The URL can be used to link to this page

2014, 06-10 Regular AgendaAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday, June 10, 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 Al Hulten, Valley Assembly 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. PUBLIC HEARING: Amended 2014 Transportation Improvement Plan — Steve Worley 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2015-2020 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan— Steve Worley 3. 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 June 10, 2014 Request for Council Action Form, Totaling: $2,422,835.45 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending May 31, 2014: $430,472.55 c. Approval of May 20, 2014 Study Session Council Meeting Minutes d. Approval of May 27, 2014 Regular Formal Council Meeting Minutes NEW BUSINESS: 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-005, Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Lori Barlow [public comment] 5. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-006, Zoning Map — Lori Barlow [public comment] 6. Motion Consideration: Centennial Trail Agreement — Mike Stone [public comment] Council Agenda 06-10-14 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. Noxious Weed Control Board — Cary Driskell 8. Advance Agenda — Mayor Grafos INFORMATION ONLY 9. Eighth Avenue Reconstruction 10. Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant CITY MANAGER COMMENTS 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION: [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)] Potential Litigation 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 2"—d and 4"—' 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 03rd and 51 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 06-10-14 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 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: PUBLIC HEARING: Amended 2014 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council approved CMAQ/TA Grant Applications on March 12, 2013; Adopted the 2014-2019 Six Year TIP on June 25, 2013, Resolution #13-006; Approved Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) Grade Crossing Protection Fund (GCPF) application on July 30, 2013; Council received an Info RCA January 21, 2014, and heard an Admin Report on February 4, 2014. BACKGROUND: Council adopted the 2014-2019 TIP based upon information staff had at that time relative to available funds and how those funds could be utilized for transportation projects. Since the adoption of the 2014-2019 TIP, staff submitted grant applications for the following projects, which were selected for funding: • Vista Rd / BNSF RR Crossing Safety Improvements (WUTC-GCPF) • Appleway Trail Phase 2 (RW & CN), (partial federal TA Program funding for 2017) Additional proposed changes identified in the Amended 2014 TIP include the following: Removed projects: • Sidewalk Infill Program Phase 3, (CMAQ Funding not received) Added Projects: • Sullivan Rd Resurfacing Project (PE Phase), Sprague to Mission (STP), (Rescheduled) • Fancher Bridge over BNSF RR Expansion Joint Repair (federal BR funding) • Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements (PE Only), (Developer funding) • 8th Ave Reconstruction — McKinnon to Fancher • Appleway Ave Resurfacing — Thierman to Park • Euclid Ave Resurfacing — Flora to Barker (County Sewer Lift Station) • Mullan Rd Resurfacing — Dishman-Mica to Broadway Carryover projects from 2013: • Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Concrete Intersections • Sidewalk Infill Program Phase 2 • University Overpass Study • Citywide Safety Improvements (Bike/Ped) • 2013 Pavement Preservation Projects, Phase 2 o Argonne Rd Resurfacing, Sprague to Broadway (STP) o Sprague Ave Resurfacing, Havana to 1-90 (EB Lanes Only) (STP) o Sprague Ave Resurfacing, 1-90 to Thierman (STP) o Sprague Ave Resurfacing, Herald to University (STP) • 2013 Pavement Preservation Projects, Phase 3 o Sprague Ave Resurfacing, Park to Vista Based on this information, it is recommended that the 2014 TIP be amended to reflect the deletion of the projects that did not receive funding, include those projects that were not completed in 2013 and have carried over to the 2014 construction season, and have those projects added to the 2014 construction season. Since the City uses Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) monies as matching funds for state and federal grants, this amendment to the current -year TIP is necessary to meet the state law that requires REET funds to only be used on projects that have been identified in an adopted plan. Attached is a summary of the proposed changes. Adoption of the Amended 2014 TIP is currently scheduled for June 24, 2014. OPTIONS: Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Public Hearing BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The projects costs shown in the Amended 2014 TIP are preliminary and may be adjusted as refinements are made. There are sufficient capital project funds to cover the local match for these projects. