility to process Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, and C&D Waste, the ability of the Contractor to provide Transfer Services, Transport Services, or Disposal Services, or the ability of the Disposal Facility to dispose of, recycle, or compost Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, and C&D Waste shall promptly notify the other Party. Said notification shall in no case take more than 24 hours after the discovery of the information. Notification shall initially be oral and shall be followed by prompt written notification. 6.2 Emergency Operations Plan. Prior to the execution of this Agreement, the Contractor shall provide to the City a written comprehensive emergency operations plan designed to provide an alternate means of providing Transfer Services, Transport Services, and Disposal Services, to process, transfer, transport and dispose of, recycle, and compost Solid Waste under this Agreement should the Contractor not be able to do so with the originally designated Transfer Facility, Disposal Facility or in the manner originally contemplated. Examples of emergencies which would give rise to use of the emergency operations plan include, but are not limited to Uncontrollable Circumstances that render the Transfer or Disposal Facility inoperable, or government regulatory action that renders the Transfer or Disposal Facility inoperable. Lack of capacity to process Solid Waste at either the Transfer or Disposal Facility due to increased Solid Waste from sources other than the City shall not constitute a valid emergency. The emergency operations plan shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement and shall be reviewed annually and updated as necessary. A copy of the emergency operations plan is attached hereto as Exhibit"F." 6.3 Implementation of the Emergency Operations Plan. In the event that the Contractor fails or is unable to provide the Solid Waste Services which it has agreed to perform under this Agreement, or is unable to process, transfer, transport to and legally dispose of, recycle, or compost all Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, and C&D Waste at the Disposal Facility, the Contractor shall immediately implement the emergency operations plan and thereafter immediately notify the City and the Designated Haulers orally, followed by a written notification to the City at the earliest practicable time which shall not exceed 24 hours from the time the emergency operations plan was put into effect. ARTICLE 7 OWNERSHIP OF WASTE 7.1 Ownership. Title to Solid Waste delivered to the Contractor under this Agreement is in the person or entity which arranged for said delivery and provided the Solid Waste. The Contractor may obtain ownership of Solid Waste delivered to the Transfer Facility to the extent provided by law, but only to the extent that Contractor accepts and processes such Solid Waste. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, title to Solid Waste shall not vest in the City. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 22 of 46 ARTICLE 8 INDEMNIFICATION 8.1 Indemnification and Hold Harmless — Non-Environmental. Contractor shall, at its sole expense, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, attorney's fees and costs of litigation, expenses, injuries, and damages of any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of the breach by the Contractor of any or its representations, warranties or covenants under this Agreement or the intentionally wrongful or negligent acts, errors or omissions in the services provided by Contractor, Contractor's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants and employees to the fullest extent permitted by law, subject only to the limitations provided below. Such duty to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, and employees shall survive the term of this Agreement. 8.2 Indemnification and Hold Harmless — Environmental. Contractor shall, at its sole expense, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims of pollution or other environmental liabilities arising out of the Transfer Services, Transport Services, and Disposal Services provided by Contractor, Contractor's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants, and employees, including any third-party service providers providing Transport Services and Disposal Services or owning any Disposal Facility(s) utilized by the Contractor, for disposal of Solid Waste under this Agreement. Such duty to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, and employees shall survive the term of this Agreement until the statute of limitations on any such claims expires which may last through operation, closure, and post-closure of any Transfer Facility or Disposal Facility utilized by the Contractor to provide Transfer and Disposal Services under this Agreement. 8.3 General Provisions. The following provisions are applicable to indemnification under Sections 8.1 and 8.2: A. Contractor's duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City shall not apply to liability for damages arising out of such services caused by or resulting from the intentional wrongful acts or sole negligence of City or City's agents or employees. B. Contractor's duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City against liability for damages arising out of such services caused by the concurrent negligence of(1) City or City's agents or employees, and (2) Contractor's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants and employees, shall apply only to the extent of the negligence of Contractor, Contractor's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants and employees. C. Contractor's duty to defend, indemnify and hold City harmless shall include, as to all claims, demands, losses and liability to which it applies, City's personnel-related costs, reasonable attorneys' fees, and the reasonable value of any services rendered by the office of the City Attorney, outside consultant costs, court costs, fees for collection, and all other claim- related costs and expenses. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 23 of 46 D. Contractor specifically and expressly waives any immunity that may be granted it under the Washington State Industrial Insurance Act, Title 51 RCW. These indemnification obligations shall not be limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation or benefits payable to or for any third party under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefits acts. Provided, that Contractor's waiver of immunity under this provision extends only to claims against Contractor by City, and does not include, or extend to, any claims by Contractor's employees directly against Contractor. The Parties hereby certify that this indemnification provision was mutually negotiated and agreed to. E. Contractor and the City agree to make and pursue claims against their applicable insurance coverage for all costs and expenses related to third party claims. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver or relinquishment of any claims either Contractor or the City may have against their respective insurers, nor shall any provision of this Agreement waive or relinquish any subrogation or contribution rights that Contractor or the City's insurers may have against another insurer or other potentially responsible party. F. In no event shall the Contractor be liable for consequential, special, or incidental damages suffered by the City. ARTICLE 9 INSURANCE 9.1. Insurance Required. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Contractor, its agents,representatives, employees or subcontractors. 9.2. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Contractor shall obtain or, as indicated below, arrange for insurance of the types described below: A. Automobile liability insurance covering all owned, non-owned, hired and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage. B. Commercial general liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors and personal injury and advertising injury. City shall be named as an insured under Contractor's commercial general liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the City. C. Workers' compensation coverage as required by the industrial insurance laws of the State of Washington. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 24 of 46 D. Commercial Umbrella Liability Insurance (not "excess only" Umbrella Liability Insurance). E. Pollution Liability Insurance covering bodily injury and property damage to third parties resulting from sudden or gradual pollution occurring during the course of providing any of the Solid Waste Services outlined herein. In the event Contractor utilizes a third-party service provider to provide Transport Services and Disposal Services, including any third-party owned Disposal Facility(s), Contractor shall provide or arrange for the owner of the Disposal Facility to provide the Pollution Liability Insurance required under this Agreement and shall provide evidence of or evidence that such owner has pollution liability insurance in at least the amount provided in Section 9.3(D) for losses arising from the provision of such services and use of such facility(s) for the Solid Waste Services provided under this Agreement. 9.3 Minimum Amounts of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain or, as indicated in Section 9.2(E), arrange for the following insurance limits: A. Automobile liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of$1,000,000 per accident. B. Commercial general liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000 each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate. C. Commercial Umbrella Liability Insurance (not "excess only" Umbrella Liability Insurance)with limits of$5,000,000 each occurrence. D. Pollution Liability (Environmental Liability) with limits of$5,000,000 to be provided by the party required to provide such insurance under Section 9.2(E). 9.4 Other Insurance Provisions. A. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions for all insurance except workers' compensation: 1. Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to City. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by City shall be in excess of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 2. Contractor shall fax or send electronically in .pdf format a copy of insurer's cancellation notice within two Business Days of receipt by Contractor. 3. City shall be named as an additional insured. B. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. C. Evidence of Coverage. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 25 of 46 Agreement, Contractor shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates to the City Clerk at the time Contractor returns the signed Agreement to the City. The certificate shall specify all of the parties who are additional insureds, and will include applicable policy endorsements, and the deduction or retention level. Insuring companies or entities are subject to City acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies shall be provided to City. Contractor shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions, and/or self-insurance. Contractor shall obtain replacement insurance certificates meeting the requirements herein and furnish such replacement certificates to the City at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the insurance certificate being replaced. D. Insurance Required from Designated Haulers. The City shall, in its contracts with Designated Haulers, obligate them to obtain and keep insurance policies in force with companies and coverages as are customary in the industry. City shall provide copies of all insurance certificates for the Designated Haulers to Contractor within two Business Days of Contractor's request. ARTICLE 10 COORDINATION MEETINGS 10.1 Initial Coordination Meeting. Prior to the commencement of services under this Agreement, the Contractor, City and others requested by either Party shall meet as necessary to discuss scheduling,processes and any other matters the Parties deem appropriate. 10.2 Periodic Coordination Meetings and Reports. The City and the Contractor shall hold periodic coordination meetings, no less than annually, to review the Solid Waste Services being provided, problems and/or complaints made by third parties. Either the City or the Contractor may organize, call and notify the other Party of that meeting. If requested, either Party shall submit a written report to the other Party at least seven days before any meeting regarding operations,problems, complaints or any other matter arising under this Agreement. ARTICLE 11 DEFAULTS 11.1 Contractor Default. There shall be two classes of defaults by the Contractor in its performance under this Agreement: A. Major Default. A Major Default includes: 1. The Contractor's failure to provide Transfer Services, Transport Services and Disposal Services for all Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, and C&D Waste at the Transfer Facility and Disposal Facility or an alternate facility under Section 3.11 for a period of two consecutive Days provided such failure is not due to Uncontrollable Circumstances; 2. A release or the threat of a release by the Contractor of a Hazardous Substance, as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 26 of 46 Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et. seq. as amended ("CERCLA"), or as defined by the Model Toxics Control Act, chapter 70.105D RCW, as amended ("MTCA"), which the City reasonably concludes, in its reasonable discretion, may constitute a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance of such a degree that the United States Environmental Protection Agency or Washington Department of Ecology would be reasonably likely to conduct a remedial action, require remedial action by the City or the generators of the Solid Waste, or impose liability on the City or generators of the Solid Waste; provided that a release or threat of release of a Hazardous Substance as described in this Section 11.1(A)(2) shall not constitute a Major Default or default by Contractor under this Agreement if Contractor: (1) has already begun and is diligently pursuing a response or remedial action as required by CERCLA or MTCA at the time of the City's determination; or (2) following notice from the City of a release or threatened release, Contractor implements a response or remedial action and diligently pursues it as required by CERCLA or MTCA; 3. The situation wherein the emergency operations plan is put into effect, whereupon, the City shall have the reasonable discretion, 10 days thereafter, to determine that Contractor is not implementing the emergency operations plan and is failing to provide Transfer Services, Transport Services, and Disposal Services for all Acceptable Waste, Recyclables, Organics, and C&D Waste in accordance with the terms of the emergency operations plan, provided such failure is not due to Uncontrollable Circumstances; 4. Except as otherwise permitted herein, the Contractor's assignment of any rights, duties or obligations under or arising from this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld, conditioned or delayed; 5. Except as otherwise permitted herein, the transfer, conveyance or assignment of a controlling ownership interest in the Contractor, without the prior written consent of the City,which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld, conditioned or delayed; or 6. The filing of any bankruptcy proceeding against or by the Contractor and subsequent proceedings thereafter whether voluntary or involuntary that prevent Contractor from providing the Solid Waste Services under this Agreement, and in the case of a bankruptcy filing against the Contractor or involuntary filing, the Contractor does not have such proceeding vacated or dismissed within 60 days after it is filed. B. Minor Default. A Minor Default includes any other failure by the Contractor to perform its obligations under this Agreement which does not constitute a Major Default. 11.2 Consequences of Contractor Defaults. A. Major Default. In the event of a Major Default, the City shall have the right, in its sole discretion,to immediately: Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 27 of 46 1. Seek and receive liquidated damages from the date of the Major Default in the amount of$4,000 per day to the date the Major Default is remedied by the Contractor or this Agreement is terminated, whichever comes first. These liquidated damages are not a penalty, but are fixed and agreed upon between the Contractor and City because of the impracticability and difficulty of fixing and ascertaining the actual damages that the City would sustain in the event of a Major Default; 2. Terminate this Agreement upon written notice and declare that it is released from its obligations under this Agreement and may use any other method, person or entity to provide the services required under this Agreement or substitutes therefore and may seek any legal or equitable relief permitted by law; 3. Use any other method, person or entity to perform the services required under this Agreement or substitutes therefore without the Contractor being released from its obligations under this Agreement; 4. Seek the judicial remedy of specific performance; 5. Foreclose on the Surety in accordance with this Agreement. The City shall reduce the amount received from foreclosure on the Surety by the amount of any liquidated damages received; or 6. Pursue any combination of the foregoing or any other remedy provided under this Agreement or by law. B. Minor Default. In the event of a Minor Default, the Contractor or Surety shall be permitted to remedy the Minor Default within 30 days of the City sending written notice and if Contractor does not remedy the Minor Default within such time period, or if such Minor Default is not susceptible to cure within such 30 day period, if Contractor shall fail to commence and diligently pursue such cure to completion within the period of time which is reasonably necessary to complete such cure, then the Contractor shall pay to the City liquidated damages in the amount of$1,000 per day from the date that is the last day of such 30 day or reasonable cure period to the date the Minor Default is remedied. These liquidated damages are not a penalty, but are fixed and agreed upon between the Contractor and City because of the impracticability and difficulty of fixing and ascertaining the actual damages that the City would sustain in the event of a Minor Default. If the Minor Default is not remedied within 30 days after the expiration of the initial 30 day or reasonable cure period,the City may, at its sole discretion: 1. Terminate this Agreement and obtain alternative services; 2. Seek the judicial remedy of specific performance; 3. Foreclose on the Surety in accordance with this Agreement. The City shall reduce the amount received from foreclosure on the Surety by the amount of liquidated damages received; or Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 28 of 46 4. Pursue any combination of the foregoing or any other remedy provided under this Agreement or by law. If a Minor Default is not remedied within 90 days of its occurrence, the City may, at its sole option, exercise any of the remedies set forth for remedy of a Major Default under this Article. 11.3 Default Procedure. A. Notice of Default. Except as otherwise provided for in this Agreement, the City's representative shall give written notice to the Contractor's representative and its Surety provider of the City's determination of default and intention to declare the Contractor in default. The Notice shall specify the factual basis for the determination of default, the effective date of the determination of default, and the remedy(s) selected by the City. B. Show Cause. The Contractor may request to show cause why it should not be declared in default,which may be allowed in the sole discretion of the City. In the event the City allows the Contractor to show cause, the Contractor shall provide written explanation to the City Manager, City Representative, and a third member from the City selected by the City Manager and City Representative. After considering the written explanation, the City Manager, City Representative and third City member shall confer and may declare the Contractor in default and notify the Contractor and Surety provider of such declaration. Any appeal of such determination shall be resolved through litigation filed in the Superior Court of Spokane County, Washington. C. Cure and Appeal. For Minor defaults, the time period for curing such defaults shall begin to run on the date the City gives initial notice of default, or in the event the Contractor elects to show cause, on the date of the final declaration of default. Absent a specific order from a superior court judge, the remedy(s) sought by the City and time period for cure as allowed under this Agreement shall not be stayed pending the appeal process. 11.4 City Default. A. General. For each and every event of default by the City, the City shall be permitted to remedy the default within 30 days of the Contractor sending written notice and if the City does not remedy the default within such time period, or if such default is not susceptible to cure within such 30 day period, if the City shall fail to commence and diligently pursue such cure to completion within the period of time which is reasonably necessary to complete such cure, the Contractor shall have available to it all remedies to the extent provided by law. B. Actual Damages. For each and every default by the City, the Contractor, in its discretion, shall be entitled to recover its actual reasonable damages. Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, nothing herein shall create an obligation for the City to pay for any of the Solid Waste Services to be provided under this Agreement. 11.5 No Waiver by City. Nothing in this Agreement, and no actions taken pursuant to this Agreement, shall constitute a waiver or surrender of any immunities, rights, remedies, claims, or causes of action the City may have against the Contractor or its Surety provider under Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 29 of 46 any other provision of this Agreement or any provision of law, subject to the terms of this Agreement. ARTICLE 12 DISPUTES 12.1 Informal Negotiation. Should a dispute arise between the Parties, they shall initially attempt to resolve the dispute through informal discussion and negotiations. Each Party may designate one or more representatives for such discussions and negotiations. Each Party shall use good faith efforts to attempt to resolve the dispute through such discussions and negotiations. 12.2 Mediation. If the Parties cannot resolve the dispute through informal discussions and negotiations, either Party may submit a dispute notice to the other that they believe the negotiations cannot resolve the dispute and mediation is required. A dispute notice may not be submitted until at least 30 days have passed since informal discussion and negotiations began. Within 7 days from the dispute notice, the Parties shall by agreement select and designate a trained mediator to serve as a mediator in the dispute. The mediator so designated shall fix the time and place for the mediation, which date shall not be later than 14 days from the date the mediator was selected, and shall give the Parties at least five Business Days written notice of the initial mediation session. The mediator shall meet with the Parties until either (A) the dispute is resolved, or (B) the mediator determines that further meetings will not likely result in a resolution by agreement. 12.3 Judicial Review. Any dispute that cannot be resolved under the informal negotiation or mediation process shall be resolved by litigation filed in the Superior Court for Spokane County, Washington, unless otherwise required by federal or state law. 12.4 Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement is entered into in Spokane County, Washington. Venue shall be Spokane County, State of Washington. 12.5 Cost and Attorney's Fees. The prevailing Party in any litigation arising out of this Agreement shall be entitled to its attorney's fees and costs of such litigation (including expert witness fees). Costs of mediation shall be born equally by both Parties. ARTICLE 13 CONTRACTOR 13.1 Contractor as Independent Contractor. The Contractor shall perform all work under this Agreement as an independent contractor. The Contractor is not and shall not be considered an employee, agent, sub-agent or servant of the City for this Agreement or otherwise; the Contractor's subcontractors, employees or agents are not and shall not be considered employees, agents, sub-agents or servants of the City for this Agreement or otherwise. The Contractor shall have exclusive control of and the exclusive right to control the details of the Solid Waste Services and work performed under this Agreement and the City shall have no ability to control the day-to-day operation of the Transfer Facility, or the provision of Solid Waste Services. The Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 30 of 46 City shall not be responsible for any injuries, accidents or other mishaps associated with the Transfer Facility's operations, the provision of Solid Waste Services, or the operations of any subcontractor or third-party service provider. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for the acts and omissions of its officers, agents, employees and subcontractors. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as creating a partnership or joint venture between the Contractor and the City or as giving the City a duty to supervise or control the acts or omissions of the Contractor or any other person performing services or work under the Agreement. 13.2 Use of Subcontractors or Third-Party Service Providers. The Parties have contemplated the Contractor's use of third-party service providers or subcontractors for the provision of some or all of the Solid Waste Services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall provide names and contact information for all third-party service providers or subcontractors to the City prior to such providers or subcontractors commencing any work. The use of third-party service providers or subcontractors shall not relieve the Contractor from any of its responsibilities under this Agreement and Contractor shall be liable for any failure of the third-party service provider or subcontractor to perform which causes a default under this Agreement. 13.3 Cooperative Services. This Agreement may be used by other government agencies. By entering into this Agreement, the Contractor agrees to make substantially the same Agreement services,terms, and fee rates available to other such governmental agencies if they so desire, subject to issues specific to the other governmental agencies, including but not limited to changes necessary due to greater or lesser tonnage amounts (e.g., modifications to the performance bond amount or liquidated damages) and the particular administrative fee that may be sought. The City shall in no way whatsoever incur any liability in relation to specifications, delivery,payment, or any other aspect of purchases or services received by such agencies. ARTICLE 14 SUCCESSORS; ASSIGNMENT 14.1 Contractor Delegation. The City executes this Agreement with the Contractor as a uniquely qualified party to provide the Solid Waste Services. The Contractor's delegation of any Agreement duties shall be subject to this Agreement. Any delegation of duties shall not relieve the Contractor or the Surety provider of any liability and/or obligation under this Agreement. 14.2 Assignment. Except as Solid Waste Services may be provided by subcontractors or third-party service providers in accordance with Sections 3.3, 3.4 or 13.2, this Agreement is not assignable voluntarily, involuntarily or by process of law, without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Unless specifically approved in writing by the City, any assignment shall not relieve the Contractor of its obligations, duties and liabilities hereunder. 14.3 Asset in Bankruptcy. In no event shall this Agreement be, or be treated as, an asset of the Contractor after adjudication of bankruptcy. The City shall not be bound to this Agreement by any trustee or receiver appointed to enter into or take possession of the Transfer Facility or otherwise. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 31 of 46 14.4 Transfer of Ownership. Except as provided below, there shall be no transfer of a controlling ownership interest in the Contractor without the prior written approval of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. For purposes of this section, "transfer of a controlling interest in the Contractor" shall mean the transfer or assignment of 49 percent or more of the beneficial ownership of the Contractor to or from a single entity; however, the following transfers or assignments shall not be construed as a "transfer of a controlling interest in the Contractor": transfers or assignments between individuals who own, in whole or in part, the Contractor or the parent company or any subsidiary of Contractor, including transfers or assignments between or to (1) the individuals who own, in whole or in part, the Contractor or such parent company or any subsidiary, (2) the spouses, surviving spouses and linear descendants (including adopted children) of the persons described in (1) above, (3) a trust, estate, corporation, partnership, or other entity owned by or for the persons described in (1) or (2) above, and (4) a corporate trustee designated to act in a fiduciary capacity for the estate or trust of any person described in(1) or (2) above. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City may, in its discretion, determine that new ownership can adequately and faithfully render the Solid Waste Services called for in this Agreement for the remaining term of this Agreement, and the City may elect to execute a novation, allowing new ownership to assume the rights and duties of this Agreement and releasing the previous ownership from all obligations and liability. The new ownership would then be solely liable for any Solid Waste Services and/or claims related to this Agreement. 14.5 Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding on any and all successors or assignees unless and until terminated by the City in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. ARTICLE 15 TERM 15.1 Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date, and, unless extended pursuant to Section 15.2, shall automatically expire on December 31, 2024. 15.2 Extension. This Agreement may be extended by mutual written consent of the Parties for two three-year increments under the same terms and conditions as provided herein. The City shall give at least 180 days' written notice prior to the expiration of the applicable term of its desire to (A) extend this Agreement under the same terms and conditions, (B) terminate this Agreement and renegotiate a new agreement, or (C) terminate this Agreement. The Contractor shall provide a written response within 30 days of receipt of the City's notice. The Contractor's response shall (A) accept the extension, (B) decline the extension under the same terms and state the Contractor's desire to negotiate a new agreement, or (C) acknowledge termination of the Agreement as provided in Section 15.1. If the Parties desire to negotiate a new agreement, this Agreement may be extended under the same terms and conditions as provided herein until the effective date of the new agreement with written mutual consent of both Parties. 15.3 Termination. Except as provided in Article 11 — Defaults, this Agreement may be Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 32 of 46 terminated prior to the complete term only upon written mutual agreement by the Parties. ARTICLE 16 CONTRACTOR AND CITY REPRESENTATIVES;NOTICES 16.1 Emergency Contact. The Contractor and the City shall each designate and provide, for the term of this Agreement, a 24-hour emergency contact telephone number. The emergency contact telephone number shall be provided in writing to the representatives of each Party prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 16.2 Contractor Representative; Notices. For purposes of receiving notices, the Contractor's representative is: Marc B. Tone President Sunshine Recyclers, Inc. dba Sunshine Disposal&Recycling 2405 North University Road Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Email: marct@sunshinedisposal.com Telephone: 509 252-9060 Telefax: 509 252-9069 All notices, other than notifications of emergencies, shall be in writing to the Contractor's representative at the physical or electronic mail addresses provided above. 16.3 City Representative; Notices. All notices, other than notifications of emergencies, shall be in writing to the City at the following address: City of Spokane Valley Attn: City Clerk 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 The City Manager, or his or her designee, shall receive the notices and carry out the responsibilities of the City Representative provided herein. 16.4 Representatives for Notices Only. The representatives identified in Sections 16.2 and 16.3 shall not have the authority to alter this Agreement or bind either Party to any terms not contained in this Agreement. 16.5 Change in Representative. The Parties shall promptly notify each other in writing of any change in the person designated as the Contractor's or the City's representative or any change in address for receipt of notification. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 33 of 46 ARTICLE 17 MISCELLANEOUS 17.1 Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be administered, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. 17.2 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire and complete agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements. 17.3 Anti-kickback. No officer or employee of City, having the power or duty to perform an official act or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in this Agreement, or have solicited, accepted or granted a present or future gift, favor, service or other thing of any value from any person with an interest in this Agreement. 17.4 Time of Essence. Time limits stated in this Agreement are of the essence. No waiver of the Agreement time limits or schedule dates is to be implied from either Party's failure to object to untimely performance under this Agreement. Any waiver of time limits or schedules shall not be construed as a waiver of future time limits or schedules. 17.5 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is entered into by the City in its governmental capacity and is not intended nor does it create any third party beneficiary or other rights in any private person, company, entity, or other organization, nor does it create any third party beneficiary or other rights in any public municipality or other governmental entity except as otherwise provided herein. 17.6 Amendment. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement may only be amended in writing by both Parties. 17.7 Waivers. No officer, employee, agent or other individual acting on behalf of either Party has the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this Agreement. No waiver in one instance shall be held to be waiver of any other subsequent breach or nonperformance. All remedies afforded in this Agreement or by law, shall be taken and construed as cumulative, and in addition to every other remedy provided herein or by law. Failure of either Party to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require at any time performance by the other Party of any provision hereof shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such provisions nor shall it affect the validity of this Agreement or any part thereof. 17.8 Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement should be held to be invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement. 17.9 Exhibits. Exhibits attached and incorporated into this Agreement are: A. Transfer Facility, Disposal Facility, Times and Days B. Education and Public Outreach Programs Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 34 of 46 C. Performance Standards D. Customer Service Plan E. Form of Surety F. Emergency Operation Plan G. Insurance Certificates Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 35 of 46 The Parties have executed this Agreement this day of , 2014. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Contractor: Mike Jackson, City Manager By: Its: Authorized Representative ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Office of the City Attorney Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 36 of 46 Exhibit"A" Transfer Facility The Contractor has identified the following as the Transfer Facility: The Sunshine Transfer Station and Recycle and MRW Station located at 2405 North University Road, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. Operation of Transfer Facility The Contractor shall provide Transfer Services at the Transfer Facility to allow Self Haulers and Designated Haulers to deliver Solid Waste during the following days and times: Monday through Sunday, 7:30 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., excluding the following designated holidays: New Years' Day, Memorial Day, Easter, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. Disposal Facility The Contractor has identified that Acceptable Waste, C&D Waste, and Special Waste shall be disposed of at one or more of the following sites: Wenatchee Landfill, 191 Webb Road, Wenatchee, Washington 98802 Roosevelt Regional Landfill, 500 Roosevelt Grade Road,Roosevelt, Washington 99356 Graham Road Landfill, South 1820 Graham Road, Medical Lake, Washington 99022 Recyclables, Organics, and MRW shall be recycled, composted, and disposed of at one of the sites listed above or other sites as determined by market rates and in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local law. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 37 of 46 Exhibit"B" Education and Public Outreach Programs City and Contractor shall collectively work together to develop an education campaign. The City shall be responsible for all costs of providing education related to the Solid Waste Services provided by Contractor herein. The Parties shall develop an educational campaign that outlines the operations of the Transfer Facility, including location, hours of operation, services provided, and customer service hotline number and the date for commencement of services. Such campaign shall be made to fully inform the citizens of the City and may include brochures mailed to all households and businesses within the City, postings at the scale houses of the Transfer Facility,publication or inclusion of advertisement inserts in local newspapers, and radio advertisements. The education campaign shall begin no later than September 1, 2014 and shall run at least through commencement of services on November 17,2014. City and Contractor shall develop a website detailing operations of the Transfer Facility, including location, hours of operation, services provided, and customer service hotline number. The Parties may utilize the existing websites for the City and Contractor, provided both shall be updated to reflect the Solid Waste Services provided herein. Contractor shall work with City to assist it in providing ongoing education on recycling and waste diversion options, which may include providing materials and outreach visits to schools within the City,brochures, and material on the website. Contractor shall work with City to assist it in providing ongoing education on Unacceptable Waste and locations and methods to properly dispose of Unacceptable Waste on the website and by materials, such as brochures or postings, available at the Transfer Facility. Notwithstanding anything in this Exhibit B, City shall be responsible for costs of all educational materials. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 38 of 46 Exhibit"C" Performance Standards In performing the services under this Agreement, Contractor agrees to the following: 1. All interior access drives,parking areas and vehicle maneuvering areas shall be paved. 2. The Transfer Facility shall be fenced to prevent unauthorized access during non-operating hours and to prevent off-site migration of litter. 3. Adequate commercial grade and professional-looking signage, traffic control devices (such as cones or jersey barriers) and Transfer Facility personnel shall be provided to direct Designated Haulers and Self Haulers to the appropriate tipping areas. 4. Sufficient equipment shall be provided at all times to handle Solid Waste and to efficiently and safely operate the Transfer Facility. 5. Contractor shall ensure a sufficient number of employees shall be provided, on hand and working at all times so as to handle all Solid Waste being directed to the Transfer Facility, including a sufficient number of employees to accept and process MRW and Recyclables, to efficiently and safely operate the Transfer Facility, and to assist Self Haulers with the proper unloading of Solid Waste. 6. Contractor shall meet the objectives and requirements of the Customer Service Plan on Exhibit"D." 7. Acceptable Waste shall be removed continuously throughout the operating day to reduce potential for odors and to provide adequate tipping floor space for Designated Haulers and Self Haulers. Acceptable Waste shall be removed from the Transfer Facility tipping floor within 72 hours of its acceptance by the Contractor. 8. The tipping floor and public access areas shall be cleaned as necessary to prevent build-up of Solid Waste residues and to provide Designated Haulers and Self Haulers with a safe and orderly Transfer Facility. 9. The Transfer Facility and University and Oberlin Road in the vicinity of the Transfer Facility shall regularly be patrolled to collect litter. 10. Contractor shall use its good faith efforts to process Designated Haulers and Self Haulers in an efficient and timely manner so that processing times are reasonable given the then- occurring volume of haulers. The Parties agree that in normal operating conditions, on-site processing times (including vehicle queuing) for Designated Haulers and Self Haulers shall be no more than 30 minutes. 11. Contractor shall ensure that no vehicles are queued into Montgomery Avenue except to the Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 39 of 46 extent such queuing arises from Uncontrollable Circumstances. 12. Snow accumulations shall be promptly cleared and/or removed to permit Designated Haulers and Self Haulers reasonable access to and use of the Transfer Facility. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 40 of 46 Exhibit"D" Customer Service Plan 2405 N University Road Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 924-5678 Customer Service is essential when providing safe, efficient and economical recycling and disposal services. It is the Goal of Contractor to answer questions and resolve customer issues at the initial point of contact with our employees and/or managers. The following procedures will be utilized at the Spokane Valley University Road Transfer Station, which has been identified as the primary Transfer Facility. Customer Service Center Customer Service Center Location Contractor owns and operates a Customer Service Call Center located at 2405 N. University Road in the Spokane Valley. The call center services only Contractor's customers and is the focal point for all questions and concerns regarding refuse collection and transfer station operations. The Call Center operates from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The Call Center is closed on major holidays which include: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas. Customer Service Structure Staffing levels at our Customer Service Center are determined by call volume. Contractor is committed to adjusting the staffing levels at our Customer Service Center to ensure timely response to all phone inquiries. All staffing is hired locally. The current staff level consists of (1) Chief Financial Officer, (1) supervisor, (4) customer service representatives and (3) scale house operators. Customer Service Operations Our locally hired Call Center Representatives (CSR's) bring with them a familiarity of how refuse is collected and disposed of within Spokane County. They also have a basic understanding of the road networks of the communities they serve. For this reason they are better equipped to connect with the customer they are assisting by answering their questions more quickly and accurately. Each CSR station is equipped with a networked computer to assist them with answering questions and documenting customer questions and complaints. This system allows for the documented questions and complaints to be sent to managers in the field or at the corporate level. Having this ability assists us in addressing the needs of the customer in real time. Performance by our CSR staff is measured by a regular review by the senior customer service specialist of all account changes made during the previous day. Calls are periodically monitored to ensure our staff is correctly trained to resolve customer inquiries. We utilize side by side Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 41 of 46 monitoring to provide our staff immediate feedback. Calls are answered in approximately 20 seconds. During periods of heavier call volume, customers have the choice to receive a return phone call. They can simply input their phone number into our system and not lose their place in queue. In the event a CSR is unable to answer a customer's question or resolve an issue the CSR has the ability to route the customer call to the senior customer service specialist or a manager. In the event the manager is not available he/or she will return the customers call as soon as possible or by the end of the business day. Spokane Valley University Road Transfer Station Website To assist customers with answering questions and resolving issues Contractor will have a website solely devoted to the Spokane Valley University Road Transfer Station. The website will explain how each component of the Transfer Station functions: its hours of operation, commonly asked questions, and how to contact us. In the section regarding on How to Contact Us there will be a Call Center phone number and listed e-mail address. The e-mail address will be routed to the Call Center for answering questions and concerns by the CSR's. The CSR's will check for e-mails from the website throughout the day and before the close of business. E-mails addressed to managers will go through the CSRs first before being routed on. In the event the manager is not available he/or she will return the customer's e-mail as soon as possible or by the end of the business day. Scale House Attendants It is the function of the Scale House Attendants to weigh vehicles entering and exiting the Transfer Station, answering customer questions, giving directions, coordinating traffic and receiving money. To assist the scale house attendants with moving customers through the facility all scale houses will be equipped with brochures that explain Transfer Station operations. In the event a scale house attendant cannot answer a customer's question or resolve an issue the scale house attendant will notify the onsite supervisor. The onsite supervisor will work with the customer to answer the question or resolve the issue. If there is a dispute over money between the Scale House Attendant and a customer, the internal scale house camera will be reviewed by the onsite manager for resolution. Spotter/Screener It is the function of the Spotter/Screener to make sure all customers are disposing of items that Contractor can legally accept. In the event that an item cannot be disposed, the onsite manager will be contacted to discuss this issue with the customer. The ultimate goal of the conversation is to find a solution to their disposal needs. It is also the responsibility of the spotter/screener to educate and assist customers with recycling, Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 42 of 46 directing traffic and assuring that safety policies related to the public and commercial customers are being followed. Moderate Risk Waste Technician It is the function of the Moderate Risk Waste Technician to assist the public with handing their moderate risk waste. In the event we receive a hazardous waste material that we cannot legally accept the onsite supervisor will be called to discuss this issue with the customer. The ultimate goal of the conversation is to find a solution to their disposal needs. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 43 of 46 • Exhibit"E" Form of Surety • • Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 44 of 46 PERFORMANCE BOND Annual Form Bond No. KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, That we , as Principal, and , of , authorized to do business in the State of as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto as Obligee, in the maximum penal sum of Dollars ( ), lawful money of the United States of America, for which payment well and truly to be made we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and assigns,jointly and severally, firmly by this Bond. WHEREAS, the Principal has entered, or is about to enter, into a written agreement with the Obligee to perform in accordance with the terms and conditions of the , (hereinafter referred to as the Contract), said Contract is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; NOW, THEREFORE, the condition of this obligation is such that if the above named Principal, its successors and assigns, shall well and truly perform its obligations as set forth in the above mentioned Contract, then this Bond shall be void; otherwise to remain in full force and effect pursuant to its terms. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Contract,the Bond is subject to the following express conditions: 1. Whereas, the Obligee has agreed to accept this Bond, this Bond shall be effective for the definite period of to . The Bond may be extended, at the sole option of the Surety, by continuation certificate for additional periods from the expiry date hereof. However, neither: (a) the Surety's decision not to issue a continuation certificate, nor(b) the failure or inability of the Principal to file a replacement bond or other security in the event the Surety exercises its right to not renew this Bond, shall itself constitute a loss to the Obligee recoverable under this Bond or any extension thereof. 2. The above referenced Contract has a term ending . Regardless of the number of years this Bond is in force or the number of continuation certificates issued, this Bond shall not be extended beyond , unless earlier nonrenewed pursuant to paragraph 1 above. 3. No claim, action, suit or proceeding, except as hereinafter set forth, shall be had or maintained against the Surety on this instrument unless such claim, action, suit or proceeding is brought or instituted upon the Surety within one year from termination or expiration of the bond term. 4. Regardless of the number of years this Bond is in force or the number of continuation certificates issued, the liability of the Surety shall not be cumulative in amounts from period to period and shall in no event exceed the amount set forth above, or as amended by rider. 5. Any notice, demand, certification or request for payment, made under this Bond shall be made in writing to the Surety at the address specified below. Any demand or request for payment must be made prior to the expiry date of this Bond. Surety Address: Attn: 6. If any conflict or inconsistency exists between the Surety's obligations or undertakings as described in this Bond and as described in the underlying Contract,then the terms of this Bond shall prevail. SIGNED, SEALED AND DATED this day of By: , Principal By: S-5025d(06-06) ,Attorney-in-Fact Exhibit"F" Emergency Operations Plan Transfer Facility The Kootenai County Solid Waste Department has agreed to allow Sunshine Disposal & Recycling to direct refuse trucks to Prairie Transfer Station for loading of intermodal containers and/or transfer trailers on an emergency basis. The Prairie Transfer Facility is located at 15580 W Prairie Ave, Post Falls, ID 83854. The Prairie Transfer Station is an emergency back up to Sunshine's Spokane Valley University Road Transfer Station and will only be utilized if there are circumstances that prohibit the University Road Transfer Station from accepting waste from the designated hauler as provided in Article 6. The emergency operations plan anticipates that the public will be allowed to continue to utilize the Spokane Valley University Road Transfer Station. If the emergency plan has to be activated, Sunshine will provide Self-Haulers access to front load and roll off containers to fulfill the Self-Haul customers disposal needs. These containers will be serviced by Contractor's refuse trucks which will also be routed to the Prairie Transfer Station. Disposal Facility Contractor utilizes and has access to different regional landfills throughout the Northwest as its Disposal Facility, including the Greater Wenatchee Regional Landfill, Graham Road Regional Landfill, and Roosevelt Regional Landfill. If a regional landfill experiences an event that prohibits receipt of Acceptable Waste,pursuant to Article 6, the Emergency Operations Plan will to be activated and the Acceptable Waste will be diverted to an alternative landfill. Contractor will divert Acceptable Waste to the back-up landfill until the primary landfill re-opens for receipt of Acceptable Waste. Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 45 of 46 Exhibit"G" Insurance Certificates Agreement for Comprehensive Solid Waste Transfer,Transport,and Disposal Services Page 46 of 46 SUNSDIS-01 LSCALES C R DATE(MM/DD/YYYY) CERTIFICATE LIABILITY INSURANCE 5/5/2014 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S),AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(ies)must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: Moloney,O'Neill,Corkery&Jones Inc PHONE 509 325-3024 FAX 509 325-1803 818 W Riverside#800 E-MAIL No,Ext):( ) (A/c,No):( ) Spokane,WA 99201 ADDRESS: INSURER(S)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC# INSURER A:Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp INSURED INSURER B: Sunshine Disposal,Inc INSURER C: 11320 W.McFarlane Rd INSURER D: Airway Heights,WA 99001 INSURER E: INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TYPE OF INSURANCE ADDL SUBR POLICY EFF POLICY EXP WLIMITS LTRINSR VD POLICY NUMBER (MMIDD/YYYYI IMM/DD/YYYY) GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY X C07170065 09/01/2013 09/01/2014 DAMAGE TO RENTED 300 000 PREMISES(Ea occurrence) $ , CLAIMS-MADE X OCCUR MED EXP(Any one person) $ 10,000 PERSONAL&ADV INJURY $ 1,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 GE 'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG $ 2,000,000 POLICY X jT X LOC $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT 1,000,000 (Ea accident) $ A X ANY AUTO C07170065 09/01/2013 09/01/2014 BODILYINJURY(Perperson) $ ALL OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY(Per accident) $ AUOS AUTOS X HIRTEDAUTOS )( NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE AUTOS (PER ACCIDENT) X UMBRELLA LIAB X OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ 10,000,000 A EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE C07170065 09/01/2013 09/01/2014 AGGREGATE $ 10,000,000 DED RETENTION$ $ WORKERS COMPENSATION WC STATU- OTH- AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY TORY LIMITS ER A ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE Y/N C07170065 09/01/2013 09/01/2014 E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $ 1,000,000 OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? N/A (Mandatory In NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYEE $ 1,000,000 If yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below EL,DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $ 1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,If more space Is required) City of Spokane Valley is additional insured(primary and non-contributory)under General Liability with respect for ongoing operations performed for the City per form CG8416 12/03 attached. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE Cityof Spokane ValleyTHE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN p ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. 11707 E.Sprague Ave,Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE I ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2010/05) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CG 841612 03 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. GENERAL LIABILITY MASTER PAK PLUS® FOR CONSTRUCTION This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART INDEX Subject Page Blanket Additional Insured (Owners, Lessees or Contractors) 2 Fire, Lightning, Explosion and Sprinkler Leakage Damage to Premises You Rent 3 Non-Owned Watercraft 4 Supplementary Payments (Bail Bonds) 4 Personal And Advertising Injury- Electronic Publication Extension 5 Aggregate Limits (Per Location) 5 Aggregate Limits(Per Project) 5 Voluntary Property Damage Coverage 6 Off Premises Care, Custody or Control Coverage 6 Newly Formed or Acquired Organizations 7 Duties in the Event of Occurrence, Offense, Claim or Suit 7 Bodily Injury(Mental Anguish) 8 Waiver of Transfer of Rights of Recovery Against Others 8 Medical Payments 8 Broad Named Insured 8 Broadened Mobile Equipment 8 Incidental Malpractice Liability 8 Non-Owned Aircraft 9 Property Damage-Elevators 9 CG 841612 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 1 of 9 E 600 00 1. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED (Owners, Lessees Or Contractors) (Includes a Primary/Non-Contributory provision) Section II -Who Is An Insured is amended to include as an insured any person or organization whom you are required to name as an additional insured on this policy in a written contract or written agreement. The written contractor written agreement must be currently in effect or becoming effective during the term of this policy and executed prior to the"bodily injury,""property damage"or"personal and advertising injury." The insurance provided the additional insured is limited as follows: A. The person or organization is only an additional insured with respect to liability: 1. Arising out of real property, as described in a written contract or written agreement,that you own, rent, lease or occupy; or 2. Caused by your ongoing operations performed for the additional insured. The insurance provided the additional insured in 1.A.2. above does not apply to: a. Coverage A-Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, Coverage B-Personal and Advertising Injury Liability or defense coverage under the Supplementary Payments arising out of an architect's, engineer's or surveyor's rendering of or failure to render any professional services including: (1) The preparing, approving, or failing to prepare or approve maps, shop drawings, opinions, reports, surveys,field orders, change orders or drawings and specifications; and (2) Supervisory, inspection, architectural or engineering activities. b. "Bodily injury"or"property damage"occurring after: (1) All work, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work, on the project(other than service, maintenance or repairs)that was performed by or on behalf of the additional insured(s)at the site where the covered operations have been completed; or (2) That portion of"your work"out of which the injury or damage arises has been put to its intended use by any person or organization other than another contractor or subcontractor engaged in performing operations for a principal as part of the same project. B. The limits of insurance applicable to the additional insured are those specified in a written contract or written agreement or the limits of Insurance as stated in the Declarations of this policy and defined in Section III -Limits Of Insurance of this policy,whichever are less. These limits are inclusive of and not in addition to the limits of insurance available under this policy. C. The insurance provided the additional insured does not apply to the liability resulting from the sole negligence of the additional insured. CG 8416 12 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 2 of 9 E 601 00 D. As respects the coverage provided to the additional insured under this endorsement, Section IV- Conditions is amended as follows: 1. The following is added to Condition 2. Duties In The Event Of Occurrence,Offense,Claim,or Suit: An additional insured under this endorsement will as soon as practicable: a. Give written notice of an"occurrence"or an offense, that may result in a claim or"suit" under this insurance to us; b. Tender the defense and indemnity of any claim or"suit"to all insurers whom also have insurance available to the additional insured; and c. Agree to make available any other insurance which the additional insured has for a loss we cover under this Coverage Part. 2. The following is added to Condition 3. Legal Action Against Us: We have no duty to defend or indemnify an additional insured under this endorsement until we receive written notice of a claim or"suit"from the additional insured. 3. The following is added to Paragraph a., Primary Insurance of Condition 4.Other Insurance: If the additional insured's policy has an Other Insurance provision making its policy excess, and a Named Insured has agreed in a written contract or written agreement to provide the additional insured coverage on a primary and noncontributory basis, this policy shall be primary and we will not seek contribution from the additional insured's policy for damages we cover. 4. The following is added to Paragraph b., Excess Insurance of Condition 4.Other Insurance: Except as provided in Paragraph 4.a. Primary Insurance as amended above, any coverage provided hereunder shall be excess over any other valid and collectible insurance available to the additional insured whether primary, excess, contingent or on any other basis. In the event an additional insured has other coverage available for an"occurrence"by virtue of also being an additional insured on other policies, this insurance is excess over those other policies. 2. FIRE, LIGHTNING, EXPLOSION AND SPRINKLER LEAKAGE DAMAGE TO PREMISES YOU RENT If Damage To Premises Rented To You under Coverage A is not otherwise excluded from this policy, the following applies: A. The last paragraph of 2. Exclusions of Section I-Coverage A is replaced by the following: If Damage To Premises Rented To You is not otherwise excluded, Exclusions c.through n. do not apply to damage by fire, lightning, "explosion"or sprinkler leakage to premises while rented to you or temporarily occupied by you with permission of the owner. A separate limit of insurance applies to this coverage as described in Section III-Limits Of Insurance. B. Paragraph 6.of Section III -Limits Of Insurance is replaced by the following: 6. Subject to 5.above, the higher of$300,000 or the Damage To Premises Rented To You Limit shown in the Summary of Limits and Charges section of this policy is the most we will pay under Coverage A for damages because of"property damage"to premises rented to you or temporarily occupied by you with the permission of the owner arising out of any one fire, lightning, "explosion"or sprinkler leakage incident. CG 641612 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 3 of 9 E 602 00 C. Paragraph b.(1)(b) of Condition 4.Other Insurance(Section IV—Conditions) is replaced by the following: (1) That is Fire, Lightning, Explosion or Sprinkler Leakage insurance for premises rented to you or temporarily occupied by you with the permission of the owner; D. Paragraph 9.a. of the definition of"insured contract"in Section V-Definitions is replaced by the following: 9. "Insured contract" means: a. A contract for the lease of premises. However, that portion of the contract for a lease of premises that indemnifies any person or organization for damages by fire, lightning, "explosion"or sprinkler leakage to premises while rented to you or temporarily occupied by you with the permission of the owner is not an"insured contract"; E. The following definition is added to Section V-Definitions: "Explosion"means a sudden release of expanding pressure accompanied by a noise, a bursting forth of material and evidence of the scattering of debris to locations further than would have resulted by gravity alone. "Explosion"does not include any of the following: 1. Artificially generated electrical current including electrical arcing that disturbs electrical devices, appliances or wires; 2. Rupture or bursting of water pipes; 3. Explosion of steam boilers, steam pipes, steam engines or steam turbines owned or leased by you, or operated under your control; or 4. Rupture or bursting caused by centrifugal force. 3. NON-OWNED WATERCRAFT Subparagraph g.(2)of Paragraph 2., Exclusions of Section I -Coverage A is replaced by the following: (2) A watercraft you do not own that is: (a) Less than 51 feet long; and (b) Not being used to carry persons or property for a charge; 4. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS In the Supplementary Payments -Coverages A and B provision: The limit for the cost of bail bonds in Paragraph 1.b. is changed from$250 to$1000. CG 841612 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 4 of 9 E 603 00 5. PERSONAL AND ADVERTISING INJURY-ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION EXTENSION Paragraphs 14.b., d.and e.of Section V-Definitions are replaced by the following: b. Malicious prosecution or abuse of process; d. Oral,written, televised, videotaped or electronic publication of material that slanders or libels a person or organization or disparages a person's or organization's goods, products or services; e. Oral,written,televised, videotaped or electronic publication of material that violates a person's right of privacy; The following is added to Paragraph 14."Personal and Advertising Injury"of Section V-Definitions: h. Discrimination or humiliation that results in injury to the feelings or reputation of a natural person, but only if such discrimination or humiliation is: (1) Not done intentionally by or at the direction of: (a) An insured; or (b) Any"executive officer"director, stockholder, partner or member of the insured; and (2) Not directly or indirectly related to the employment, prospective employment or termination of employment of any person or persons by any insured. Subparagraphs b. and c. of 2., Exclusions of Section I-Coverage B-Personal And Advertising Injury Liability are replaced by the following: b. Material Published With Knowledge Of Falsity "Personal and advertising injury"arising out of oral,written,televised, videotaped or electronic publication of material, if done by or at the direction of the insured with knowledge of its falsity; c. Material Published Prior To Policy Period "Personal and advertising injury"arising out of oral, written, televised,videotaped or electronic publication of material whose first publication took place before the beginning of the policy period; 6. AGGREGATE LIMITS OF INSURANCE (PER LOCATION) The General Aggregate Limit under Section III Limits Of Insurance applies separately to each of your "locations"owned by or rented to you or temporarily occupied by you with the permission of the owner. "Location"means premises involving the same or connecting lots, or premises whose connection is interrupted only by a street, roadway, waterway or right-of-way of a railroad. 7. AGGREGATE LIMITS OF INSURANCE (PER PROJECT) The General Aggregate Limit under Section III Limits Of Insurance applies separately to each of your projects away from premises owned by or rented to you. CG 841612 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 5 of 9 E 604 00 8. VOLUNTARY PROPERTY DAMAGE COVERAGE At your request,we will pay for"loss"to property of others caused by your business operations. The most we will pay for this coverage is$500 each "occurrence." The"loss"must occur during the policy period. The"occurrence"must take place in the"coverage territory". "Loss" means unintended damage or destruction. "Loss"does not mean disappearance, abstraction or theft. This coverage does not apply to: 1. Damage arising out of the use of any"auto"; 2. Property you own, occupy, rent or lease from others; or 3. Property on your premises for sale, service, repair or storage. None of the other policy exclusions apply to this coverage. If the policy to which this endorsement is attached is written with a property damage liability deductible, the deductible shall apply to Voluntary Property Damage. The limit of coverage stated above shall not be reduced by the amount of this deductible. 9. OFF PREMISES CARE,CUSTODY OR CONTROL COVERAGE A. We will pay those sums that you become legally obligated to pay as damages because of"property damage"to personal property of others while in your or your"employees"care, custody or control or real property of others over which you or your"employees"are exercising physical control if the "property damage"arises out of your business operations. This Coverage is subject to sections B., C.,D. and E. below. B. Exclusions This insurance shall not apply to: 1. "Property damage"of property at premises owned, rented, leased, operated or used by you; 2. "Property damage"of property while in transit; 3. The cost of repairing or replacing: (a) Any of your work defectively or incorrectly done by you or by others on your behalf; or (b) Any product manufactured, sold or supplied by you, unless the"property damage"is caused directly by you after delivery of the product or completion of the work and resulting from a subsequent undertaking; or 4. "Property damage"of property caused by or arising out of the"products-completed operations hazard". C. Limits Of Insurance-The most we will pay for"property damage" under this Section 9. is$25,000 for each"occurrence". The most we will pay for the sum of all damages covered under this Section 9. because of"property damage"is an annual aggregate limit of$25,000. The Limits Of Insurance provided under this Section 9. are inclusive of and not in addition to any other limits provided in the policy or endorsements attached to it. D. Deductible-We will not pay for"property damage" in any one"occurrence" until the amount of "property damage"exceeds$250. If the policy to which this endorsement is attached contains a "property damage"deductible,that deductible shall apply if it is greater than$250. E. In the event of"property damage"covered by this endorsement, you shall, if requested by us, replace the property or furnish the labor and materials necessary for repairs thereto at your actual cost, excluding profit or overhead charges. CG 841612 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 6 of 9 E 605 00 10. NEWLY FORMED OR ACQUIRED ORGANIZATIONS A. Paragraph 4. of Section II-Who Is An Insured is deleted and replaced by the following: 4. Any business entity acquired by you or incorporated or organized by you under the laws of any individual state of the United States of America over which you maintain majority ownership interest exceeding fifty percent. Such acquired or newly formed organization will qualify as a Named Insured if there is no similar insurance available to that entity. However: a. Coverage under this provision applies only until the expiration of the policy period in which the entity was acquired or incorporated or organized by you. b. Coverage A does not apply to"bodily injury"or"property damage"that occurred before the entity was acquired or incorporated or organized by you. c. Coverage B does not apply to"personal and advertising injury"arising out of an offense committed before the entity was acquired or incorporated or organized by you. d. Records and descriptions of operations must be maintained by the first Named Insured. B. This Section 10.does not apply to newly formed or acquired organizations if coverage is excluded either by provisions of the Coverage Part or by other endorsement(s) attached to it. 11. DUTIES IN THE EVENT OF OCCURRENCE,OFFENSE,CLAIM OR SUIT A. The requirements in Section IV-Conditions, Paragraph 2.a.,that you must see to it that we are notified of an"occurrence"applies only when the"occurrence" is known to: 1. You, if you are an individual; 2. A partner, if you are a partnership; 3. A member or manager, if you are a limited liability company; 4. An executive officer or designee, if you are a corporation; 5. A trustee, if you are a trust; or 6. A designee, if you are any other type of organization. B. The requirements in Section IV-Conditions Paragraph 2.b.that you must see to it that we receive written notice of a claim or"suit"will not be considered breached unless the breach occurs after such claim or"suit"is known to: 1. You, if you are an individual; 2. A partner, if you are a partnership; 3. A member or manager if you are a limited liability company; 4. An executive officer or designee, if you are a corporation; 5. A trustee, if you are a trust; or 6. A designee, if you are any other type of organization. Knowledge of an"occurrence,"claim or"suit"by the agent, servant or"employee"of any insured shall not in itself constitute knowledge of the insured unless an officer or designee shall have received notice from its agent, servant or"employee". 12. BODILY INJURY Paragraph 3.of the definition of"bodily injury" in the Section V-Definitions is replaced by the following: 3. "Bodily injury"means bodily injury, sickness or disease sustained by a person, including mental anguish or death resulting from any of these at any time. CG 8416 12 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 7 of 9 E 606 00 13.WAIVER OF TRANSFER OF RIGHTS OF RECOVERY AGAINST OTHERS We have the right to recover our payments from anyone liable for an injury covered by this policy. We will not enforce our right against any person or organization for whom you perform work under a written contract that requires you to obtain this agreement from us. This agreement shall not operate directly or indirectly to benefit anyone not named in the agreement. 14. MEDICAL PAYMENTS If Coverage C Medical Payments is not otherwise excluded, the Medical Expense Limit provided by this policy shall be the greater of: A. $10,000; or B. The amount shown in the Declarations. 15. BROAD NAMED INSURED Paragraph 2.a.(1)(d)of Section II -Who Is An Insured is replaced by the following: (d) Arising out of his or her providing or failing to provide professional health care services. However, this exclusion does not apply to nurses, emergency medical technicians or paramedics who are employed by you to provide medical or paramedical services to your employees. 16. BROADENED MOBILE EQUIPMENT Paragraph 12.f.(1)of Section V-Definitions is replaced by the following: (1) Equipment designed primarily for: (a) Snow removal; (b) Road maintenance, but not construction or resurfacing; or (c) Street cleaning provided that vehicles have a Gross Vehicle Weight of 1,000 pounds or greater; 17. INCIDENTAL MALPRACTICE LIABILITY Paragraph 3.of Section V-Definitions is replaced by the following: 3. "Bodily injury"means bodily injury, sickness, disease or"incidental medical malpractice"sustained by a person, including mental anguish or death resulting from any of these at any time. The following is added to Section V-Definitions: 23. "Incidental medical malpractice"means injury arising out of the negligent rendering or failure to render medical or paramedical services to persons by any physician, dentist, nurse, emergency medical technician or paramedic who is employed by you to provide such services to your employees, provided you are not engaged in the business or occupation of providing any services referred to in this definition. 18. NON-OWNED AIRCRAFT The following is added to Subparagraph g. of 2., Exclusions of Section I -Coverage A Bodily Injury And Property Damage Liability: (6) An aircraft with a paid crew, that is hired, chartered or loaned but is not owned by any insured. CG 841612 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 8 of 9 E 607 00 19. PROPERTY DAMAGE-ELEVATORS The following is added to Subparagraph j.of 2., Exclusions of Section I -Coverage A Bodily Injury And Property Damage Liability: Paragraphs(3)and (4)of this exclusion do not apply to damages that result from the use of elevators. All other terms and conditions of your policy remain unchanged. CG 841612 03 Includes copyrighted material of ISO Properties,Inc.,with its permission. Page 9 of 9 E 608 00 SIMI OF WASHINGTON Department of Labor & Industries Certificate of Workers' Compensation. Coverage May,5, 2014. WA UBI No. 602 000 782 L&I Account ID 462,631-01 Legal Business Name SUNSHINE RECYCLERS INC Doing Business As SUNSHINE RECYCLERS INC Workers' Comp Premium Status: Account is current. Estimated Workers Reported Quarter 1 of Year 2014"11 to 20 (See Description Below) Workers" Account Representative TO/ CAROLYN CRAWFORD (360)902- 4715-Email: CRAI235@lni.wa.gov Licensed Contractor? No What does "Estimated Workers Reported" mean? Estimated workers reported represents the number of full time position requiring at feast 480 hours of work per calendar quarter. A single 480 hour position may be filled by one person, or several part time workers. Industrial Insurance Information Employers report and pay premiums each quarter based on hours of employee work already performed, and are liable for premiums found later to be due. Industrial insurance accounts have no policy periods, cancellation dates, limitations of coverage or waiver of subrogation (See RCW 51.12;050 and 51.1.6.190). CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 27, 2014 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing [' information ® admin. report [' pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Spokane Conservation District Water Resources Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Staff from the Spokane Conservation District will update Council regarding the new Water Resources Projects they are working on, such as the On-Site Septic System Program (OSS) and the Livestock & Land Program. The Forestry Department will give updates on the FireWise, Urban Forestry, and the Avista Shade Tree Programs. Staff who will be speaking include Water Resources Program Manager Walt Edelen, and Forestry Program Manager Garth Davis. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion only. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: n/a STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: Spokane Conservation District Whofik O a fl Septic System Repair Financial Assistance Program THE G Phase I: 2014 — 2018 Spokane County Watersheds Program Summary Failing On-Site Sewage Systems (055) throughout Spokane County watersheds can present water quality and health issues. When OSS systems fail to function properly, phosphorus, nutrients, bacteria, viruses and other pathogens are likely to enter ground and surface water. The Spokane Regional Health District reports 66 on-site sewage systems are failing each year. The 055 Loan Program will provide financial assistance to eligible landowners outside the Urban Growth Boundary. The program will further include an education and outreach component and intends to be sustained as a long-term internal program. The expense of repairing and replacing residential systems can be a heavy burden for landowners. Eligible Spokane County residents can apply for low interest loans (3.6-5.6%), replacement grants, small repair grants and even connections to sewer. Loan rates and terms will vary dependent upon Median Household Income. Grants may require a 25% match from the landowner. Eligibility requirements for the grant program will be available as of May 1st, 2014 Program Goals, Funding & Partners ;y Plumbing vent Funding for the project is from the Washington State Department of Ecology Centennial Clean Water Fund. The i 'C::r-e 4. ,. OSS Loan program will provide assistance to as many i'eacltfieldldrainfleld systems as possible for the next 4 years. Priority will be 1' 1 4: given to landowners near ground and surface water septic tank 441. sources. a .�a , Program Partners: . Effluent absorption Spokane Regional Health Dist. -• and purifications Spokane County Utilities ``. Community Development Groundwater Dept. of Ecology - - SNAP Project Contacts Spokane Conservation District, 210 N. Havana, Spokane, WA 99202, ph: (509) 535-7274 Vicki Carter, vicki-carter@sccd.org, Walt Edelen, walt-edelen@sccd.org All SCD Programs and Services are offered without discrimination . sav 44,ilist, Spokane Conservation District A: b � , ` � Y 0 44 Ctillealliirri f,„Mz,,E1P 2014 Livestock and Land Program Livestock BMP Grant and Low Interest Loans Program Summary The Spokane Conservation District is offering ) � /,, i � , {�,a F +I ` yF '' i a NEW program to help county farms and :`,d IT, •v , t - it "" '� , = '�'ii `i'i}.' ,1 ranches address mud and manure issues. r , -- w ,-, 1� Landowners can apply, qualify, and utilize '"" _ , - ,,,a,.t� ' YEF.it ,Y= grant and loan fundingopportunities to '- " ". `� �' 1 pp BEFDRE ' • .A�-':_: '- . $E Al �1 improve their livestock operations. District ' ter' t F., 'a^' 4,0'.-'3--. - iice' �� a� d N _ staff will conduct free site assessments and A� - ,, r ,.. develop no-obligation plans. In addition, the ' , '• i '', .4. program offers an educational workshop Y s -,...:-.1,-72-.:;,,,,6= "� 4``' series, technical materials and a peer to peer The photographs above illustrate how the program can install livestock BMPs mentoring group. Annual watershed BMP to improve and protect water quality. Approximately one-half mile of tours are available to all residents to observe riparian fencing and one off-creek watering facility were implemented on this working BMP installations. spring calving site. The project created a 35' to 50' riparian buffer to help manage nutrient and sediment contributions. y Cost-Share Rates Grants & Loans 1 . ':_ ." 1 k :k • Must meet eligibility requirements - ‘ • Heavy Use Area—up to$7,500 • Up to 75%grant cost-share • Riparian Fencing—No limit • Can utilize loan for BMP construction " ,h ' • Off-Creek Watering--Up to$30,000 • Combination grant/loan projects • Waste Storage Facility—Up to$12,500 • Low interest loan rates dependent �'• • 25% match contribution requirement upon median income level (3—5%) - • Loan terms are typically 5 years Thermosink1' energy free livestock waterer Project Contacts For More Information! Spokane Conservation District, 210 N. Havana,Spokane, WA 99202, ph: (509) 535-7274 Walt Edelen, walt-edelen@sccd.org or Charlie Peterson, charlie-peterson@sccd.org �`"' r`P Funding provided by:The Washington State Department of Ecology �(, '•t 'I'"/ . )�_ Centennial Clean Water Program, Grant#�FP14080. �� LivE.-i 1111.exn I,5:\1) All SCD Programs and Services are offered without discrimination r•I%.,.ti,,,,,,c 1.11) IA\D �q ' / .' .� sr p:-r3 .aka y 'a ,�k } `V v .l -} w;: �vIl� ti' Y44.- 44- -=�9 �� i/ 'Y``�,r_.;•.' H�h� F k� ,y �``?A:Al', v,. � �' `�W'�' ,.+ • t. IF T � i�l�fk !.! ..t4L' t.. . y sf ." ,, -i.,-,„:q7.,, , ,n v wi;. .:. w __ ff' - FC }+ ' .. "- 41 ?.fit. '14 +}`Slfi�' '', -- ?Z ',:.f ` ^`' e 'f':.., �..., ., may„ ,i r t'._ .. *,.. �°T<1en s _, `',*o a�. .'' C :? * 9� 4 _ 6 ,,,,y } y 3, iS.7,t�,\.�]yy(iT 1'... j yL !c (1 ..',:,',,, ;:?C;.- 4 .-'s em 6 --.4 a., 4 y '-t' "t l (' 5' �.''..4%!‘t, '.. %!It ,.`-I0 1 , I ,. i \ _ f S' '1.e 4 FII *-.'/4.-, .. rhe` . ' ; + ko,_,,S , , - \-: I&J 1*l -_ .- _ 'f I %•'. .."';1,'-',-.7.',/',. BecomeuE,11.1;w3: . tKif , 11141 () IJ.EI 1Fa')) RW i 1V11\11"11.0 Clity USA itrvii.As3i .cur.1::.,,-,; Free ,' ry ,,,� ,, 7 TI-I��II '1I��G,E�GJ, II ()E G 1!..L.G_) BY ,i )t_I'VA'Sli'i `u'ilk1(.1 • More than 80 cities WINDS Off" MIL" ' MICHAEL, SCHRAG .'r r J and towns in Washington Ritzville Tree Committee 'f :` . ` ' State are discovering the Chairman �, many benefits of being a Tree City USA. 66 'Lli I!: EO);;I/ �E!()E :( I.>Iik1ClJ@. W1 'i:i ) `il'C) ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY 1:'Wy' ' �E (-3I`� RNA BENEFITS BENEFITS BENEFITS ll' .)) i;'l; (: 6�I�C `I'r: JE1 • Creates more • Creates a • Improves 0(-)Gl/ bkJdril'bl1ilE E\1`i�' `Il'C_ opportunities for framework for community health, PU II t 1l_,DC 1:N:1 V ll'L iU\91I)) grant funding. managing trees and character and ENVII Euow kifil1Aii9, • Defines the value tree-related risks. aesthetics. �1(( Q, �, of volunteer efforts. • Helps track • Boosts civic pride. SUS lAINAI ILIA [i n • Promotes associated activities • Celebrates TERRY FLATLEY a community's and costs. community Renton City Forester investment in • Ensures accomplishments, the future. consideration of • Connects _— • Green trees during the citizens with their fo SERvict development process community's T infrastructure is y s ,asp ) '`,J good for business. • Establishes trees. J ordinance language �rxEKrunsko to guide decision- TREE CITY USA' making. WASHINGTON COMMUNITY l dnr.wagov/urbanforestrysx ;4FORESTRY •SHADE TREE PROGRAM c � CUSTOMER NAME PHONE NUMBER AVESTA ELECTRICACCOUNT NUMBER SERVICE ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP ABOUTYOUR HOME Approximate Size of Your Home ❑ I am an Avista electric customer ❑ Yes,I have an air conditioner (SQ.FT) REWIRED ❑Central ❑Room Approximate Age of Your Home LI No,I don't currently have an air conditioner Program Eligibility and Guidelines • Owners of seasonal or recreational residences are not eligible to participate in the Program. The Shade Tree program ("Program") is available . Owners are responsible for complying with } to Avista electric customers in Spokane county, all applicable codes and regulations. Spokane,Washington through the Spokane • Owners must complete and sign a copy of this Agreement and Conservation District (SCD). provide to SCD,prior to the shade tree being planted. • Owners of existing single and multi-family,primary living • Avista reserves the right to verify that a shade tree has been residences(including manufactured and modular homes) planted and/or inspect such shade tree after planting. Avista ("Qualifying Residences")are eligible to participate in the Program. will coordinate inspection with Owners,as applicable. SHADE TREE INCENTIVE AGREEMENT Disclaimers. Losses,arising out of or related to any act,omission,fault or negligence of I,as Owner of a Qualifying Residence,have read the Owner as such Losses relate to Owner's participation under the Program. above Program Eligibility and Guidelines and agree to the conditions for participation in the Program as follows: 4. Owner understands that it is not possible to predict energy savings,if any,and Avista's funding under this Agreement does not warrant that 1. AVISTA DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL IMPLIED OR EXPRESS WARRANTIES planting a shade tree will achieve any reduction in energy costs. (INCLUDING,BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 5. Owner acknowledges that this Program is ongoir.g as part of MERCHANTABILITY CR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE),AND SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY REPRESENTATION OR PROMISE Avista's continued commitment to energy efficiency,and may WITH RESPECT TO THE SHADE TREE OR THE COST OF SUCH TREE OR be subject to change or cancellation without notice. LABOR REQUIRED TO PLANT SUCH TREE ON CUSTOMER'S PREMISES. 6. Prior to a shade tree being planted,a signed copy of 2. Avista's sole obligation under the Program is to provide this Agreement shall be provided to SCD. funding,and Avista assumes no liability for Owner's decision 7. This Agreement:(if is the entire agreement between the Avista and to participate in the Program,or for any disputes arising out of Owner concerning its subject matter;(ii)supersedes all prior agreements maintenance,repair and/or replacement of the shade tree. and understandings between Avista and Owner,whether or not 3. Owner shall indemnify and defend Avista from any and ail claims,losses, written;and/iii)is not intended to confer upon any person other than harm,casts,liabilities,damages and expenses(including attorneys'fees) Avista and Owner any rights or remedies under the Agreement, of any nature whatsoever(collectively,"Losses"),or allegations of such OWNERS SIGNATURE DATE Mail Completed Application To: Spokane Conservation District-210 N Havana,Spokane WA 99202 www.avistautitities,cam 01/09©2009.Avista Corporation.All Rights Reserved. ShadeTreerorm.indd 1 7G7Po9 3:25:32 PM oa o nal§b Illial@ te . ti@@ihdd@E§ * 20' from outermost major power line (not house power line or cable/phone line) * 35' from large mature tree * 25' from small mature tree * 15'-30' from SW corner of home * 15'-30' from west side of home * 5' from any hardscape (sidewalk, driveway) * 5' from fence or small outbuilding ,� ) =- -1 30' ) V N ;` / ` �" ` 15' :1 i.it NMIIIMIni• : �..• f---0 I- W E • �.. 1` ` A \ y � \\i. �' tit o N \..\\‘,..„ \\(\-\\\ : ,tib` .k1..+esti\\, .-.k•, i u5 mommmummommimmumm—wwmwwwr=w-=^�= wlma;f__a wrl rw--r_I www-www nws•www•s=nnc `Zt.L�:t w;wswwn www www■n wwl iww>•wmrtw w-ww-w=l---r—ww w—ww=—ww- Registration Fc -.---- LU 1-01 First 20 Registrants receive FREE lodging N = Thursday night! (preference will be given to out of town participants) Space is limited. Fi re i pre-registration is required. Please return this form to: COMMUni II es Spokane Conservation District 210 N Wo rks h o p Spookanekane,,WAA 99202 Name Organization May 29 —30, 2014 Quality Inn Valley Suites, Address Spokane Valley, WA city State Zip Phone Email T-shirt size U I will be staying at the hotel: yes or no 11.1C(11/4111:: - Special Dietary needs N d ON Persons with a disability requiring special a accommodations while participating in this program may call Spokane Conservation District, U 509-535-7274. If accommodation is not CD requested in advance,we cannot guarantee the C availability of accommodation on site. p Z All SCD programs and services are offered _ CL (.1) cv1111111 -- without discrimination. -= w , , e&v, 4 What will I learn? fill Fi\118E ;3" s ``.-44-:.4.,,:y., „=7r • What the Community Wildfire Protection Plan is ,p-a. w� µ � and how you can benefit from the plan. 4 - C0111MiJN1T1ES” + ` ��� • The history of the Valley View Fire. 4 � � `� '` '" �~ yrs An introduction to Eire behavior. * '74'''',-°,4'.. Wo RKSHop May 29 • Bark beetles and how they affect forest health. .7_,.-- a• F ;• 9am-9:30am: cheek in 1 programming lasts until 4:30pm `� � May 30 • Tour a Firewise community. yY�fi c 7:30am-Sam: check in I programming lasts until 2:30pm Li -- . • How individuals and communities can reduce 0 sin.�n .�. ao ,,, ^^- How can . gister2 unnecessary losses from wildfires. The Firewise Communities Workshop is an • De artment of Natural Resources (DNR) interactive educational event for: Registration for the event is FREE and includes all P Architects Realtors class material,lunch on both days.The first 20 programs and other potential funding sources registrants will receive free Thursday night lodging at for fuels reduction. Bankers Landowners the Quality Inn Valley Suites,E.8923 Mission Ave, Spokane WA,99212,509-928-5218.The hotel offers • Creating defensible space around homes and City&County Officials Homeowner's Associations a full hot breakfast,high speed Internet and other neighborhoods. Landscape Architects Fire Professionals amenities.There are several hotels and restaurants • within a short distance. Plus,all participants who complete the workshop Emergency Managers Developers Use the registration form on this brochure or visit receive free training mar'mals. www.sccd.org to register online. Planners Insurance Agents "The best time to become Firewise is Utility Workers State Public Officials Knox?ark- z before the next fire starts." ,. $ American Red Cross Staff Small Forest Land Owners 1 Si.-.K B �' spok a Valley Brought to you by... ve Contact Us - -__ : t -- E NcOOSER VA 7.1Giii 'l• Garth Davis,District ForesterP` OM Spokane Conservation District - - - sem:` �+'�` v. o kr i ___ �� 21 N Havana iv& 0 n WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTM twror Spokane,\..V..\ 99202 a i 0 y Natural Resources m Ave -_-._ -- u9111y.$nn_--++--_ `011cla�Irn 509-535-7274 Valley Suites ar Q I"`Expren Barth-davis@sccd.org y WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY visit us on the web: T City of EXTENSION -- 'E Sln:o Ave d Spokane --: �/ -E Stnta Ave- .xww.secd.org a m valley a www.ftrewise.org DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of May 21,2014; 9:50 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings June 3,2014,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tues May 27] ACTION ITEM 1.Motion Consideration: Solid Waste Transfer,Transport&Disposal Final Agreement—Lamb,Jackson(20 min) NON-ACTION ITEMS 2. Browns Park Master Plan—Mike Stone (20 minutes) 3. Streamline Sales Tax Mitigation—Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 4. Thierman Traffic Issue—Eric Guth (20 minutes) 5.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 85 minutes] June 10,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,June 2] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Amended 2014 TIP—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2015-2020 Six Year TIP—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 3. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance,Comp Plan Amendments—Lori Barlow (15 minutes) 5. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance,Zoning Map—Lori Barlow (10 minutes) 6.Motion Consideration: Approval of Draft Centennial Trail Agreement—Mike Stone (10 minutes) 7.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 65 minutes] June 17,2014: Budget Workshop, 8:30 a.m.to 3:30 p.m. [due Mon,June 9] Spokane Valley City Council Chambers No evening meeting June 17,2014 June 24,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,June 16] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Proposed Resolution Amending 2014 TIP—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 3. Proposed Resolution Adopting 2015-2020 Six Year TIP—Steve Worley (15 minutes) 4.Motion Consideration: Bid Award Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement—E.Guth (10 minutes) 5.Motion Consideration: Bid Award Sprague Resurfacing,Vista to Herald—E.Guth (10 minutes) 6.Motion Consideration: Bid Award Stn Ave Reconstruct;McKinnon to Fancher—Guth (10 minutes) 7.Motion Consideration: Browns Park Master Plan—Mike Stone (15 minutes) 8.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 9. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: 80 minutes] July 1,2014, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,June 23] 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] July 8,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,June 30] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2.Marijuana Regulations—Erik Lamb (20 minutes) 3.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 5/22/2014 9:24:07 AM Page 1 of 4 [*estimated meeting: minutes] July 15,2014, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,July 7] .Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] July 22,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,July 14] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2.First Reading Proposed Ordinance,Marijuana Regulations—Erik Lamb (15 minutes) 3.Motion Consideration: Bid Award Appleway Trail,University to Pines—E. Guth (10 minutes) 4.Motion Consideration: Bid Award Mansfield Ave Connection—E. Guth (10 minutes) 5.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 6. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] July 29,2014 no meeting August 5,2014 No Meeting-National Night Out August 12,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Aug 4] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance,Marijuana Regulations—Erik Lamb (15 minutes) 3.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Argonne Corridor Upgrade—Eric Guth (10 minutes) 4.Admin Report: Estimated Revenues and Expenditures 2015 budget—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 5.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 50 minutes] August 19,2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Aug 11] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] August 26,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Aug 18] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2015 Budget—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes,motion to set 9/23 Budget hearing) (5 minutes) 3.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: 25 minutes] September 2,2014, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Aug 25 1. Outside Agencies Presentations [5 min each]: (a)Economic Development,(b) Social Service) (—90 min) 2.Admin report on proposed ordinance adopting 2015 property taxes (20 minutes) 3.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 115 minutes] September 9, 2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tues, Sept 2] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Community Development Block Grant Proposed Projects—Scott Kuhta (20 minutes) 3.Admin Report: City Manager presentation of 2015 Preliminary Budget (30 minutes) 4.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 60 minutes] September 16,2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Sept 8] 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 5/22/2014 9:24:07 AM Page 2 of 4 September 23,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Sept 15] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CDBG Proposed Projects—Scott Kuhta (15 minutes) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2015 Budget—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 3. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 4.First Reading Proposed Property Tax Ordinance—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 5.Motion Consideration: CDBG Proposed Projects—Scott Kuhta (10 minutes) 6.Motion Consideration: Outside Agency Allocations for 2015—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 7.Admin Report: Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment—Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 8.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 9. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: 95 minutes] September 30,2014, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Sept 22] 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] October 7,2014,Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Sept 29] 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] October 14,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 6] 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 3. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 4. Second Reading Proposed Property Tax Ordinance—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 5.First Reading Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 6.First Reading Proposed 2015 Budget Ordinance—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 8.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 80 minutes] October 21,2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 13] 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] October 28,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 20] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed 2015 Budget Ordinance—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 4.Admin Report: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Recommendations—M.Calhoun (15 minutes) 5.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 6. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] November 4,2014, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 27] 1.Admin Report: 2015 Fee Resolution—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 2.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 20 minutes] November 11,2014—no meeting—Veteran's Day November 18,2014,Formal meeting 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Nov 10] Draft Advance Agenda 5/22/2014 9:24:07 AM Page 3 of 4 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Proposed Resolution Amending Fee Resolution for 2015—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 3.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 25 minutes] November 25,2014—no meeting—Thanks2ivin2 week December 2,2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Nov 24] 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] December 9,2014,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 1] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2.Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Allocations for 2015 (20 minutes) 3.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 30 minutes] December 16,2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 8] 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] December 23,2014 no meeting December 30,2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 22] 1.Advance Agenda 2. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: ADA Transition Plan Coal/Oil Train Environmental Impact Statement Economic Incentives Fire and Life Safety Code Historic Preservation Interim Marijuana Regs [expires Aug 11,2014] North/South Corridor(WSDOT Update) Noxious Weed Board SEPA/NEPA Process—Eric Guth Stormwater Swales,care of Street Vacation/Connectivity Process Tourism Promotion Agency(TPA) Truck Parking in Residential Zones Urban Agriculture (animals,bees,etc.) *time for public or Council comments not included Draft Advance Agenda 5/22/2014 9:24:07 AM Page 4 of 4 City of Spokane Valley Spokan 4 11ey Community Development Monthly Report 04/01/2013 - 04/30/2014 Page Title 1 Cover Sheet 2 Pre-Application Meetings Requested 3 Online Applications Received 4 Construction Applications Received 5 Land Use Applications Received 6 Construction Permits Issued 7 Land Use Applications Approved 8 Development Inspections Performed 9 Code Enforcement 10 Revenue 11 Building Permit Valuations Printed 05/05/2014 13:51 Page 1 of 11 Community Development Spokane Valley Monthly Report 04/01/2013 - 04/30/2014 Pre-Application Meetings Requested A Pre-Application Meeting is a service provided to help our customers identify the code requirements related to their project proposal. Community Development scheduled a total of 10 Pre-Application Meetings in April 2014. 20 15 10 5 J I 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Land Use Pre-Application = Commercial Pre-App Meeting Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial Pre-App 2 9 11 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Land Use Pre-Application Meeting 3 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 5 11 15 10 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 41 Printed 05/05/2014 13:51 Page 2 of 11 Community Development Siiiikane 1 Monthly Report s 04/01/2013 - 04/30/2014 Online Applications Received Community Development received a total of 107 Online Applications in April 2014. I 150 100 1 50 , 0 1 t ULII 0 r ,-. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Trade Permit Sign Permit gEt1 Right of Way Permit Reroof Permit = Demolition Permit Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Demolition Permit 1 2 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reroof Permit 1 1 13 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Right of Way Permit 2 1 1 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Permit I 0 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trade Permit 13 24 40 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 17 31 58 107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 213 Printed 05/05/2014 13:51 Page 3 of 11 Community Development Silediane Valley Monthly Report 04/01/2013 - 04/30/2014 Construction Applications Received Community Development received a total of 497 Construction Applications in April 2014. 600 400 200 ill 110 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec lib Commercial - New Commercial-TI Residential-New I= Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial-New 2 8 18 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Commercial-TI 15 10 10 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residential-New 5 20 18 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Commercial-Trade 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residential-Trade 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residential-Accessory 8 2 9 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Demolition *2 *6 *4 *9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign 9 *11 *12 *17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Construction Permits *172 *201 *330 *429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 216 258 401 497 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 1,372 *Includes Online Applications. Printed 05/05/2014 13:51 Page 4 of 11 Community Development Siiediane Valley Monthly Report 04/01/2013 - 04/30/2014 Land Use Applications Received Community Development received a total of 83 Land Use Applications in April 2014. l 100 50 III 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct. Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment Binding Site Plan Preliminary State Environmental Policy Short Plat Preliminary Final Platting Act(SEPA) Long Plat Preliminary Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment Administrative Exception/Interpretation = Other Land Use Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment 1 1 6 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Short Plat Preliminary 4 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Long Plat Preliminary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Binding Site Plan Preliminary 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Platting 0 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Administrative 1 3 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits 52 50 56 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 60 5. I 0 fe 01 0 01 0 Annual Total To-Date: 271 Printed 05/05/2014 13:51 Page 5 of 11 Community Development Spokane` Valley Monthly Report 01/01/2014 - 04/30/2014 Construction Permits Issuec Community Development issued a total of 402 Construction Permits in April 2014. 600 i 400 200 ill 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial-New 122 Commercial-TI Residential-New = Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial-New 1 0 9 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Commercial-TI 18 11 4 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residential-New 5 4 36 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Commercial-Trade 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residential-Trade 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residential-Accessory 8 3 8 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Demolition 2 4 2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign 7 11 10 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Construction Permits 147 152 271 318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 195 186 340 402 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 1,123 Printed 05/05/2014 15:14 Page 6 of 11 Community Development Siiediane Valley Monthly Report 01/01/2014 - 04/30/2014 Land Use Applications Approved Community Development approved a total of 67 Land Use Applications in April 2014. l 100 50 11111 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment ill Binding Site Plan Preliminary State Environmental Policy Short Plat Preliminary Final Platting Act(SEPA) Long Plat Preliminary Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment Administrative Exception/Interpretation = Other Land Use Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment 5 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Short Plat Preliminary 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Long Plat Preliminary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Binding Site Plan Preliminary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Platting 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Administrative 1 2 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits 44 53 57 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 52 59 I 6. I 0 fe 01 0 01 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 248 Printed 05/05/2014 15:14 Page 7 of 11 Community Development pcdiane 1 Monthly Report 01/01/2014 - 04/30/2014 Development Inspections Performed Community Development performed a total of 1266 Development Inspections in April 2014. Development Inspections include building, planning, engineering and ROW inspections. 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 277 \\N 600 400 200 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 2013 2014 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals 2014 601 631 986 1,266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 III 3,484 2013 465 503 807 1,026 1,060 1,015 1,084 1,078 1,186 1,016 832 669[ 10,741 2012 644 623 540 828 1,104 926 985 988 931 1,149 805 549 MI 10,072 Printed 05/05/2014 15:14 Page 8 of 11 Community Development Silediane Valley Monthly Report 01/01/2014 - 04/30/2014 Code Enforcement Code Enforcement Officers responded to 32 citizen requests in the month of April. They are listed by type below. Please remember that all complaints, even those that have no violation, must be investigated. I 40 20 I 01111 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Complaint, Non-Violation Environmental =I General Nuisance = Property Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Complaint,Non-Violation 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Environmental 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 General 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nuisance 14 5 12 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Property 6 3 13 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 25 9 26 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 92 Printed 05/05/2014 15:20 Page 9 of 11 Community Development pcdiane Monthly Report 1 01/01/2014 - 04/30/2014 Revenue Community Development Revenue totaled $160,508 in April 2014. 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -GI- 2014 2013 -- Five-Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals 2014 $74,628 $66,134 $198,571 $160,508 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $499,841 Trend $77,877 $68,528 $112,700 $142,013 $215,223 $195,948 $140,018 $116,427 $124,983 $103,820 $95,140 $70,239 $1,462,916 2013 $158,912 $51,536 $102,538 $106,496 $184,176 $409,592 $277,553 $102,021 $129,174 $133,561 $98,386 $66,559 $1,820,504 2012 $34,204 $60,319 $177,737 $173,932 $268,672 $223,888 $123,137 $103,703 $113,731 $112,542 $108,948 $51,745 $1,552,558 2011 $43,842 $77,247 $80,774 $118,237 $84,684 $106,909 $88,247 $83,949 $167,076 $78,237 $95,172 $58,881 $1,083,255 2010 $87,229 $84,626 $109,029 $96,800 $305,185 $102,781 $87,805 $87,724 $107,002 $73,100 $72,948 $64,009,$1,278,238 2009 $65,199 $68,914 $93,424 $214,601 $233,397 $136,568 $123,348 $204,739 $107,930 $121,658 $100,247 $110,001r$1,580,026 Printed 05/05/2014 15:20 Page 10 of 11 Community Development 7D6 1 Monthly Report 01/01/2014 - 04/30/2014 Building Permit Valuation Community Development Building Permit Valuation totaled $8,878,040 in April 2014. 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 _, 10,000,00041// Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -r 2014 2013 - Five-Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals 2014 $3.17M $2.45M $9.90M $8.88M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M I $24.40M Trend $7.33M $4.17M $4.69M $8.52M $19.74M $19.01M $11.55M $9.67M $9.40M $7.53M $4.35M $2.21M I $108.17M 2013 $25.49M $1.92M $3.58M $7.30M $22.21M $41.88M $32.88M $6.52M $8.11M $14.12M $7.23M $2.54M I $173.78M 2012 $0.72M $2.95M $5.29M $5.32M $24.38M $33.08M $7.91M $9.89M $6.47M $8.78M $3.76M $1.66M I $110.21M 2011 $1.46M $5.95M $5.03M $6.15M $2.53M $4.98M $3.83M $3.45M $21.54M $4.46M $3.97M $1.85M I $65.20M 2010 $7.06M $6.34M $6.82M $6.64M $32.55M $4.86M $5.36M $3.91M $5.71M $3.01M $1.93M $2.29M 2009 $1.91M $3.70M $2.74M $17.19M $17.03M $10.27M $7.75M $24.56M $5.18M $7.28M $4.87M $2.70M Printed 05/05/2014 15:20 Page 11 of 11 Pokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 + Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall®spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Mike Jackson, City Manager From: Mark Calhoun, Finance Director Date: May 20, 2014 Re Finance Department Activity Report—April 2014 Following is information pertaining to Finance Department activities through the end of April 2014 and included herein is a 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures through the end of April. 2013 Yearend Process With the exception of wrapping up the close-out of capital project the 2013 books were materially closed out in April. We anticipate the final capital projects will be closed out by mid- May at which point we will begin the process of preparing the 2013 Annual Financial Report which will be complete by the end of May. The State Auditor's Office will be on site the last week of May to begin the audit of 2013. Vehicle Purchases The 2014 Budget included $90,000 for the addition of three vehicles for the Public Works Department and at this point we have ordered 2 Ford Escapes and 1 Ford half ton pick-up at a total anticipated cost of $77,535. We anticipate delivery by early June and expect there will be some additional costs incurred in the set-up of the vehicles, Moody's Investors Service Review of City Bond Rating The City was contacted by Moody's Investor's Service in mid-March regarding their desire to conduct a bond rating update. With assistance of Legal, Community Development and Public Works we responded to a variety of questions posed by Moody's by preparing a binder of information for their review. This culminated in an April 2 phone conference with Moody's that involved the City Manager, Finance Director and Deputy Attorney. This effort culminated in an April 9t,, Moody's rating update for the City that took us from an Al to an AA3. Refunding of the 2003 Limited Tax General Obligation (LTGO) Bonds In 2003 the City issued $9,430,000 in LTGO bonds to facilitate the construction of CenterPlace. • Of this amount $2,430,000 of the bond proceeds were used to finance road and street improvements surrounding the building. This portion of the bond issue was set to be paid off in annual installments over the 20-year period ending December 31, 2023. Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by equal distributions of the 1st and 2nd 1/4% real estate excise tax (REET) recorded in Funds 301 and 302. • $7,000,000 of the bond proceeds were used to finance construction of CenterPlace. This portion of the bond issue was set to be paid off in annual installments over the 30-year H;1FinanceActivity Reportsl20?412094 04.docx Page 1 period ending December 31, 2033, Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by the Spokane Public Facilities District. • Per the 2003 bond covenants the City may at its option call or redeem those bonds that remain outstanding after December 1, 2013. Given that interest rates are currently less than those the City is paying on the 2003 bonds we have begun the process to refund (refinance) the bonds. The end product of this endeavor will be a reduction in annual bond payments as a result of the interest portion of the bond payment declining. We anticipate Council action to consider and approve the bond refunding will take place in June and the actual bond refunding to take place in July. 2015 Budget Development Process The 2015 Budget development process began in the Finance Department in early March and on April 10th we sent detailed budget requests to all departments to complete by mid-May. By the time the budget is adopted on October 28th the Council will have had an opportunity to discuss the budget on seven occasions including two public hearings, June 17 Council budget workshop August 12 Admin report on 2015 revenues and expenditures August 26 Public hearing #1 on 2015 revenues and expenditures September 9 City Manager's presentation of preliminary 2015 Budget September 23 Public hearing #2 on 2015 Budget October 14 First reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2015 Budget October 28 Second reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2015 Budget Budget to Actual Comparison Report A report reflecting 2014 Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for those funds for which a 2014 Budget was adopted is located on pages 5 through 16. Because we attempt to provide this information in a timely manner this report is prepared from records that are not formally closed by the Finance Department at month end or reconciled to bank records. Although it is realistic to expect the figures will change over subsequent weeks, I believe the report is materially accurate. We've included the following information in the report: • Revenues by source for all funds, and expenditures by department in the General Fund and by type in all other funds. • A breakdown between recurring and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures in the General Fund, Street O&M Fund and Stormwater Fund. • The change in fund balance including beginning and ending figures. The beginning fund balance figures are those that are expected to be reflected in our 2013 Annual Financial Report. • Columns of information include: o The 2014 Budget as adopted. o April 2014 activity. o Cumulative 2014 activity through April 2014. o Budget remaining in terms of dollars. o The percent of budgeted revenue collected or budgeted expenditures disbursed. A few points related to the General Fund #001 (page 5): Recurring revenues collections are currently at 20.13% of the amount budgeted with 33.3% of the year elapsed. This is typical and reflective of the nature of the timing of when revenues are collected. • Property tax are paid to Spokane County in two installments each year on April 30 and October 31 and are then remitted to the City primarily in May and November with lesser H:\Finance Activity Reporfsl201412014 04.docx Page 2 amounts typically remitted in June and December. In January we received one final payment related to the 2013 collections, so the amounts related to 2014 start in the month of February. Properly taxes received thus far in 2014 are $941,625 or 8.52% of the amount budgeted. • Sales tax collections represent only 3-months of collections thus far because taxes collected in April are not remitted to the City by the State until the latter part of May. Collections are currently $4,050,519 or 24.71% of the amount budgeted. • Gambling taxes are at $14,799 or 2.40% of the amount budgeted. This is because they are paid quarterly with first quarter payments due by April 30. Returns received in 2014 so far have been primarily related to late payments for 2013 activity. • Franchise Fee and Business Registration revenues are typically received in the month following a calendar year quarter. So far in 2014 we have received $322,767 or 26.61% of the amount budgeted. • State shared revenues are composed of State of Washington distributions that include items such as liquor board profits, liquor excise tax, streamlined sales tax mitigation and criminal justice monies. Most of these revenues are paid by the State in the month following a calendar quarter. Through April we've received remittances totaling $446,419 or 23.66% of the amount budgeted. • Fines and forfeitures revenues are composed of monthly remittances from Spokane County with payments made in the month following the actual assessment of a fine and false alarm fees. Through April 2014 we've received remittances through the month of March with receipts of$400,301 or 27.22% of the amount budgeted. • Community Development service revenues are largely composed of building permit and plan review fees as well as right of way permits. Revenues are currently $465,665 or 37.09% of the amount budgeted. • Recreation program fees are composed of revenues generated by the variety of parks and recreation programs including classes, swimming pools (in-season), and CenterPlace. Currently, revenues total $185,296 or 31.96% of the amount budgeted. Recurring expenditures are currently at 29.09% of the amount budgeted with 33.3% of the year elapsed. Departments experience seasonal fluctuations in activity so they don't necessarily expend their budget in twelve equal monthly installments. Investments (page 17) Investments at April 30 total $47,902,522 and are composed of$42,845,951 in the Washington State Local Government Investment Pool and $5,056,571 in bank CDs. Total Sales Tax Receipts (page 18) Total sales tax receipts reflect State remittances through April and total $4,573,724 including general, criminal justice and public safety taxes. This figure is $122,833 (2.76%) greater than for the same 3-month period in 2013. Economic Indicators (pages 19 —21) The following economic indicators provide information pertaining to three different sources of tax revenue that provide a good gauge of the health and direction of the overall economy. 1. Sales taxes (page 19) provide a sense of how much individuals and businesses are spending on the purchase of goods. 2. Hotel / Motel taxes (page 20) provide us with a sense of overnight stays and visits to our area by tourists or business travelers. 3. Real Estate Excise taxes (page 21) provide us with a sense of real estate sales. H:1Finance Activity Reports1201412014 04.docx Page 3 Page 19 provides a 10-year history of general sales tax receipts (not including public safety or criminal justice) with monthly detail beginning January 2005. • Compared with calendar year 2013, 2014 collections have increased by $97,416 or 2.46%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at $17.4 million and dropped off dramatically in the subsequent three years. Page 20 provides a 10-year history of hotel/motel tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2005. • Compared with calendar year 2013, 2014 collections have increased by $2,924 or 3.75%. • Collections reached an all-time high in 2013, exceeding the previous high in 2012 by $28,600. Page 21 provides a 10-year history of real estate excise tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2005. • Compared with calendar year 2013, 2014 collections have decreased by $76,352 or 26.86%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at nearly $2.6 million, decreased precipitously in 2008 and 2009, and are slowly gaining ground. Debt Capacity and Bonds Outstanding (page 22) This page provides information on the City's debt capacity, or the dollar amount of General Obligation (G.0.) Bonds the City may issue, as well as an amortization schedule of the bonds the City currently has outstanding. • The maximum amount of G.O. bonds the City may issue is determined by the assessed value and the 2013 assessed value for 2014 property taxes is $7,168,991,028. Following the City's December 1, 2013, bond payment, the City currently has $7,435,000 of nonvoted G.O. bonds outstanding which represents 6.91% of our nonvoted bond capacity, and 1.38% of our total debt capacity for all types of bonds. • The $7,435,000 of bonds the City currently has outstanding is part of the 2003 nonvoted (LTGO) bond issue. Of this amount: o $5,990,000 remains on bonds issued for the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds are repaid with a portion of the 1/10 of 1% sales tax that is collected by the Spokane Public Facilities District. o $1,445,000 remains on bonds issued for road and street improvements around CenterPlace. The bonds are repaid with a portion of the real estate excise tax collected by the City. H.'1Finance Activity Reports1201412014 04.docx Page 4 P:1Finance\For City Council\Council Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget #00i -GENERAL FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Property Tax 11,049,400 625,105 941,625 (10,107,775) 8.52% Sales Tax 16,390,000 1,201,991 4,050,519 (12,339,481) 24.71% Sales Tax-Criminal Justice 1,330,000 100,075 334,519 (995,481) 25.15% Sales Tax-Public Safety 745,000 55,670 188,706 (556,294) 25.33% Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 617,400 12,208 14,799 (602,601) 2.40% Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,213,000 293,956 322,767 (890,233) 26.61% State Shared Revenues 1,886,500 95,219 446,419 (1,440,081) 23.66% Fines,Forfeitures and Penalties 1,470,800 136,935 400,301 (1,070,499) 27.22% Community Development 1,255,400 153,344 465,665 (789,735) 37.09% Recreation Program Fees 579,800 71,843 185,296 (394,504) 31.96% Miscellaneous Department Revenue 85,500 9,663 19,857 (65,643) 23.22% Miscellaneous&Investment Interest 117,600 7,187 29,520 (88,080) 25.10% Transfer-in -#101 (street admin) 39,700 0 9,925 (29,775) 25.00% Transfer-in -#105(him tax-CP advertising) 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00% Transfer-in -#402(storm admin) 13,400 0 3,350 (10,050) 25.00% Total Recurring Revenues 36,823,500 2,763,195 7,413,267 (29,410,233) 20.13% Expenditures City Council 414,950 22,936 146,643 268,307 35,34% City Manager 660,843 52,439 207,650 453,193 31.42% Legal 448,922 31,143 130,613 318,309 29.09% Public Safety 23,384,643 1,830,539 7,065,558 16,319,085 30.21% Deputy City Manager 653,215 36,408 149,821 503,394 22.94% Finance 1,180,659 95,028 382,586 798,073 32.40% Human Resources 237,883 19,414 75,129 162,754 31.58% Public Works 882,694 58,582 246,524 636,170 27.93% Community Development-Administration 290,883 19,899 84,982 205,901 29.22% Community Development-Engineering 807,114 52,013 219,360 587,754 27.18% Community Development-Planning 928,906 77,963 302,178 626,728 32.53% Community Development-Building 1,267,656 100,953 405,053 862,603 31.95% Parks&Rec-Administration 274,743 20,312 86,101 188,642 31.34% Parks&Rec-Maintenance 796,200 62,843 190,122 606,078 23.88% Parks&Rec-Recreation 229,152 15,558 43,531 185,621 19.00% Parks&Rec-Aquatics 490,400 1,373 4,662 485,738 0.95% Parks&Rec-Senior Center 89,882 6,889 26,611 63,271 29.61% Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 828,842 60,874 239,988 588,854 28.95% Pavement Preservation 888,823 0 22,206 866,617 2.50% General Government 1,741,600 75,848 591,994 1,149,606 33.99% Transfers out-#502(insurance premium) 325,000 0 81,250 243,750 25.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 36,823,010 2,641,013 10,702,561 26,120,449 29.06% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 490 122,182 (3,289,293) (3,289,783) 'NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues n/a 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Expenditures Transfers out-#309(park grant match) 192,500 0 0 192,500 0.00% Law Enforcement Contingency 350,000 0 0 350,000 0.00% Public Works(autocad licenses) 8,800 8,800 8,800 0 100.00% Parks&Recreation(CP chairs) 11,350 0 0 11,350 0.00% Public Safety(precinct improvements) 24,000 0 0 24,000 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 586,650 8,800 8,800 577,850 1.50% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (586,650) (8,800) (8,800) 577,850 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (586,160) 113,382 (3,298,093) _ (2,711,933) Beginning unrestrictedfund balance 23,422,562 23,422,562 Ending unrestricted fund balance 22,836,402 20,124,469 Page 5 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #101 -STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 1,858,600 131,246 432,271 (1,426,329) 23.26% Investment Interest 3,000 173 519 (2,481) 17.29% Insurance Premiums&Recoveries 0 0 4,204 4,204 #DIV/01 Utility Tax 2,750,000 208,206 624,936 (2,125,064) 22.72% Miscellaneous Revenue 0 531 1,683 1,683 #DIV10! Total Recurring Revenues 4,611,600 340,156 1,063,613 (3,547,987) 23.06% Expenditures Wages/Benefits I Payroll Taxes 627,288 56,800 258,716 368,572 41.24% Supplies 386,500 32,421 233,972 152,528 60.54% Services&Charges 2,392,201 172,469 447,807 1,944,394 18.72% Intergovernmental Payments 798,000 66,464 96,155 701,845 12.05% Interfund Transfers-out-#001 39,700 0 9,925 29,775 25.00% Interfund Transfers-out-#501 (plow replace.) 75,000 6,250 25,000 50,000 33.33% Interfund Transfers-out-#501 (non-plow vehicle 10,777 (6,250) (3,556) 14,333 -32.99% Interfund Transfers-out-#311 (pavement preserva 282,000 0 70,500 211,500 25.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 4,611,466 328,154 1,138,520 3,472,946 24.69% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 134 12,002 (74,906) (75,040) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grants 0 0 15,150 15,150 #DIV10! Transfer-in -#302 0 0 23 23 #DIVIO! Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #DIV10! Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 0 15,173 15,173 #DIVIO! Expenditures 0133-Sprague/Sullivan ITS 0 0 173 (173) #DIVI01 Patch Trailer 30,000 0 0 30,000 0.00% Hawk Signal 25,000 0 0 25,000 0.00% Software 6,750 0 0 6,750 0.00% Transfers out-#501 (new pickup) 15,000 0 0 15,000 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 76,750 0 173 76,577 0.23% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (76,750) 0 15,000 91,750 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (76,616) 12,002 (59,906) 16,710 Beginning fund balance 2,082,833 2,062,833 Ending fund balance 1,986,217 2,002,927 Page 6 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #103-PATHS&TRAILS Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 7,800 0 0 (7,800) 0.00% Investment Interest 0 3 9 9 #DIV101 Total revenues 7,800 3 9 (7,791) 0.11% Expenditures Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #DIVl0I Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIV10! Revenues over(under)expenditures 7,800 3 9 (7,791) Beginning fund balance 71,871 71,871 Ending fund balance 79,671 71,880 #105-HOTEL 1 MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 490,000 29,384 80,823 (409,177) 16.49% Investment Interest 300 25 72 (228) 24.10% Total revenues 490,300 29,409 80,895 (409,405) 16.50% Expenditures Interfund Transfers-#001 30,000 0 0 30,000 0.00% Tourism Promotion 547,000 62,733 100,710 446,290 18.41% Total expenditures 577,000 62,733 100,710 476,290 17.45% Revenues over(under)expenditures (86,700) (33,324) (19,815) (885,695) Beginning fund balance 236,927 236,927 Ending fund balance 150,227 217,112 Page 7 P:1Finance\For City Council\Council Monthly Reports\201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Bud•et Aril Aid 30 Remainin! Budset SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #120-CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total revenues 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 300,000 300,000 Ending fund balance 300,000 300,000 #121 -SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 7,300 384 1,189 (6,111) 16.29% Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total revenues 7,300 384 1,189 (6,111) 16.29% Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Revenues over(under)expenditures 7,300 384 1,189 (6,111) Beginning fund balance 5,448,502 5,448,502 Ending fund balance 5,455,802 5,449,691 #122-WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 700 37 115 (585) 16.48% Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0l Subtotal revenues 700 37 115 (585) 16.48% Expenditures Snow removal expenses 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Total expenditures 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures (499,300) 37 115 (500,585) Beginning fund balance 503,565 503,565 Ending fund balance 4,265 503,680 #123-CIVIC FACILITIES REPLACEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 1,700 89 274 (1,426) 16.13% Interfund Transfer-#001 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total revenues 1,700 89 274 (1,426) 16.13% Expenditures Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0l Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 616,284 0 154,071 462,213 25.00% Total expenditures 616,284 0 154,071 462,213 25.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures (614,584) 89 (153,797) (463,639) Beginning fund balance 1,789,271 1,789,271 Ending fund balance 1,174,687 1,635,474 Page 8 P:1FinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reportsi201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget DEBT SERVICE FUNDS #204-DEBT SERVICE FUND Revenues Spokane Public Facilities District 441,520 0 0 (441,520) 0.00% Interfund Transfer-in-#301 93,152 0 23,288 (69,864) 25.00% Interfund Transfer-in-#302 93,151 0 23,288 (69,863) 25.00% Total revenues 627,823 0 46,576 (581,247) 7.42% Expenditures Debt Service Payments-CenterPlace 441,520 0 (36,793) 478,313 -8.33% Debt Service Payments-Roads 186,303 0 (15,525) 201,828 -8.33% Total expenditures 627,823 0 (52,319) 680,142 -8.33% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 98,894 (1,261,389) Beginning fund balance 0 0 Ending fund balance 0 98,894 Page 9 P:1Finance'For City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS I #301 -CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 1 -Taxes 600,000 41,872 107,379 (492,621) 17.90% Investment Interest 1,000 65 200 (800) 19.97% Total revenues 601,000 41,937 107,579 (493,421) 17.90% Expenditures Interfund Transfer-out-#204 93,152 0 23,288 69,864 25.00% Interfund Transfer-out-#303 266,575 0 (23,785) 292,360 -8.86% Interfund Transfer-out-#311 (pavement preset', 184,472 0 0 184,472 0.00% Total expenditures 546,199 0 (497) 546,696 -0.09% Revenues over(under)expenditures 54,801 41,937 108,076 (1,040,117) Beginning fund balance 968,021 968,021 Ending fund balance 1,022,822 1,076,097 #302 SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 2-Taxes 600,000 39,852 102,585 (497,415) 17.10% Investment Interest 1,000 74 230 (770) 23.02% Total revenues 601,000 39,926 102,815 (498,185) 17.11% Expenditures Interfund Transfer-out-#101 0 0 23 Interfund Transfer-out-#204 93,151 0 23,288 69,863 25.00% Interfund Transfer-out-#303 585,097 0 17,158 567,939 2.93% Interfund Transfer-out-#311 (pavement presen, 164,472 0 0 184,472 0.00% Total expenditures 862,720 0 40,469 822,275 4.69% Revenues over(under)expenditures (261,720) 39,926 62,346 (1,320,460) Beginning fund balance 1,323,378 1,323,378 Ending fund balance 1,061,658 1,385,724 Page 10 P:\Finance'For City CounciliCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #303 STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 11,092,997 73,417 630,933 (10,462,064) 5.69% Developer Contribution 166,020 0 0 (166,020) 0.00% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #DIV10! Transfer-in-#301 268,575 0 (23,785) (292,360) -8.86% Transfer-in-#302 585,097 0 17,158 (567,939) 2.93% Transfer-in-#312 Appleway Landscaping 250,000 0 0 (250,000) 0.00% Transfer-in-#312 Sullivan Rd W Bridge 2,320,000 0 7,263 (2,312,737) 0.31% Transfer-in-#402 7,101 0 0 (7,101) 0.00% Investment Interest 0 2 5 5 #DIVIO! Total revenues 14,689,790 73,419 631,574 (14,058,216) 4.30% Expenditures 060 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade SRTC 06-31 860,280 9,007 12,307 847,973 1.43% 061 Pines(SR27)ITS Imporvement SRTC 06-26 10,000 0 67 9,933 0.67% 123 Mission Ave-Flora to Barker 382,410 2,243 7,535 374,875 1.97% 141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC 123,090 5,966 13,099 109,991 10.64% 142 Broadway©ArgonnelMullan 50,000 1,723 3,341 46,659 6.68% 145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail 100,000 53 832 99,168 0.83% 149 Sidewalk Infill 364,425 2,457 41,440 322,985 11.37% 150 Sullivan Road Bridge Drain Retrofit 0 0 0 0 #DMO! 154 Sidewalk&Transit Stop Accessibility 0 0 13 (13) #DIV/01 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 8,888,189 15,798 68,316 8,819,873 0.77% 156 Mansfield Ave.Connection 1,158,727 3,468 499,980 658,747 43.15% 159 University Rd/1-90 Overpass Study 50,000 11,524 17,080 32,920 34.16% 166 Pines Rd.(SR27)&Grace Ave. Int.Safety 538,850 1,501 8,201 530,649 1.52% 167 Citywide Safety Improvements 341,928 0 0 341,928 0.00% 168 Wellesley Ave Sidewalk&Adams Rd Sidewalk 30,000 720 2,406 27,594 8.02% 169 Argonne/Mullan Safety Indiana-Broadway 0 0 0 0 #DIV10i 170 Argonne road: Empire Ave-Knox Ave. 0 0 (11,032) 11,032 #DIV10! 175 Sullivan UP Tracks UC(SB)Resurfacing 0 0 0 0 #DIV/01 176 Appleway Trail 0 0 39 (39) #DIV/0! 177 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study 100,000 9,667 9,667 90,333 9.67% 181 Citywide Traffic Sign Upgrade 50,000 3,719 43,254 6,746 86.51% 185 Appleway Landscaping-Phase 1 250,000 45 525 249,475 0.21% 191 Vista Rd BNSF Xing Safety Improvements 0 802 4,055 (4,055) #DIV/0! 196 8th Avenue-McKinnon to Fancher 300,000 5,935 13,681 286,319 4.56% 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 (PE Start 2014) 91,891 68 68 91,823 0.07% Contingency 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0.00% Total expenditures 14,689,790 74,696 734,876 13,954,914 5.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 (1,277) (103,302) (28,013,130) Beginning fund balance 72,859 72,859 Ending fund balance 72,859 (30,443) Page 11 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget [CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #309-PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Interfund Transfer-in-#001 192,500 0 0 (192,500) 0.00% Investment Interest 500 36 113 (387) 22.51% Total revenues 193,000 36 113 (192,887) 0.06% Expenditures Capital 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! 203 Sand volleyball courts at Brown's Park 40,000 899 899 39,101 2.25% Edgecliff picnic shelter 65,000 0 0 65,000 0.00% 195 Discovery Playground equipment 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Shade structure at Discovery Playground 15,000 0 0 15,000 0.00% City entry sign 70,000 0 0 70,000 0.00% Park signs 22,500 0 0 22,500 0.00% Total expenditures 262,500 899 899 261,601 0.34% Revenues over(under)expenditures (69,500) (863) (787) (454,488) Beginning fund balance 352,779 352,779 Ending fund balance 283,279 351,992 #310-CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Miscellaneous 0 0 839,285 839,285 #DIVIO! Investment Interest 1,900 98 302 (1,598) 15.90% Total revenues 1,900 98 839,587 837,687 44188.80%. Expenditures Capital 0 0 0 0 #DIV/01 Miscellaneous 0 0 2,202 (2,202) #DIVIO! Total expenditures 0 0 2,202 (2,202) #DIVf01 Revenues over(under)expenditures 1,900 98 837,386 839,889 Beginning fund balance 1,101,903 _ 1,101,903 Ending fund balance 1,103,803 1,939,289 Note: The fund balance includes$839,285.10 paid by the Library District for 2.82 acres at the Balfour Park site. If the District does not succeed in getting a voted bond approved by October 2017 then the City will repurchase this land at the original sale price of$839,285.10. #311 -STREET CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 2011+ Revenues interfund Transfers in-#101 282,000 0 70,500 (211,500) 25.00% Interfund Transfers in-#123 616,284 0 154,071 (462,213) 25.00% Interfund Transfers in-#301 184,472 0 0 (184,472) 0.00% Interfund Transfers in-#302 184,472 0 0 (184,472) 0.00% Interfund Transfers in-#001 888,823 0 222,206 (666,617) 25.00% Grant Proceeds 2,763,272 5,352 26,636 (2,736,636) 0.96% Miscellaneous 0 0 50 50 #DIV/0! Investment Interest 0 152 469 469 #DIV/0! Total revenues 4,919,323 5,504 473,932 (4,445,391) 9.63% Expenditures 162 2012 Street Preservation 400,000 0 194 399,806 0.05% 163 Sprague Ave Swale Upgrade, Park to 1-90 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 174 2013 Street Preservation Ph1 0 0 191 (191) #DIVIo! 179 2013 Street Preservation Ph2 1,610,000 1,252 3,702 1,606,298 0.23% 180 Carnahan, Indiana&Sprague Presery 0 8,038 10,818 (10,818) #DIV/0! 186 Adams Road Resurfacing 198,760 652 5,951 192,809 2.99% 187 Sprague Ave Preservation Project 1,352,841 10,882 25,754 1,327,087 1.90% 188 Sullivan Rd Preservation Project 33,920 0 0 33,920 0.00% 202 Appleway Street Preservation Project 0 2,901 5,656 (5,656) #DIVIO! Total expenditures 3,595,521 23,725 52,267 3,543,254 1.45% Revenues over(under)expenditures 1,323,802 (18,221) 421,666 (7,988,645) Beginning fund balance 798,609 798,609 Ending fund balance 2,122,411 1,220,275 Page 12 P:1FinancelFor City Council\Council Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining _ Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #312-CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Revenues Transfers in-#001 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0? Developer Contribution 0 0 4,675 4,675 #DIV/0! Total revenues 0 0 4,675 4,675 #DIV/0! Expenditures Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Transfers out-#303-Appleway Landscaping 250,000 0 0 250,000 0.00% Transfers out-#303-Sullivan Rd W Bridge 2,320,000 0 7,263 2,312,737 0.31% Total expenditures 2,570,000 0 7,263 2,562,737 0.28% Revenues over(under)expenditures (2,570,000) 0 (2,588) (2,558,062) Beginning fund balance 7,742,299 7,742,299 Ending fund balance 5,172,299 7,739,711 Page 13 P:1FinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports\2014\2014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget FENTERPRISE FUNDS _ #402-STORM WATER FUND IRECURRING-ACTIVITY Revenues Stormwater Management Fees 1,835,000 112,122 165,591 (1,669,409) 9.02% Investment Interest 2,500 110 340 (2,160) 13.59% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Total Recurring Revenues 1,837,500 112,232 165,931 (1,671,569) 9.03% Expenditures Wages/Benefits 1 Payroll Taxes 505,535 24,808 108,914 396,621 21.54% Supplies 15,900 1,034 1,394 14,506 8.77% Services&Charges 1,065,076 64,298 100,513 964,563 9.44% Intergovernmental Payments 26,500 13,076 13,076 13,424 49.34% Interfund Transfers-out-#001 13,400 0 3,350 10,050 25.00% Interfund Transfers-out-#502 1,567 0 392 1,175 25.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 1,627,978 103,217 227,640 1,400,338 13.98% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 209,522 9,015 (61,709) (271,231) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grant Proceeds 0 7,477 8,747 8,747 #DIV/0! Interfund Transfers-in 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Developer Contributions 0 0 51,492 51,492 #DIVIO! Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 7,477 60,239 60,239 #DIVIO! Expenditures Capital-various projects 900,000 0 0 900,000 0.00% Property acquisition 250,000 0 0 250,000 0.00% VMS Trailer 16,000 0 0 16,000 0.00% 150 Sullivan Bridge Drain Retrofit 0 53 882 (882) #DIV/0! UIC Retrofits on Pvmnt Pres Projects 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 168 Wellesley Ave Sidewalk&Adams Rd Sidewalk 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! 193 Effectiveness Study 0 5,331 5,331 (5,331) #DIVIO! 197 Broadway,Havana to Fancher SD Retrofit 0 0 444 (444) #DIV/0! 198 Sprague, Park to University LID 0 0 793 (793) #DIV/0! 199 Havana-Yale Diversion 0 0 972 (972) #DIV/0! 200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion 0 0 2,566 (2,566) #DIVIO! Transfers out-#501 (new pickup) 30,000 0 0 30,000 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 1,196,000 5,385 10,989 1,185,011 0.92% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (1,196,000) 2,092 49,251 1,245,251 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (986,478) 11,108 (12,458) 974,020 Beginning working capital 2,342,556 2,342,556 Ending working capital 1,356,078 2,330,098 Page 14 P:IFinance&For City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget ENTERPRISE FUNDS-continued #403-AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA Revenues Spokane County 500,000 0 0 (500,000) 0.00% Grant DOE-Decant Facility 0 5,096 5,096 5,096 #DIV/O! Grant DOT-Decant Facility 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Grant revenue 870,000 16,322 38,119 (831,881) 4.38% Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 #DIV10! Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Total revenues 1,370,000 21,419 43,215 (1,326,785) 3.15% Expenditures 163 Sprague swales 0 0 510 (510) #DIV10! 190 14th Ave Custer to Carnahan 0 3,396 0 0 #DIV10! 189 Bettman-Dickey Storm drain 0 0 0 0 #DIVl0! 173 Decant Facility 0 82,555 88,899 (88,899) #DIV/0! Broadway SD retrofit(design only) 60,000 0 0 60,000 0.00% Outfall Diversion(design only) 60,000 0 0 60,000 0.00% 192 SE Yardley Retrofits 1,000,000 6,111 27,874 972,126 2.79% Total expenditures 1,120,000 92,062 117,283 1,002,717 10.47% Revenues over(under)expenditures 250,000 (70,644) (74,068) (2,329,502) Beginning working capital 333,610 333,610 Ending working capital 583,610 259,542 Page 15 P:1FinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2014 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 33.3% For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30,2014 • 2014 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget April April 30 Remaining Budget INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS #501 -ER&R FUND Revenues Transfer-in-#001 15,400 0 3,850 (11,550) 25.00% Transfer-in-#101 10,777 0 2,694 (8,083) 25.00% Transfer-in-#101 (plow replace.) 75,000 0 18,750 (56,250) 25.00% Transfer-in-#402 1,567 0 392 (1,175) 25.00% Investment Interest 1,000 65 201 (799) 20.06% Transfer-in-#101 (new pickup) 15,000 0 0 (15,000) 0.00% Transfer-in-#402(new pickup) 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00% Total revenues 148,744 65 25,887 (122,857) 17.40% Expenditures Vehicle Acquisitions 90,000 0 0 90,000 0.00% Total expenditures 90,000 0 0 90,000 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 58,744 65 25,887 (212,857) Beginning working capital 1,183,348 1,183,348 Ending working capital 1,242,092 1,209,235 #502-RISK MANAGEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 0 1 1 #DIV10! InterfundTransfer-#001 325,000 0 81,250 (243,750) 25.00% Total revenues 325,000 0 81,251 (243,749) 25.00% Expenditures Auto&Property Insurance 325,000 0 272,435 52,565 83.83% Unemployment Claims 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #DIV/01 Total expenditures 325,000 0 272,435 52,565 83.83% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 (191,184) (296,314) Beginning working capital 124,171 124,171 Ending working capital 124,171 (67,013) SUMMARY FOR ALL FUNDS Total of Revenues for all Funds 67,257,980 3,435,385 11,157,910 Per revenue status report 67,257,980 3,435,385 11,157,910 Difference 0 0 0 Total of Expenditures for all Funds 71,304,691 3,340,684 13,518,340 Per expenditure status report 71,304,691 3,340,684 13,518,341 0 (0) (0) Page 16 P,1Finance\For City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/14/2014 Investment Report For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30, 2014 Total LGIP* BB CD 2 BB CD 3 , Investments Beginning $ 42,717,763.26 $ 3,056,571.04 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 47,774,334.30 Deposits 1,624,641.28 0.00 0.00 1,624,641.28 Withdrawls (1,500,000.00) 0.00 0.00 (1,500,000.00) Interest 3,546.91 0.00 0.00 3,546.91 Ending $ 42,845,951.45 $ 3,056,571.04 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 47,902,522.49 matures: 6/28/2014 11/4/2014 rate; 0.35% 0.29% Earnings Balance Current Period Year to date Budget 001 General Fund $ 29,870,622.01 $ 2,233.96 $ 7,078.32 $ 65,000.00 101 Street Fund 2,336,788.34 173.03 518.62 3,000.00 103 Trails & Paths 37,976.60 2.81 8.70 0.00 105 Hotel/Motel 343,303.42 25.42 72.30 300.00 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 300,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 5,190,903.37 384.36 1,189.32 7,300.00 122 Winter Weather Reserve 503,509.81 37.28 115.36 700.00 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 1,196,911.86 88.62 274.23 1,700.00 301 Capital Projects 873,042.44 64.64 199.68 1,000.00 302 Special Capital Projects 1,004,504.29 74.38 230.15 1,000.00 303 Street Capital Projects Fund 22,848.78 1.69 5.24 0.00 304 Mirabeau Point Project 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 307 Capital Grants Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 309 Parks Capital Project 491,150.39 36.37 112.54 500.00 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 1,318,429.48 97.62 302.07 1,900.00 311 Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 2,048,422.89 151.67 469.32 0.00 312 Capital Reserve Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 402 Stormwater Management 1,483,379.79 109.84 339.87 2,500.00 403 Aquifer Protection Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 875,628.38 64.84 200.62 1,000.00 502 Risk Management 5,100.64 0.38 1.17 0.00 $ 47,902,522.49 $ 3,546.91 $ 11,117.51 $ 85,900.00 *Local Government Investment Pool Page 17 P:IFinancelFor City Council\Council Monthly Reports1201412014 4 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/14/2014 Sales Tax Receipts For the Four-Month Period Ended April 30, 2014 Month Difference Received 2013 2014 $ % February 1,876,298.24 1,891,011.43 14,713.19 0.78% March 1,279,426.01 1,324,975.84 45,549.83 3.56% April 1,295,166.24 1,357,736.39 62,570.15 4.83% 4,450,890.49 4,573,723.66 122,833.17 2.76% May 1,531,483.94 June 1,486,879.22 July 1,568,524.87 August 1,612,535.63 September 1,646,673.39 October 1,650,525.59 November 1,630,334.91 December 1,544,088.55 January 1,584,524.73 18,706,461.32 4,573,723.66 Sales tax receipts reported here reflect remittances for general sales tax, criminal justice sales tax and public safety tax. The sales tax rate for retail sales transacted within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley is 8.7%. The tax that is paid by a purchaser at the point of sale is remitted by the vendor to the Washington State Department of Revenue who then remits the taxes back to the various agencies that have imposed the tax. The allocation of the total 8.7%tax rate to the agencies is as follows: - State of Washington 6,50% - City of Spokane Valley 0.85% - Spokane County 0.15% - Spokane Public Facilities District 0.10% * - Crminial Justice 0.10% * - Public Safety 0.10% * 2.20% local tax - Juvenile Jail 0.10% * - Mental Health 0.10% * - Law Enforcement Communications 0.10% * - Spokane Transit Authority 0.60% * 8.70% * Indicates voter approved sales taxes In addition to the .85% reported above that the City receives, we also receive a portion of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety sales taxes. The distribution of those taxes is computed as follows: Criminal Justice: The tax is assessed county-wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 10% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the County and the cities within the County. Public Safety: The tax is assessed county-wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 60% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the cities within the County. Page 18 H:1Tax RevenuelSales Tax120141sales tax collections 2014 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 1:-'--'1;0 5/7/2014 Sales Tax Collections- March 4 For the years 2005 through 2014 ® �� 2014 to 2013 Difference I 2005 I 2006 1 2007 2008 I 2009 2010 1 2011 1 2012 I 2013 I 2014 $ January 1,367,929 1,572,609 1,759,531 1,729,680 1,484,350 1,491,059 1,460,548 1,589,887 1,671,269 1,677,887 6,618 0.40% February 917,747 1,068,743 1,155,947 1,129,765 1,098,575 963,749 990,157 1,009,389 1,133,347 1,170,640 37,293 3.29% March 1,015,573 1,072,330 1,196,575 1,219,611 1,068,811 1,018,468 1,015,762 1,067,733 1,148,486 1,201,991 53,505 4.66% Collected to date 3,301,249 3,713,682 4,112,053 4,079,056 3,651,736 3,473,276 3,466,467 3,667,009 3,953,102 4,050,518 97,416 2.46% April 1,322,070 1,371,030 1,479,603 1,423,459 1,134,552 1,184,137 1,284,180 1,277,621 1,358,834 0 May 1,159,647 1,392,111 1,353,013 1,243,259 1,098,054 1,102,523 1,187,737 1,174,962 1,320,449 0 June 1,212,663 1,362,737 1,428,868 1,386,908 1,151,772 1,123,907 1,248,218 1,290,976 1,389,802 0 July 1,377,753 1,555,124 1,579,586 1,519,846 1,309,401 1,260,873 1,332,834 1,302,706 1,424,243 0 August 1,395,952 1,405,983 1,516,324 1,377,943 1,212,531 1,211,450 1,279,500 1,299,678 1,465,563 0 September 1,372,081 1,487,155 1,546,705 1,364,963 1,227,813 1,191,558 1,294,403 1,383,123 1,466,148 0 October 1,520,176 1,526,910 1,601,038 1,344,217 1,236,493 1,269,505 1,291,217 1,358,533 1,439,321 0 November 1,095,566 1,369,940 1,443,843 1,292,327 1,155,647 1,139,058 1,217,933 1,349,580 1,362,021 0 December 1,286,191 1,366,281 1,376,434 1,129,050 1,070,245 1,141,012 1,247,920 1,323,189 1,408,134 0 Total Collections 15,043,348 16,550,953 17,437,467 16,161,028 14,248,244 14,097,299 14,850,409 15,427,377 16,587,617 4,050,518 Budget Estimate 12,280,000 16,002,000 17,466,800 17,115,800 17,860,000 14,410,000 14,210,000 14,210,000 15,250,000 16,390,000 Actual over(under)budg 2,763,348 548,953 (29,333) (954,772) (3,611,756) (312,701) 640,409 1,217,377 1,337,617 (12,339,482) Total actual collections as a%of total budget 122.50% 103.43% 99.83% 94.42% 79.78% 97.83% 104.51% 108.57% 108.77% n/a %change in annual total collected 10.93% 10.02% 5.36% (7.32%) _ (11.84%) (1.06%) 5.34% 3.89% 7.52% n/a %of budget collected through March 26.88% 23.21% 23.54% 23.83% 20.45% 24.10% 24.39% 25.81% 25.92% 24.71% %of actual total collected through March 21.94% 22.44% 23.58% 25.24% 25.63% 24.64% 23.34% 23.77% 23.83% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of March 4,500,000 4,000,000 -` --- ---•3,500,000 - r. _______ - lig3,000,000 :... . .-.__--- ..--- .. 2,500,000 T.- s March 2,000,000 - •February 1,500,000 I= IIIII ■January 1,000,000 IN isE 500,000 0 - , , , 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Page 19 H:\Tax RevenuelLodging Tax120141105 hotel motel tax 2014 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/7/2014 Hotel/Motel Tax Receipts through- March Actual for the years 2005 through 2014 ....44 'teams 2014 to 2013 Difference I 2005 I 2006 1 2007 1 2008 I 2009 I 2010 I, 2011 1 2012 I 2013 I 2014 I $ % January 20,691.03 20,653.49 25,137.92 28,946.96 23,280.21 22,706.96 22,212.21 21,442.32 24,184.84 25,425.40 1,241 5.13% February 19,976.81 20,946.09 25,310.66 24,623.06 23,283.95 23,416.94 22,792.14 21,548.82 25,974.98 26,013.62 39 0.15% March 22,828.15 24,308.48 29,190.35 27,509.99 25,272.02 24,232.35 24,611.28 25,654.64 27,738.65 29,383.93 1,645 5.93% Total Collections 63,495.99 65,908.06 79,638.93 81,080.01 71,836.18 70,356.25 69,615.63 68,645.78 77,898.47 80,822.95 2,924 3.75% April 29,748.41 34,371.82 37,950.53 40,406.02 36,253.63 39,463.49 38,230.49 52,130.37 40,979.25 0.00 May 29,017.66 32,522.06 31,371.01 36,828.53 32,588.80 34,683.32 33,790.69 37,478.44 40,560.41 0.00 June 35,330.35 34,256.71 36,267.07 46,659.88 40,414.59 39,935.36 41,403.41 43,970.70 47,850.15 0.00 July 43,841.82 49,744.62 56,281.99 50,421.37 43,950.26 47,385.18 49,311.97 52,818.60 56,157.26 0.00 August 46,852.10 45,916.16 51,120.70 50,818.35 50,146.56 54,922.99 57,451.68 57,229.23 63,816.45 0.00 September 46,746.18 50,126.53 57,260.34 60,711.89 50,817.62 59,418.96 58,908.16 64298.70 70,794.09 0.00 October 34,966.85 38,674.17 43,969.74 38,290.46 36,784.36 41,272.35 39,028.08 43,698.90 43,835.57 0.00 November 26,089.36 36,417.11 36,340.64 35,582.59 34,054.79 34,329.78 37,339.36 39,301.22 42,542.13 0.00 December 31,740.18 29,147.15 31,377.41 26290.11 27,131.43 26,776.84 32,523.19 30,432.13 34,238.37 0.00 Total Collections 387,828.90 417,084.39 461,578.36 467,089.21 423,978.22 448,544.52 457,602.66 490,004.07 518,672.15 80,822.95 Budget Estimate 436,827.00 350,000.00 400,000.00 400,000.00 512,000.00 380,000.00 480,000.00 430,000.00 490,000.00 490,000.00 Actual over(under)budg (48,998.10) 67,084.39 61,578.36 67,089.21 (88,021.78) 68,544.52 22,397.34) 60,004.07 28,672.15 (409,177.05) Total actual collections as a%of total budget 88.78% 119.17% 115.39% 116.77% 82.81% 118.04% 95.33% 113.95% 105.85% nla %change in annual total collected 6.71% 7.54% 10.67% 1.19% (9.23%) 5.79% 2.02% 7.08% 5.85% nla %of budget collected through March 14.54% 18.83% 19.91% 20.27% 14.03% 18.51% 14.50% 15.96% 15.90% 16.49% %of actual total collected through March 16.37% 15.80% 17.25% 17.36% 16.94% 15.69% 15.21% 14.01% 15.02% nla Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of March 90,000.00 80,000.00 • _ 70,000.00 -- ________ 60,000.00 50,000.00 -March zaeislicali 40,000.00 re February 0Jaouary 30,000.00 -_ 20,000.00 10,000.00 IIII0.00 - 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011. 2012 2013 2014 Page 20 H:1Tax RevenuelREE7120141301 and 302 REET for 2014 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA r 5/7/2014 1st and 2nd 1/4%REET Collections through March Actual for the years 2005 through 2014rill 2014 to 2013 _ Difference I 2005 [ 2006 1 2007 I 2008 I 2009 J 2010 I 2011 I 2012 1 2013 I 2014 1 $ January 147,819.56 243,894.16 228,896.76 145,963.47 55281.25 59,887.08 64,128.13 46,358.75 56,898.40 61,191,55 4,293 7.55% February 128,082.35 172,154.72 129,919.79 159,503.34 45,180.53 64,121.61 36,443.36 56,114.56 155,226.07 67,048.50 (88,178) (56.81%) March 198,013.09 182,065.71 263,834.60 133,513.35 73,306.86 86,204.41 95,879.78 71,729.67 72,171.53 79,703.61 7,532 10,44% Collected to date 473,915.00 598,114.59 622,651.15 438,980.16 173,768.64 210,213.10 196,451.27 174,202.98 284,296.00 207,943.66 (76,352) (26.86%) April 192,012.44 173,796.61 211,787.08 128,366.69 81,155.83 99,507.19 79,681.38 86,537.14 90,376.91 0.00 May 240,765.59 306,871.66 222,677.17 158,506.43 77,463.58 109,624.89 124,691.60 111,627.22 116,164.91 0.00 June 284,268.67 226,526.64 257,477.05 178,202.98 105,020.98 105,680.28 81,579.34 124,976.28 139,112.11 0.00 July 209,350.53 2,104.30 323,945.47 217,942.98 122,530.36 84,834.48 79,629.06 101,048.69 128,921.02 0.00 August 280,881.50 451,700.06 208,039.87 133,905.93 115,829.68 72,630.27 129,472.44 106,517.19 117,149.90 0.00 September 214,738.94 188,066.23 165,287.21 131,240.36 93,862.17 75,812.10 68,019.83 63,516.73 174,070.25 0.00 October 244,590.31 211,091.20 206,442.92 355,655.60 113,960.52 93,256.02 61,396.23 238,094.79 117,805.76 0.00 November 190,964.73 141,729.09 191,805.53 147,875.00 133,264.84 72,021.24 74,752.72 104,885.99 78,324.02 0.00 December 159,381.40 161,285.23 179,567.77 96,086.00 71,365.60 38,724.50 65,077.29 74,299.65 75,429.19 0.00 Total distributed by Spokane County 2,490,869.11 2,461,285.61 2,589,681.22 1,986,762.13 1,088,222.20 962,304.07 960,751.16 1,185,706.66 1,321,650.07 207,943.66 Budget estimate 4,006,361.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 760,000.00 800,000.00 950,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,200,000.00 Actual over(under)budget (1,515,491.89) 461,285.61 589,681.22 (13,237.87) (911,777.80) 202,304.07 160,751.16 235,706.66 321,650.07 (992,056.34) Total actual collections as a%of total budget 62.17% 123.06% 129.48% 99.34% 54.41% 126.62% 120.09% 124.81% 132.17% n/a %change in annual total collected - 23.92% (1.19%) 5.22% (23.28%) (45.23%) - (11.57%) (0.16%) 23.41% 11.47% nla %of budget collected through March - 11.83% 29.91% 31.13% 21.95% 8.69% 27.66% 24.56% 18.34% 28.43% 17.33% %of actual total collected through March 19.03% 24.30% 24.04% 22.10% 15.97% 21.84% 20.45% 14.69% 21.51% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of March 700,000.00 600,000.00 - 500,000.00 - - 400,000.00 -March 300,000.00 II February January 200,000.00 100,000.00 ® _ 0.00 - , r 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Page 21 H:1Bonds\debt capacity CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2/4/2014 Debt Capacity 2013 Assessed Value for 2014 Property Taxes 7,168,991,028 Maximum Outstanding Remaining Debt as of Debt % Capacity 12/31/2013 Capacity Utilized Voted (UTGO) 1.00% of assessed value 71,689,910 0 71,689,910 0.00% Nonvoted (LTGO) 1.50% of assessed value 107,534,865 7,435,000 100,099,865 6.91% Voted park 2.50% of assessed value 179,224,776 0 179,224,776 0.00% Voted utility 2.50% of assessed value 179,224,776 0 179,224,776 0.00% 537,674,327 7,435,000 530,239,327 1.38% , ,r- 2003 LTGO Bonds Road & Period Street Ending CenterPlace Improvemen s Total 12/1/2004 60,000 85,0 0 145,000 12/1/2005 75,000 90,0 0 165,000 12/1/2006 85,000 90,00' 175,000 Bonds 12/1/2007 90,000 95,004 185,000 Repaid 12/1/2008 95,000 95,001 190,000 12/1/2009 105,000 100,00' 205,000 12/1/2010 110,000 100,001 210,000 12/1/2011 120,000 105,000 225,000 12/1/2012 130,000 110,000 240,000 12/1/2013 140,000 115,000 255,000 1,010,000 985,000 1,995,000 12/1/2014 150,000 120,000 270,000 12/1/2015 160,000 125,000 285,000 12/1/2016 170,000 130,000 300,000 12/1/2017 180,000 135,000 315,000 12/1/2018 220,000 140,000 360,000 12/1/2019 250,000 145,000 395,000 12/1/2020 290,000 150,000 440,000 12/1/2021 325,000 160,000 485,000 Bonds 12/1/2022 360,000 165,000 525,000 Remaining 12/1/2023 405,000 175,000 580,000 12/1/2024 450,000 0 450,000 12/1/2025 490,000 0 490,000 12/1/2026 535,000 0 535,000 12/1/2027 430,000 0 430,000 12/1/2028 340,000 0 340,000 12/1/2029 295,000 0 295,000 12/1/2030 280,000 0 280,000 12/1/2031 240,000 0 240,000 12/1/2032 190,000 0 190,000 12/1/2033 230,000 0 230,000 5,990,000 1,445,000 7,435,000 7,000,000 2,430,000 9,430,000 Page 22 Rick VanLeuven Ozzie Knezoi. ch Chief ofFolice Shcilif (çOLIr•-, if ) Spokane Valley Police El � Services provided in partnershipwith , 0.4%, 1., dank .0,.. the Spokane County Sheriff's Office and the Community, }Dedicated to Your Safety. TO: Mike Jackson, City Manager FROM: Rick VanLeuven, Chief of Police DATE; May 19,2014 RE: Monthly Report April 2014 April 2014: April 2013: CAD incidents: 4,698 CAD incidents: 4,791 Reports taken: 1,725 Reports taken; 1,847 Traffic stops: 1,013 Traffic stops: 1,051 Traffic reports: 220 Traffic reports: 293 CAD incidents indicate calls for service as well as self-initiated officer contacts. Hot spot maps are attached showing April residential burglaries, traffic collisions, vehicle prowlings, and stolen vehicles. Also attached are trend-line graphs for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013: Citations, Spokane Valley Dispatched Calls, Self-Initiated Calls, Collisions, Persons Crimes, Property Crimes, and Sex Crimes. Also included is the April Crimes by Cities stats report. This report reflects incidents that occurred in a specific city to which a deputy from Spokane County took the courtesy report. For example, an individual may have had his car stolen in Airway Heights, and he waited until he returned home in the Newman Lake area to make a report In 2011, we switched from UCR to NIBRS classification. As a result, certain crimes were broken down to their violation parts for NIBRS and each part is now counted. Consequently, comparing certain crimes before 2011 to crimes during or after 2011 is not possible using the graphs. The crimes that are impacted by the NIBRS classification changes and should not be compared to prior graphs include: Adult Rape, Assault, Forgery and Theft. Page 1 ADMINISTRATIVE: I- _I - We extend our great appreciation to Pat DeVries and Patrick Browning of Denies Business Systems who were instrumental in obtaining and installing 15 cubicle workstations for the Spokane '+. dAO I MP Valley Police Department, which is enhancing our staffing plan for the Investigative Unit. Two additional • detectives are being added to the unit as of May 161h with more to follow. Thank you for your investment into the Spokane Valley Police Department! Chief VanLeuven obtained Executive Level Certification from the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission (CJTC). CJTC enhances public safety by establishing standards and providing education and training. This certification is a non- mandated, career-level certification for law enforcement and corrections personnel. For CJTC purposes, an Executive is defined as a chief, deputy chief, sheriff, undersheriff, superintendent, or director and the incumbent must be in one of those positions to apply. Applicants must successfully complete 80 hours of leadership courses to be eligible to receive this certification. Chief VanLeuven was on-call in mid-April for a one-week period. The Quarterly Leadership Meeting was held in mid-April at the Sheriff's Office Training Center. Chief VanLeuven and others from the Spokane Valley Police Department attended this meeting. One of the Valley Precinct's long-time security guards, Roy, worked his last day at the precinct in late April. At age 82, Roy and his wife dcwnsized to a smaller home and he officially retired, All of us at the Spokane Valley Police Department and District Court extended our best wishes to him at a luncheon. The end. of April brought the Grand Reopening of the Crime Prevention Office at the Spokane Valley Mall. The office is now located upstairs, on the northwest end of the mall, across from the children's play area. The Crime Prevention Office is open Monday through Friday, from 9:00 am to 8:00 pm. Guests visiting the office are greeted by SCOPE volunteers, who come from various SCOPE sub-stations and donate their time to be available to assist our citizens. The Sheriffs Neighborhood Watch Coordinator also works out of this office. SHERIFFS COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING EFFORT (SCOPE): SCOPE volunteers participated in the following events during the month of April: • Crime Victims Resource Fair at the STA Plaza; • Spokane Valley Rotary; Page 2 • Senior Empowerment Expo at CenterPlace; • Paint Your Helmet at the Fairgrounds; • Spokane Guild School Penny Drive; • Drug Take sack Day at the Spokane Valley Precinct; • Valley YMCA Safety Event; • GoodWill GoodGuides Mentoring Program Meeting; ■ East Valley Community Coalition; • Fall Free Spokane Coalition Meeting; • GSSAC Coalition Meeting; and, ■ Operation Family ID. April 2014 Volunteers Hours per Station Location # Volunteers Admin Hours LE,Hours Total Hours Central Valley 13 395.0 33.0 428.0 Edgecliff 15 450.0 19.0 469.0 Trentwood 6 226.5 74.5 301.0 University 21 497.0 208.5 705.5 TOTALS 58 1568.5 335.0 1903.5 Volunteer Value($21.62 per hour)$41,153.67 for April 2014 Spokane Valley Graffiti Report 2012 2013 2014 Jan. 0 2 3 Feb. 0 7 16 March 2 13 11 April 14 9 30 May 16 4 June 15 9 July 41 7 Aug. 57 22 Sept. 26 4 Oct, 30 7 Nov. 19 7 Deo. 37 1 Total 257 92 I 60 S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 71 on-scene hours (including travel time) in April, responding to crime scenes, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control. Of those hours, 23 hours were for incidents in Spokane Valley. The total number of hours Page 3 for Special Events (ValleyFest Bike Ride, and a Fun Run at Ponderosa Elementary as well as a Fun Run at University High School) in Spokane Valley in April totaled 24. Total April volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training, stand-by, response and special events is 520; year-to-date total is 2,015 hours. Abandoned vehicles tagged by S.C.O.P.E. volunteers for impoundment in Spokane Valley in March totaled 16 and in April 20 with 10 vehicles in March and 3 in April, respectively, eventually cited and towed. Nineteen hulks were processed in March and 6 hulks processed in April. During the month of April, a total of 56 vehicles were processed;the total for 2014 to date is 237. SCOPE LATENT PRINT STATS January- April 2014 TRAINING HOURS SCSO SVPD TOTAL January 0 25 35 60 February 0 28 55 83 March 0 43 59 102 April 0 41 32 73 YTD - TOTAL 0 137 181 318 SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT City of Spokane Valley #of #of Hrs #of Disabled #of #of Non- Vol. Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 4 40 4 0 0 February 6 78 25 0 0 March 3 57 11 0 0 April 3 52 2 0 0 Total 16 227 42 0 0 Spokane County #of #of Hrs #of Disabled #of #of Non- Vol. Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 2 11 2 0 0 February 8 10 4 0 0 March 2 23.5 0 0 0 April 4 26.5 0 0 0 Total 10 21 6 0 0 Page 4 OPERATIONS: Incidents In Spokane Valley Possibly Related — In early April, at about 6:00 p.m., a 12-year-old female was walking home from Opportunity Elementary on 10th Ave. when a pickup truck pulled up next to her by the sidewalk. The victim said the truck was a newer, full-size dark blue truck. The victim said the driver, who she described as a white male in his early 30's, stocky build with a dirty blonde beard, asked her how she was doing. The victim was extremely startled due to an incident that happened a few days earlier. The victim said she and her 10-year-old friend were having a sleepover in their family's camp trailer next to her house. She said they looked out the window and saw a male looking inside the trailer. She said the man standing outside the window was the same man that pulled up next to her in the truck. She said the man knocked on the trailer door and tried to open it. She said she called her mom and dad on her cell phone and when her dad came outside, the suspect was gone. The victim's father said they all three went inside the house, and less than a minute later, they heard a loud knock on the front door. The father said he opened the door, but was not able to locate anyone. The victim said after the suspect pulled up next to her in his truck and spoke to her, she yelled at him to leave her alone and ran to a neighbor's yard. She said the suspect drove up to the front of the neighbor's yard, placed a handgun on the dashboard and told her to calm down. The victim told the suspect to leave her alone multiple times as he was telling her to calm down. The suspect eventually drove away eastbound on 10th Ave. from the scene. Anyone who may have seen this truck or suspect matching the listed descriptions in the area of Opportunity Elementary is urged to call Crime Check at 509-456-2233. Driver Passed Out in Drive Thru — In early April, at approximately not long after midnight, Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies Todd Miller and Tyler Kullman responded to a report of a person who appeared to be passed out in his vehicle. The vehicle was blocking the drive-thru at Jack in the Box located at 1505 North Pines in Spokane Valley. The deputies contacted the driver of the vehicle still parked with the engine running at the preview board in the drive-thru. Deputy Miller observed the 34-year-old driver, identified by a Washington ID card, had poor balance, slow movements, slurred speech, red glassy eyes, and had an odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath as he spoke. Deputy Miller asked the suspect to submit to field sobriety evaluations. After the evaluations, based on Deputy Miller's training and experience, the male suspect was arrested for driving while intoxicated. Deputy Miller learned the male's driving privileges where suspended in the 1st degree and he had four prior DUI convictions. He also was required to have an Ignition Interlock Device in his vehicle, which he did not have. The male suspect was transported and booked in the Spokane County Jail for Felony DUI, due to his past convictions, and misdemeanor charges of Driving While License Suspended 1st Degree and Ignition Interlock Violation. A search warrant was obtained for a blood draw and a sample was sent to the lab for testing. The results of the blood test showed his blood alcohol level was 0.14, and was presumptive positive for cannabinoids (marijuana). Juveniles Try to Steal Marijuana From Residence — In early April, at approximately 1:50 a.m., Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies responded to the report of a burglary in the 8000 block of East South Riverway Avenue in Spokane Valley. The victim was reporting he was armed with a shotgun, that a shot had been fired, and that there were several suspects. When deputies arrived, they contacted two victims at the location. They stated their garage had been broken into several times in the last few days, but they hadn't reported the incidents because nothing of value had been Page 5 taken. They believed the suspect might return and attempt to burglarize their garage again, so they installed motion lights and armed themselves with a shotgun and "bear spray." When the homeowners noticed the motion light come on and heard sounds in the garage,they stepped out and emptied the can of bear spray into the garage. The suspects broke out a window and exited the garage. One of the suspects, a 17-year-old juvenile male armed with a machete, was confronted in the front yard of the residence by one of the victims who was armed with the shotgun. The victim stated he yelled for the suspect to stop twice. The juvenile suspect, still armed with the machete, advanced toward the victim who then fired his shotgun toward the fence as a warning. The suspect immediately dropped the weapon and backpack he was carrying and laid down on the ground. When deputies arrived, the juvenile suspect was in the driveway wearing make-shift handcuffs constructed from zip ties. Multiple pieces of evidence were recovered from the scene including an air soft pistol, but the other suspects were not located. The juvenile suspect was arrested and transported to the Spokane County Juvenile Detention Center where he was booked for 1st Degree Burglary. Later in the evening, investigators with the Spokane Valley Police located and arrested a second suspect, a 19-year-old male,who was located at a residence where he had been staying just a few blocks away from where the incident occurred. He was taken into custody without incident, transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail on 1st Degree Burglary charges. It appears from the initial information available that the suspects believed there might be a large stash of marijuana stored at the residence. The investigation is on-going and detectives are still seeking the third suspect related to the crime. Arrest Starts Over Spilt Milk and Soda — In early April at approximately 5:10 p.m., Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies responded to call of a disorderly male at the HICO Convenience Store located at 9219 East Sprague in Spokane Valley. The male was reportedly yelling he had lead poisoning and began pouring soda on the counter. When Deputy Tom Walker arrived and entered the store, he observed a 24-year-old male pouring a half-gallon of milk all over himself. He was able to detained the male without incident. Deputy Chan Erdman arrived and contacted the clerk. He was told the male entered the store and immediately began yelling that he had lead poisoning. The male was sweating and acting very erratic, leading the clerk to believe the male might be high on drugs. The male then took a soda from the cooler and walker up to the counter. He opened the soda and began pouring it on the counter and floor. While the clerk called 911, the male opened a half-gallon of milk, drank some of it, and began walking around the store as he poured it on the floor. A small baggie containing a crystalline substance believed to be methamphetamine was found in the male's pants pocket. A small gray box containing some drug paraphernalia and a small container of marijuana were also located. The substance in the baggie was later field tested and showed a presumptive positive result for methamphetamine. The male was booked into the Spokane County Jail for felony Possession of a Controlled Substance Methamphetamine and misdemeanor charges of Theft 3rd and Malicious Mischief 3rd. Deputies also received a separate report from a second victim that the male broke the windshield of a vehicle at Winco Foods. The victim declined to pursue charges for the damage. Studded Tires, False Names and Methamphetamine — In mid-April at approximately 9:00 p.m., Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Darin Powers observed a white Geo Prism travelling eastbound on Sprague Avenue in Spokane Valley. Deputy Powers heard the distinct sound of studded snow tires coming from the vehicle. He stopped the vehicle and contacted the two female occupants. Page 6 The 49-year-old female driver handed Deputy Powers a Washington Driver's license from her purse initially identifying her with the last name of Davies. This did not match the name of the registered owner of the vehicle and proof of insurance could not be provided. Deputy Powers was told the females borrowed the vehicle, but there seemed to be several inconsistencies with the information provided. He checked the driver's license provided by the driver and learned it was a Class A license with endorsements. He re-contacted the driver and asked her questions about the driver's license endorsement and listed address, which she could not answer. He also explained the picture and physical description on the driver's license did not match. The female continued to deny any wrong doing and insisted her name was Davies. She told Deputy Powers she had additional information in her purse that would help corroborate her identity, but she failed to produce the documentation. Deputy Powers explained if she did not provide her real name, she would be arrested. The female admitted she was lying and identified herself with the last name of Cournoyer. She said was scared and didn't tell the truth because her driver's license was suspended in Alaska. Deputy Powers checked this new information and found no driver's record in Alaska or Washington. Deputy Powers arrested the female and transported her to the Spokane County Jail for Refusal to Provide Information and Fraudulently Providing a Driver's License. Once at the jail, staff knew the female, correctly identified her and confirmed her identity by previous booking photos. After checking her correct information, Deputy Powers learned she had a felony warrant for Possession of a Controlled Substance and a Department of Corrections Hold. He also learned her driving privileges were suspended in Washington. During the search at the jail,jail staff located a clear baggy containing a white crystal substance in her bra area. The substance showed a presumptive positive result for methamphetamine when field tested. The female was additionally booked for the warrants, Possession of a Controlled Substance Methamphetamine, and Driving While Suspended. Theft Suspects Located by Cell Phone Technology — In mid-April just prior to 11:00 p.m., Spokane Valley Sheriff's deputies responded to a report of a theft in the 6400 block of East Trent Avenue in Spokane Valley. When deputies arrived, the female victim explained a dark-haired female snatched the victim's purse, which contained a cell phone, and then ran out of the bar. The victim and a friend exited the bar to try and locate the 23-year-old female suspect. They located the female suspect inside a white Chevrolet Tahoe and observed a male and another female get into the vehicle and drive away. The victim did a great job as a witness and provided the correct license plate of the suspect vehicle. Using the cell phone locater, deputies located the suspect vehicle in the area of the 5500 block of East Cataldo Avenue. They contacted the suspects at a residence and located the victim's purse. Deputies conducted their investigation and arrested the two females. Both were transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail. There was not enough evidence the male knew of the theft and he was not charged. The 23-year-old female suspect was charged with three felony charges of Theft 2"d. The second female suspect was charged with felony Possession of Stolen Property 2nd and for a Washington State Department of Corrections Escape Community Custody warrant. Nine Detained During Valley Search Warrants —In late April, at 9:30 a.m., the Spokane County SWAT Team and Spokane Valley Investigative Unit Detectives served simultaneous search warrants at 4609 N. Calvin and 14323 E. Longfellow. The warrants were the result of a week-long investigation at the residences dealing with stolen property from multiple burglaries in Spokane Valley. There were nine adults detained as a result of the warrants; seven at the Longfellow address and two at the Calvin address. One of the suspects attempted to run from the back yard of the Page 7 Longfellow residence, but was quickly detained by units surrounding the home. Multiple stolen items were recovered at both residences to include power tools, electronics, generators and other high-value items. Investigators also discovered a 12-year-old boy had been assaulted at the Calvin address an unknown number of times. It was determined the boy's father took him to the residence to be "disciplined" by the homeowner. Multiple felony charges are expected against the homeowner and others detained. The Kootenai County Sheriff's Office will take over the other assault allegations against the child since they were determined to have taken place in Idaho. The investigation continues and multiple arrests and charges are expected. Detectives are contacting victims who reported their stolen items in an attempt to return the property to their owners. 14-Year-Old Driver Arrested for DUI — Just before 2 a.m. in late April, Spokane Valley Deputy Todd Miller stopped a vehicle in the area of Sprague and Fancher, after observing the vehicle coming down the off ramp from I-90 without its lights illuminated. The driver verbally identified himself and stated he was born in 1998 (later determined to be 1999). The 14-year-old driver obviously did not have a valid driver's license and offered that the lights on the vehicle were not working. There were also passengers in the vehicle that included the juvenile's 15-year-old brother and 9-year-old brother, and four friends ages 14 years, 11 years, 16 years, and 15 years. The 9- year-old brother had been sitting in the very back of the Jeep on the left side, not in a seat, and was first missed when identifying passengers in the vehicle. The juvenile driver told Deputy Miller he had just picked up the vehicle and was moving it to a friend's house because it was going to be towed; however, his story wasn't adding up. The juvenile driver denied consuming alcohol. When asked about marijuana, he stated he last smoked marijuana two months prior, but not recently. Deputy Miller had the juvenile driver perform standard field sobriety tests, and afterwards it was Deputy Miller's opinion that the juvenile was under the influence of a drug (signs and symptoms consistent with marijuana use). The juvenile eventually admitted he took "a hit" about an hour prior to the traffic stop. Deputy Miller obtained a search warrant for a blood draw of the juvenile driver. During the inventory of the Jeep,prior to it being towed, Deputy Miller located a plastic bag that contained a dried leafy substance that appeared to be marijuana. The juvenile driver stated the marijuana probably belonged to the 15-year-old passenger who had been sitting in close proximity to the marijuana. Deputy Miller eventually cited and released the juvenile driver to his aunt and booked the marijuana onto property as evidence. CPS was also notified of the incident. ******************* Page 8 2014 APRIL CRIME REPORT To date: Yearly totals: Apr-14 Apr-13 2014 2013 2,013 2,012 2011 2010 2009 2008 BURGLARY 104 93 368 359 1101 1062 1027 936 725 753 FORGERY 54 90 206 317 850 826 593 341 297 354 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 132 131 523 548 1628 1770 1566 1183 1245 893 NON-CRIMINAL 14 12 46 41 106 108 160 917 892 944 PROPERTY OTHER 136 127 478 442 1469 1236 1126 837 933 828 RECOVERED VEHICLES 43 43 199 172 541 446 416 365 187 319 STOLEN VEHICLES 42 47 231 202 602 586 566 496 298 496 THEFT 247 214 873 934 3040 2636 2512 2365 2162 1,846 VEHICLE OTHER 27 33 97 103 268 287 195 3 5 7 VEHICLE PROWLING 86 109 432 415 1206 1165 1491 1395 920 1069 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 885 899 3,453 3,533 10,811 10,328 9,615 8,852 7,668 7,513 ASSAULT 90 89 329 281 950 936 963 895 927 869 DOA/SUICIDE 22 25 83 80 225 256 213 188 210 269 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 31 61 118 207 538 600 714 1297 1226 1063 HOMICIDE 1 0 1 0 2 2 3 1 3 3 KIDNAP 2 1 16 4 24 17 15 16 21 16 MENTAL 16 17 94 86 268 270 253 289 310 360 MP 12 8 39 50 156 154 125 128 115 95 PERSONS OTHER 260 288_ 1150 1089 3124 3112 2484 1692 1621 1,354 ROBBERY 7 13 23 36 96 79 98 68 75 71 TELEPHONE HARASSMENT 15 17 49 56 148 212 162 153 159 95 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 456 519 1739 1889 5531 5638 4997 4727 4,667 4,195 ADULT RAPE 5 3 25 20 38 89 67 44 35 44 CHILD ABUSE 7 1 16 5 26 27 89 115 159 148 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 23 13 86 50 236 190 184 206 157 86 SEX REGISTRATION F 0 0 0 0 4 8 2 1 2 3 INDECENT LIBERTIES 4 1 12 8 20 27 17 8 10 11 RAPE/CHILD 2 0 4 3 13 13 23 28 35 39 RUNAWAY 43 39 135 152 397 530 510 490 440 369 SEX OTHER 8 6 22 17 46 38 56 215 211 179 STALKING 2 3 5 9 21 24 19 18 15 21 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 43 43 183 143 440 424 341 215 175 142 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 137 109 488 407 1271 1370 1294 1387 1271 1,108 TOTAL ITF 27 27 117 128 316 430 521 542 671 838 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 220 293 1095 1233 3525 3957 3569 3081 3,183 3,811 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 1,725 1,847 6,892 7,190 21,454 21,723 19,996 18,589 17,460 17,465 2014 APRIL CRIMES BY CITIES (Only crimes handled by Spokane County Sheriff's Office) AH CH DP ! FC FF CAH LL ML MW R1' SCO SPA SPK SSI ', WAV 1 Total BURGLARY 8 0 1 a 1 1 2 1 3 0 73 0 4 104 0 196 FORGERY ME 0 0' 0 4 0 1 0 2 0 37 0 54 0 100 MAL MISCHIEF 0 3 0' 0 0 1 4 4 0, 97 0 I 132 0 244 NON-CRIMINAL 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 01= 14 0 25 PROP OTHER 31 0 3 2 0 0 11 1 1 0 64 1 19 136 0 269 RCRVD VE11 2 0 0 0 0 0 ON 2 0 26 0; 2 43 0 77 STL VE1-1 3 0' 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 27 0 1 42 0 76 THEFT 14 0 7 1 1 1 41 2, 8 1 132 1 112_47 0 420 YEH OTHER 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 14 0 0 27 0 43 VEH PROWL 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 90 0 a 86 0 189 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 69 1 0 18 3 2 0� 13 23 1 565 885 I 0 1,6.39 ASSAULT 4 0 4 1 0 0 3 4 3 1 41 7 90 0 159 DOA/SUICIDE 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 26 0 1 22 0 57 Dv _ 10 ONE 0 0 1 6 2 _0 0 6 1 1 31 0 89 HOMICIDE 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1' 0 1 KIDNAP 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 _ 0 4 MENTAL 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 1 . 0 0 17 0 1 16 0 41 MP 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 12 0 16 PERS OTHER 13 1 6 0 1 0 15 9 4 0 178 0 18 260 0 505 ROBBERY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 7 0 14 TEL-ILA1 ASS 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 15' 0 27 TOT Al_M..JOR CRIMES 30 MEM.® 1 _ 1 27 19 7 1 320 2 29 456 0 913 ADULT RAPE 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 2 5 0 17 CHILD ABUSE _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0. 2 0 0 7 0 9 CCUST IhTE'FER 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 9 0 0 23 0 33 r SEX REGIS F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0` 0 1 0 0 i IND LIBERTY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 5 RAPE/CHILD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 D 2 0 3 RUNAWAY 0' 0 1 0 0 0 0 4° 2 0 27 0 0 43 0 77 SEX OTHER CI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 3 0 1 8 0 12 STALKING 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 01 3 SUSP PERSON 14 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 43 0 3 43 0 108 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 17 0 4 1 1 0 2 5 I 3 0 91 0 7 137 0 268 TOTAL IIF 1 C 1 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 7 0 9 27 0 45 TOTAL TRAFFIC 8 0 50 0®i 1 4 1 1231 3 51 220 0 418 REPORTS PORTS RECEIVED 125 2 45 . 5 4 3S 37 3 1,1061 7 129 INEI 0 3,283 5/61'2014 2414 April 77c.±-74INCIDENTS BY CITIES _ _ (Only incidents handled by Spokane County Sheriffs Office) AI-( CH DP FC FF LASH I LL ML MW RF SCO SPA SPK SV WAV TOTALS CAD INCIDENTS 122 165 280 9 4 2 64 148 80 9 3,208 12 479 4,598 01 9,280 SELF INITIATED INCIDENTS 94: 25 159 2 1 i7 42 82' 29 5 1,057 3 395 1,763 0 3,657 DRUG SELF 1NT(PATROL) 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 9_ TRAFFIC STOPS 30 8 46 0 0 0 18 31 15 3 502 1 20_9 1,013 0 1,876 TRAFFIC STOPS (ARST/CITIIN) 91 0 12 0 0 0 9 8 9 1 211' 1 941 544_ 0 898 TS (WARRANTS) 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 7 15 Cl 32 CALLS FOR SERVICE 28' 140 121 7 3 2 22 66 51 4 2,151 9 84 2,935j 0 5,623 ALARMS 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 110 1 3 95 0 223 ACCIDENTS 2, 4 4 0 01 0 1 0 2 0 118 0 11 135 0[ 277 ACCIDENTS (ARREST/CIT) 0 0 0 0 01 Oi 0 0 0 0' 6 0 0 16 0 22 DRUG CALLS 0 1 1 0 C 0 0 0 0 1 19 0 0 42 0 54 DV 11 0 6 0 0 1 & 6 3 CO 110 2 3 1581 0 306 DUI 0 0 3 0 0' 1 3 0 49 0 8 781 0 142 DUI (ARREST) 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 2 0 0 2 0. 5 PURSUITS 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY 15 11 18 0 01 0 6j 16 13 1 380 0 42 449 C 951 VEHICLE RECOVERED 1 0 0 0 01 0 0 U 11 0 20 01 2 29 C 53 911 ABANDON LINE I 7 43 14 4 11 0 1 7 45 0 196 21 9. 2681 0 556 SHOPLIFTING 0 11 U 0 01 0 0 0 0: 0 1 01 0 40 C 42 ALL ARRESTS(ARREST/CIT/IN) 1 15 0 181 1 01 0 10 10 10 2 310 1 125 774, 0. 1,276 9 j CRIME CHECK REPORTS 0 0 2 12 U 21 0 6 11 16 1 398 1 1 544 0, 992 51812011.4 Spokane Valley Dispatched Calls 4000 3500 x X • 3000 dir 2500 - — _ X2011 2000 --2013 --2014 1500 1000 500 — 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Spokane Valley Self Initiated Incidents 3000 2500 2000 40— :40.644,. 2011 1500 2C12 -2013 X2014 1000 500 - 0 — JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Spokane Valley Person Crimes 350 300 - - A 111\ J 25y,� � ;: • • 200 x-2011 2012 -N-2013 150 X2014 100 50 - 0 - JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Spokane Valley Property Crimes 1000 900 - A 800 , . 4 X00 _ 1r • �. 0 A 600N..- i • 500 . ; ---zolz w —2O1a • —*-201# 400 300 200 100 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Spokane Valley Sex Crimes 50 45 - - e � X � , / Alallikh 40 2 . 3 .lrAdlgr * 4, x•30 ^ e . . 2M2b _ $ _2Q111.1111PP- II . .213. 2g 20 < > - - 15 IF 7 • iO 5 1 O .. JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Charge Count from Tickets: Spokane Valley 1800 — 1600 S a 1400 • A011641 . , 5 120L1 d lAri (.) Allibbro A16. s4V 21312 loco A ir - 201 1 m013 80C - - - A-2014 1 600 - -- 400 - 200 U JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 60101,1 ' . r , lh , 1 WNW.. ! ,,��'�`is E. 111110 7 f.„... z': T. s• .,ydr: R`*` ., Nil 11E2 G___ - r �v yI n r,-j-ii. v t9 _r: e: { e r 1 1� 1 '. n. i III ' =,..-i,. (tit. 16"1 r - • [] ane 814. p. ._ N_ . G . -I r�" )i '� aid `p _ r • L ir=7M ft. µms. .: ■ait-��iL lis - 4 .at' E � Ea om: IR4 ,1J1 �� _ V i s al iG •* [dla :T ; I Ho,,. net' 1, , 6" Spokan ' alley in,..1 .� �m�P to r � " 'E mffir.... .•"114" - i will I all 1111 ;ArAigh. i.mn"or,--- ---..,.-----r-K-- C- \ . ) -Nix1 I :fir Lake �.• .� 111 �� . X11 slip k; ��i_ , r � " i nm W=IEWimmoi pew- �! SII ■4 ■ IF�7wif it- �: �Q.' _ _ ga-0 iffii-41111114r ----Pri-sril �_ 1 �1rit.i -. mitimingi r 1 wi-7111111 r .� 6 iilY, =nom limp a:r �r� �,� 4-11111. eat raLww �" i■r e � �ritILWamp.m..- NIEZI-IWERAIIMILlimli r4 � �-z .r7.ate�' ■. ■. ■ ! ■! ■ 1.1 I iri 11 -i tea' = IIID �i�i Ly r7 dd7 Ti ■tea16. ==ir. M � " P- _ . Tqd �� -iii•!- a 67,_ Ili n ' g x-s. w.irirrl•tir,� ► i ih ,� i —.,..._"—irm „.....,,i,,, 1, ift. 40 fs, ,.._ PE a_ yii 1Pi:11 ;J.r0 `-'�'� WE_q ki, lievi.i- . IL.,/ka,,H.=.4 ..----11:6, 10,,, - -al t tir''''*'°1 * v„ ,, ...I.__ m 7Ci■i Ill _ a ;.' ` ..Tien rM� 1 wiprimo M_ i tit, Crum erciial C.7.;-EOtt r_-..41111m_ ,••.: ,. .�, i Burglaries Me mrilliAl f, it 1' .. I. ' &all :7'4 if • ' :il• % �� ._ 1 ,oma T, y...a . _ Low IR "4,+. 11 Medium 1 #"17,--, x 4 r High LUUMA':{W1U .� I Rim 1,i r2014 � Map Prsduced: I Hiles 2 14 April Commercial Burglary Hotspots rDin r oduc rit rip,„ _. ...... , l 7 �aglA ,„ , _ . Fes 111, d■41, F!: %.7 Ill L ■. r 1mow/ 8 fl 11E' `ice Mr '• +% v 4 moo■ 1 -r.�. w { urnwa ,r.. � ',awls. [R � �� , �^ ,a A V _1_,.=__ ,:•alai Polis _ ; :i .. Gd r. I ■ - °" ? C EJ :gigi. din ,4, I, Ir_ 14 :„... 0!x a Mk ti rg �s :=EN-ii■ =14, C _el �1 _ iy� y. 1+# =Et-, pros . r �(�} •} alley; 3 E_l'l,jsra 1YY�de 'died . ,.4•�;,V = yy■4, 1, iffi � i4 #R•It ,�� �1. 1 p� , we. AIM r� d El-- ! Lake }' i .4 ..linin IL r 1 --, Jam_ -.: " �� plir � -. , I. bei ',gib,• = - — a ' , 111'_ Mil llnEMI If � Adi 111Hrl -.3 111;t.,ifr....0-. gr._ . tam,. rI - ir am nwil ram riiiir=1„...e._d, . milli.% I i I__ ilkirp. _ :_– 0,emmir E iN r '.-IMM' i 4ji1I1II1 1.1vi . ij Wall Al f IMMIME + 11.==F,..7....mmr-11.m11. --."—rilt_13-211= '• = 11,1h,„ i nsin, wirm — .... Joreir 71�CiI.31 E� AiiiiI1111 �' E EES II �EE:7W� � ,G• J ::_rj, 1� r r:.- .1‘.-Mi... lMr f ��.., Iii. Ki r_. 1 ommar! roz,,. / win mr-. II -,,, .11 • . IN 1. ''211111.:1=1.!� _ PTEJy�, g �IVI G. 1 Imo_ •mo i*il. 111 E'7 kdaio=~ Il p r r ��41 ru m ft �j y Burglaries l ' I e aSi.LL 1 vi , f�7�, moi_ - ------•� � :.. l I� 3 L 11 i ' "3.1 ti,1 E{ rHary ux 4 1 . - f,..„,y., a _inib,S�41,mfMIL r .� r r , 'rl� �k kf.yrx � � 03 I 2014 April Residential ential Burglary Hotspots 9 Produced.. I I l , :rt... ...-.., .?,,,.Ally ., 'Pk ...014 1'71.1 L PO X VI LGranke i h - . "'IT go., 6".‘..w ..,"e. vv,0....th Ine ,..iinzamoAlplIMM_'. " .c.,a,_ . '' I ..rA 1.11111MIM .!NIF„ i -,,, - . , . i .,,,. 4,-4, . _ .. .A.r,10,.. 4.,Ge' ; .: ,„, -- .,-- Lacroavz, .1.7, I po ane -- 11 1 x � IgtM ; . ' `' - . ru it roip • y - - i F � : � an J Ili ...tl /i M v1/45i 1 -V F�a■cFNcld: S lc r� a>Il r{ ���u 11 X11 �^ Firs •a - �. _ ■� a, '.1 .t, klii Q3 'TIP .1.4..ffime„.miaidiel.i• ppi verily c �`_ wAlpripFirm:I.. N IleillEllipl rMimi . . meiTir, °lir [-. 1 ii_�.„. ._ .. .....• AN' 1 Int ilki, ill == .,..„.1t-_....i4.44-iwko - • wiminim .. . rte+ Fi E=-•••••• 1011.1. --Jai":z[h =�� ► �L.�l " �ke. •#'" � Elm 131Ld Sf1h � �aw � p1 ossi • a v. 111 : f piJ 1 -rs' ' k—r+ y 1y1 �,...aa. b- - elk-4" p! � 'fir .. peth �"' _ , >I•' � Imo• •aiv.inM�'• i�t♦iil F � �� lir pij -ills itii ' ..4.. � ...�, Fs 4 _ alma N. ,■� .... �3r ] .��f=■ Nd'�t per, 1� " ;N _ x¢51MIL "`{ J yr' � R :IGS ' ��gIMEI•��,.'�F h k `' N-� C� F • 1, 3 T • ': L 1, " U ! !IJII 10 9 Vehicle Si m-r,.. . Tr-- ..19 II , . iii'll.54\67%:441r.:1 4 Or -' ' _L \cie---' 1 EA . 2101 Fr. -1-). mj it. 11. EPA". . 1 IX ELp ,� V i t dium .1111 nil 161L i a '1 L J,N, k �,,#L' R ' High IMMO moi �- e •, .-JCI- o 2014 April Vehicle Prowling Hotspots Map Pr o3 e : Chem , C. --u.:: si .mss Frup Hill L. me 011 MiliWhk , E . ,inediatri._,. , 3 • IIIIITIt'l la& gridg---7717- r ... . oil a 'mi ■ !: SIGs.-. i 1 'ood . ..,q. .utt,.l+r:�_0 b°j �C:. ■ inn i = WI - Ild ... .... _ 'Yi ��I +11=N `. r e,cram�. t yi�lr's+'�'+"'� 's _. -.. L LG �Eg mu iim 7;i.i11* =Eras/111141 imp, • 1. •bra 6i; ' ' I c - bi Y, - _ , I limit 1, l'n 'nom ■ '� 11‘) Spokan ; alley �� Fif �4 q = � * �G�■ice- 11 7 an }.iU �, kl' l•„E Lm ;' to. . 1 1 !nr Oil �. Kenai+ 11111 ..- ' •,, �p • 1i FLf_■�i 'kr....ilinill”` 16}Ir 1,. '' — ` I as 1 1 i. lli pgiair- 7474 �; 1� IES 1011 iloRIMI ■ : `��4' lain j = LA M r��■� G11® ii y � H'-----:'.... .11 � ,Ur-vim, �� 1 11111L11111— != FIEIP`'-.. ■Pi _ I a micMilimillwmak `moi ' 1114 ari di?mi ry R7er. If'iw� 1 .... M c;76th r IELL= f S �i_. IrAMINIi �Q �-rNM:gilliag� F lk - t -14th- I ` - m 1]11 " t figily=1 19kIn - , , 11.=r2M14‘11e121111111W,Pla 11'511'1' k ,1r�,.7� .r" k ` 'aim Apdi_jiiWW4I 11. iPil .. m 61,- iii `:, raw.+"iiiM' 2'. I1rTJ ? . ec :' _` ` Il 4R - 4—v. 141701154:0049 !- ! IUMirl. 1 Stolen . T re Vehicles ■moi �'a?: 1 ii ��## IES "i r ti I • gall Lz_NW ...mlerag ,� lid . ...Y �` `- 0 5 Bi ,002w. sth �{ ' �_ µ � � } i - LAS ■ �, Medium ■ , . , .: c v�1. , ` , _ :. k �6 �`1 U - High IlIlltrlLU 00.5 I Mies 2014 March & April Stolen Vehicle Hotspots Plap Pr Qduc 1 r SPOKANE VALLEY TRAFFIC COLLISIONS 140 120 • • 100 i $n ,ammmAkiom NIL, AO Irv . X2011 • #2013 60 •=.22(111.4 20 0 — JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 'im i1 Jtii Ck'nt.. ,D ��N.E L,., l7 Crea IJ1=I iipii.,,,„ iii ri 4 .s. - 71T H. f99ndslry y '� - •`0` from Hdt ..1 7i ow- �► wain* L i zX I', _�xu,_. q. xti `�'' ' 0 ane A _ � � _ e■' E P r' d i I S:`w $ ,evs d _ �,c� e• - an Park•1 , 00110.20'IVO'. atEfff . - zrIall ' •••- 1 1 .1111.1 1 J rrr A[e i r 4 ParKE ,� I re " e,..... . p iLip iyr:, nii t Ali! :cm— v:Gra 1 4 is1.l #'M =1=.eF ir.11 7011P. `war j 6 IL t �; : $,1r11' i M ...,- .-0-11fa11N111-11-1-.M1.,,,- i-l-1,-e.,,.1. 11 vg . m: —,z.. tie. - A''' llMiill11i11r." ibertyLake lii4uun, mg,. 7 LWftiIliii=.1M_....„..rs1 I-iWZ,a'IL.o_w �r`,41= Broadway r. we 116 tr "' IV ��� it ■� _ MUMIIIXFWES wiir... mr.... • i �w .Li• BianiVIIPPIMI maw. A 41111,1,-.4..e:._ .�. . L �� si l: :' }. NE !— - GO lel `11.tow. 1� sr 11 'rte _ £ C e� ...s sart a a. r Y g , lege^J<a:9�� 11. ryJ�'. 111+ L- lees' Ildmeemz,rom ' .,..bmillaNF l �� rj . 11 7 �aa�� oi- ie. c imm-gr L. cik•6507,._.9 V4-nizzw■ PM t mel- � • � '1:111 Iiirl: V'.a� .' k u .11 sM !IM-.... ^ erK+ 1751'411 �r re�+le,l t :� 14i2 re Traffic .4.1LALEm mm I ' j Goflisicns 3 +,, W i :� Low .0AM aiuiuuuI " MMedium Low ra S.hi, mio ,,,, —. 2 _ t t mi mcLdium 40 ,._, ?..,.. . , ,.,,,,, , : ---co,. , !Ilei r 't t Sy�7i.�bk if0 �� I �le014 April Traffic Collision Hotspots Map Produced: 1 I 09 May 2014 tiolane Valley PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT April 2014 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION Contract Total %of Contract Name Contractor Expended as Contract Amount of 4/30/14 Expended Street Maintenance Poe Asphalt $1,366,663.00 $235,454.30 17.23% Street Sweeping AAA Sweeping $490,199.94 $177,259.56 36.16% Storm Drain Cleaning AAA Sweeping $189,990.00 $10,448.15 5.50% Snow Removal Poe Asphalt $140,000.00 $43,417.00 31.01% Landscaping Ace Landscaping $82,902.72 $9,211.41 11.11% Emergency Traffic Control Senske $10,000.00 $2,121.84 21.22% Litter and Weed Control Geiger Work Crew $60,000.00 $18,616.87 31.03% State Highway Maintenance WSDOT $215,000.00 $113,092.10** 52.60% Traffic Signals, Signs, Striping Spokane County $632,000.00 $78,590.58** 12.44% Dead Animal Control Brad Southard $20,000.00 $2,395.00 11.98% * Budget estimates ** Does not include April 2014 1 Citizen Requests for Public Works 120 — 100 — w w 80 c a cc 60 — c w 40 u 20 M Total Citizen Snow Dead Roadway Pothole Sign& Storm Traffic Requests: Removal Animal Hazard Requests Signal Drainage Requests Public Removal Requests /Erosion Works i i ■Submitted 107 16 6 11 25 29 11 9 ■In Progress 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ■Resolved 107 16 6 11 25 29 11 9 *Information in bold indicates updates 1 WASTEWATER Status of the process can be monitored at: http://www.spokaneriver.net/, http://www.ecy.wa.gov/geographic/spokane/spokane river basin.htm, http://www.spokanecounty.orq/utilities/WaterReclamation/content.aspx?c=2224 and http://www.spokaneriverpartners.com/ STREET MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY The following is a summary of Public Works/Contractor maintenance activities in the City of Spokane Valley for April 2014: • Pothole patching/shouldering • AAA Sweeping began vectoring • Cracksealing began on April 29 • AAA Sweeping swept arterials and began residential sweeping • Poe completed asphalt repairs and completed stormwater projects throughout the City • The Geiger crew began dryland grass cutting and continues with garbage pickup on arterials STORMWATER UTILITY • 2014 Stormwater Small Works and Maintenance Projects — Projects being considered by staff for 2014 work include: Ridgemont City Ponds Maintenance University & 16th, SW corner, failing drywell Sprague / Dishman Mica underpass overflow drywell Dishman Mica, S of 16th, failing drywell Euclid, east of Flora, failing drywell Carnahan - Repair 2 Buried Culverts 22nd, E 16303, WATER INTO 3 DRIVEWAYS (Veracrest) 12th & Fox, school crosswalk, gravel shoulder 22nd, E 11215, GARAGE FLOODING (22nd & Skipworth) 14th, E 6805, GARAGE FLOODED Sunderland & Sprague, new drywells Empire, west of Lockwood, gravel shoulder low spot Gravel Shoulder Puddles ($2,500/location) Decant Facility, Phase 2, water line & meter 9th & Carnahan, pipe sump fail, Staff Ferret, E 10820, Henkens, WATER INTO DRIVEWAY 14th & Vercler, GARAGE FLOODED, swale filled in Locust, N 1608, Mattox, gravel erosion Empire, E 11508, Fisher, WATER INTO DRIVEWAY 16th & Bowdish, SE corner erosion • Draft Stormwater CIP Update — staff began drafting a SW CIP for 2015-2020 and anticipates having that for Council review by mid-May. *Information in bold indicates updates 2 CAPITAL PROJECTS S"' l n Public Works Projects .000.Valley Monthly Summary-Design&Construction April-2014 Estimated Total Project Proposed %Complete Construction Project # Design&Construction Projects Funding Ad Date PE I CN Completion Cost Street Projects ▪0155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement#4508 FHWA-BR 05/16/14 99 0 F 06/15/16 $ 15,833,333 r 0156 Mansfield Ave Connection FHWA-CMAQ r 06/27/14 80 0 ' 12/31/14 $ 2,002,350 ▪0166 Pines Rd.(SR27)&Grace Ave.Int Safety HSIP '07/01/14 15 0 r 10/31/14 $ 671,050 r 0186 Adams Road Resurfacing Project CDBG '03/21/14 100 0 ' 06/30/14 $ 280,800 r 0191 Vista Rd BNSF Xing Safety Improvements WUTC '03/21/14 100 0 ' 08/31/14 $ 50,750 Street Preservation Projects r 0179 2013 Street Preservation Ph2 FHWA-STP(U) '09/20/13 100 0 ' 08/15/14 $ 1,760,000 ▪0180 Carnahan,Indiana&Sprague St.Preser. COSY '08/19/13 100 70 r 05/01/14 $ 1,132,293 r 0187 Sprague Ave Preservation Project FHWA-STP(U) r 07/01/14 15 0 ' 08/31/14 $ 1,379,900 '0196 8th Ave-McKinnon to Fancher COSV .05/30/14 60 0 ' 09/30/14 $ 300,000 ▪0202 Appleway Street Preservation Project COSV 06/01/14 100 0 r 12/31/14 $ 400,000 Traffic Projects ✓0060 Argonne Road Corridor Upgrade(SRTC 06-3)FHWA-CMAQ "07/11/14 95 0 ' 11/15/14 $ 1,290,636 r 0167 Citywide Safety Improvements HSIP '07/01/14 10 0 ' 06/30/15 $ 474,580 '0181 Citywide Traffic Sign Upgrade HSIP '08/01/13 100 90 ' 09/30/14 $ 200,000 Stormwater Projects '0173 Spokane Valley Regional Decant Facility Dept of Ecology r 12/27/13 99 35 ' 12/31/13 $ 885,000 ✓0192 SE Yardley Retrofits Dept of Ecology 06/20/14 60 0 ' 12/31/14 $ 1,000,000 Other Projects '0149 Sidewalk Inf ill FHWA-CMAQ '06/20/14 90 50 ' 06/30/14 $ 1,139,955 Total Design&Construction $ 28,800,647 Design Estimated Total Project Complete %Complete Construction Project # Design Only Projects Funding Date PE Completion Cost Street Projects ✓0123 Mission Ave-Flora to Barker FHWA-STP(U) 12/31/14 5 $ 517,919 '0141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC FHWA-STP(U) 07/31/14 75 $ 175,260 ✓0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan FHWA-STP(U) 09/30/14 90 $ 276,301 ▪0201 ITS Inf ill Project-Phase 1 FHWA-CMAQ 06/01/14 0 $ 327,562 '0205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement Developer 06/01/15 2 $ 51,619 Street Preservation Projects T 0188 Sullivan Rd Preservation Project FHWA-STP(U) 04/01/15 0 $ 1,156,500 Traffic Projects ✓0159 University Road Overpass Study FHWA-CMAQ 04/18/14 80 $ 249,711 ✓0177 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study FHWA-STP(U) 06/30/14 8 $ 200,000 Stormwater Projects ✓0193 Effectiveness Study Dept of Ecology 02/28/15 2 $ 300,000 ▪0197 Broadway,Havana to Fancher SD Retrofit Dept of Ecology 12/31/14 3 $ 60,000 ▪0198 Sprague,Park to University LID Dept of Ecology 08/01/14 3 $ 20,000 ✓0199 Havana-Yale Diversion Dept of Ecology 08/01/14 6 $ 20,000 ▪0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion Dept of Ecology 08/01/14 6 $ 200,000 Other Projects ▪0145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail FHWA-STP(E) 02/15/15 5 $ 745,000 '0176 Appleway Trail COSY 10/31/13 90 $ 150,000 '0185 Appleway Landscaping-Phase 1 COSV 06/16/14 66 $ 268,000 Total Design Only $ 4,717,872 *Information in bold indicates updates 3 GRANT APPLICATIONS • 2014 TIGER Grant Staff submitted a 2014 TIGER grant application for the Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation project on April 28, 2014. Project Name Grant Amount Requested Barker Road Grade Separation Project $15,000,000 TIGER DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM $15,000,000 • 2014 Call for Bridge Projects WSDOT issued a call for bridge projects. Funding for these projects would come from the anticipated $70 to $90 million in Federal Highway Bridge Program funds to be allocated to the State of Washington. Grant applications are due May 5, 2014. Staff is preparing an application for the replacement of the expansion joints on the Fancher Road Bridge (#3502) over the BNSF RR. • 2015-2017 Floodplain Management Project WSDOE is soliciting Preliminary Proposals for inclusion in the agency's budget request for fiscal years 2015-2017. Staff is preparing an application for the Chester Creek Drainage. Preliminary Project Grant Applications are due May 23, 2014. If the preliminary project application makes the cut, a detailed project submittal will be due August 1, 2014. Ecology is submitting a request for no less than $50 M for the 2015- 2017 program. • 2014 SRTC Call for STP Projects Staff submitted applications for the council approved projects on April 30, 2014. Below is a summary table for Improvement, Reconstruction/Preservation, and Non- Roadway projects and the costs we are applying for: IMPROVEMENT CATEGORY: Project Name Estimated Project Cost Mission Ave Improvements— Flora to Barker (PE & RW Previously $4,617,919 Funded) Barker Rd Improvements—Appleway to 1-90 $4,000,000 Sub-Total $8,617,919 RECONSTRUCTION/PRESERVATION CATEGORY: Project Name Estimated Project Cost Broadway/Argonne/Mullan PCC Intersection Reconstruction $1,976,300 (PE& RW Previously Funded) Sullivan/Euclid PCC Intersection Reconstruction (PE already $2,325,260 funded) *Information in bold indicates updates 4 Argonne Rd Reconstruction (PCC)—Indiana to Montgomery $3,750,000 Sullivan Resurfacing—Trent to Wellesley $330,000 Sprague Resurfacing—Sullivan to Corbin $1,770,000 Evergreen Resurfacing—Mission Connector to Indiana Appleway Resurfacing—Park to Dishman Mica $1,190,000 Argonne Resurfacing— Broadway to Indiana $640,000 Sub-Total $11,981,560 NON-ROADWAY CATEGORY: Project Name Estimated y Project Cost Appleway Trail Phase 2— Pines to Evergreen (Construction partially 2,134,057 funded) Sub-Total $2,134,057 STP TOTAL PROJECTS $22,733,536 • Safe Routes to Schools and Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Calls for Projects Staff is working on preparing applications for the council approved projects below. Applications are due to WSDOT by May 5 and May 11, respectively. Safe Routes to School Program 1. Seth Woodard Elementary Sidewalk Improvement Project— Est. Cost$471,500 2. Opportunity Elementary Sidewalk Improvement Project— Est. Cost $438,300 3. Progress Elementary Sidewalk Improvement Project Est. Cost$600,000 4. Trentwood Elementary Sidewalk/Bike Lane Improvement Project Est. Cost$490,000 Progress and Trentwood Elementary were unable to complete their student Tally Sheets by the end of April so their projects were dropped off the list (Items 3 & 4 above). Pedestrian and Bicycle Program 1. Appleway Trail, Phase 3— S Evergreen Road to S Corbin Road— Est. Cost$180,000 Design a new shared use path in the old railroad right-of-way beginning at S Evergreen Road east to S Corbin Road. Include pedestrian hybrid beacons at S Evergreen Road and S Sullivan Road, and include rapid rectangle flashing beacons at S Adams, S Progress, S Conklin, and S Flora Roads. 2. E Indiana Avenue Sidewalk to Transit Stops east of N Pines Road— Est. Cost$85,000 • 2014 Citywide Safety Grant Staff is working on identifying projects to present to council. Applications are due to WSDOT by July 16. *Information in bold indicates updates 5 Spokane Parks and Recreation Department Valley2426 N. Discovery Place • Spokane Valley, WA 99216 509.688.0300 Fax: 509.688.0188 parksandrec@spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: City Council Members; Mike Jackson, City Manager From: Michael D. Stone, CPRP, Director of Parks and Recreation Date: May 27, 2014 Re: Browns Park Master Plan Over the past several years, staff has been working with the Evergreen Region Volleyball Association (ERVA) to provide volleyball programming and events at Browns Park. Browns Park contains four sand volleyball courts that are becoming increasingly popular. If fact, the closest outdoor sand facility is approximately 300 miles west of Spokane in Washington State with no facilities in Idaho or Montana. The ERVA is one of the largest geographic regions within USA Volleyball encompassing Central and Eastern Washington, Northern Idaho and Montana. ERVA is working with the City of Spokane Valley to expand the sand volleyball courts at Browns Park and create a premier outdoor volleyball venue in Spokane Valley. The recently updated Parks and Recreation Master Plan recommends developing Browns Park as a destination sand volleyball venue. In order to pursue this concept, staff embarked upon a public master planning process for the park to determine the public's level of support and interest for potential changes to the park. The master planning process was led by the consultant, Michael Terrell - Landscape Architecture (MTLA). The Browns Park Master Plan is in direct response to the outcomes from the stakeholders meetings and input from the neighborhood. Through the master planning process, two primary park user groups were identified. These groups are neighbors of all ages and the organized Volleyball Association. The two groups require distinctly different facilities and spaces: the neighborhood park area; and the volleyball tournament and league play area. It is important to note that residents, including students from the nearby University High School, play volleyball and that volleyball leagues are family oriented with children of all ages enjoying the park during games. Comments from the public meeting noted that many of the active Volleyball Association members have young families that would enjoy an expanded and improved playground area. Likewise, the sand courts could be used for a variety of events when not in use for volleyball. 1 Many spatial considerations were identified for the renovation of the park. First, in order to make this a premier sand volleyball complex, as many courts as possible must be oriented in the desired orientation. Second, similar park use types should be located within close proximity. Next, design and layout of new park facilities and amenities must consider existing park topography. Lastly, placement of new facilities should consider and strive to maintain as many mature trees as possible. A variety of park infrastructure and facility updates are included in the Master Plan. New concrete walkways would connect visitors from access points of the park to all site facilities. Where it may have been difficult for some visitors to access the restroom or picnic benches in the past, circulation would be improved. In addition, lighting of the parking lots and walkways would increase security of visitors leaving the park at dusk. New trees and landscaping would provide screening and shade in key locations. The Master Plan designates the center and north portions of the park for future sand volleyball court expansion. The expansion of the courts will create more multi-day events which will attract more participants and spectators from out of town and out of state requiring accommodations while utilizing more tourism related activities. Within this area, there is an active volleyball court play component, a group gathering space and picnic areas. Here is where 16 new sand volleyball courts would be installed, allowing for tournament play. A large picnic shelter is located overlooking the championship volleyball court. This is likely where the ERVA would locate their headquarters during a major tournament event. This is also where visitors could gather, sit and enjoy a small music or awards event. The Browns Park Master Plan provides a vision for future development and acts as a guide for revitalization of Browns Park. The process identified a need for expanded and improved neighborhood level park facilities, as well as a shift in active recreational facility demand. As a result of the proposed improvements, Browns Park will be more actively utilized by the neighborhood and could become an economic catalyst for the City of Spokane Valley. Browns Park has a rich history and is loved by a wide range of community members. When Lowell Brown donated the land for Browns Park, his dream was for the space to be used for recreation, for children for years to come. Through time, proposed renovations for the park will change the type of recreation the park promotes, yet will maintain that same goal and dream. Staff will be presenting the draft plan at the June 3 City Council meeting. At that meeting, staff will be seeking input and comments from the City Council. Staff is anticipating bringing the conceptual Master Plan back on June 24 for a motion consideration to approve the cooperative agreement. If you have any questions or need additional information please let me know. Thank you. 2