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer Eric Guth, Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Amended 2014 TIP City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Adopted 2014 Transportation Improvement Program Proj. # Project From To Primary Source City Amount Total 2014 Project Costs 1 0060 Argonne Road Corridor Improvements 2 0123 Mission Ave Improvement Project (PE/RW Only) 3 0141 Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (PE) 4 0145 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail (PE Only) 5 0155 Sullivan West Bridge #4508 6 0156 Mansfield Ave Connection Project (PE/RW Only) 7 0166 Pines (SR-27)/Grace Intersection Safety Project 8 0176 Appleway Trail Phase 2 (RW & CN) 9 0177 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study 10 0180 Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project 11 0181 Citywide Traffic Sign Upgrade 12 0186 Adams St. Resurfacing Project 13 0187 Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project 14 0201 ITS Infill Project 15 Sidewalk Infill Program - Phase 3 16 2014 Street Preservation Project Funded Projects Planned Projects 1-90 Flora Sullivan SCC Sullivan Pines (SR 27) Pines (SR 27) @ University 1-90 Vista Various locations 4th Argonne Various locations Various locations Various locations Trent Barker Euclid Valley Mall @Spokane River Houk St. Grace Ave Evergreen Wellesley Argonne Sprague Herald CMAQ STP(U) STP(U) STP(E) BR TIB -UCP HSIP CMAQ STP(U) STP(U) QRSP CDBG STP(U) CMAQ CMAQ City City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Public Hearing Draft AMENDED 2014 Transportation Improvement Program Resolution 14-xxx, (6-xx-2014 ) $ 79,000 $ 582,000 $ 74,000 $ 548,000 $ 7,000 $ 52,000 $ $ 440,000 $ 893,000 $ 8,440,000 $ 13,000 $ 951,000 $ $ 523,000 $ 343,000 $ 2,542,000 $ 27,000 $ 200,000 $ 91,000 $ 670,000 $ $ 100,000 $ 27,000 $ 195,000 $ 98,000 $ 725,000 $ 4,000 $ 26,000 $ 12,000 $ 87,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 3,668,000 $ 18,081,000 Proj. # Project From To Primary Source City Amount Total 2014 Project Costs 1 0060 Argonne Road Corridor Improvements 2 0123 Mission Ave Improvement Project (PE/RW Only) 3 0141 Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (PE Only) 4 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Conc. Intersections (PE/RW) 5 0145 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail (PE Only) 6 0149 Sidewalk Infill Program - Phase 2 7 0155 Sullivan West Bridge #4508 8 0156 Mansfield Ave Connection Project 9 0159 University Rd/I-90 Overpass Study 10 0166 Pines (SR-27)/Grace Intersection Safety Project 11 0167 Citywide Safety Improvements (Bike/Ped.) 12 0177 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study 13 0176 Appleway Trail Phase 2 (CN) 14 0201 ITS Infill Project (PE Only) Sidcwalk Infill Program Phase 3 15 0179 2013 Street Preservation Projects - Phase 2 - Argonne Rd Resurfacing Project - Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project (EB Lanes) - Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project - Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project 16 0180 2013 Street Preservation Projects - Phase 3 - Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project 17 0196 - 8th Ave Reconstruction Project 18 - Appleway Ave Resurfacing 19 - Euclid Ave Resurfacing Project 20 - Mullan Rd Resurfacing Project 21 0181 Citywide Traffic Sign Upgrade 22 0186 Adams St. Resurfacing Project 23 0187 Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project 24 0188 Sullivan Rd Resurfacing Project (PE Only) 25 0191 Vista Rd/BNSF RR Crossing Safety Improvements 26 Fancher Bridge over BNSF RR Expansion Joint Repair 27 0205 Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements (PE Only) 1-90 Flora Sullivan Broadway SCC Various locations Sullivan Pines (SR 27) University Pines (SR 27) @ Various locations 1-90 University Various locations Various location; Sprague Havana 1-90 Herald Park McKinnon Thierman Flora Dishman-Mica Various locations 4th Vista Sprague Vista @ Fancher @ Sprague @ Trent Barker Euclid @Argonne/Mullan Valley Mall @Spokane River Houk St. 1-90 Grace Ave Wellesley Evergreen Broadway 1-90 Thierman University Vista Fancher Park Barker Broadway Sprague Herald Mission BNSF RR BNSF RR Barker CMAQ $ 76,785 $ 568,800 STP(U) $ 171,450 $ 1,270,000 STP(U) $ 18,900 $ 140,000 STP(U) $ 21,330 $ 158,000 STP(E) $ $ 100,000 CMAQ $ 82,000 $ 410,000 BR $ 2,320,000 $ 8,888,189 TIB -UCP $ 270,000 $ 1,522,000 CMAQ $ 10,000 $ 74,000 HSIP $ - $ 640,000 HSIP $ 74,000 $ 472,000 STP(U) $ 21,400 $ 166,700 CMAQ $ 343,213 $ 2,199,000 CMAQ $ 3,500 $ 26,200 CMAQ STP(U) $ 167,400 $ 1,240,000 City $ 300,000 $ 300,000 City $ 300,000 $ 300,000 City $ 400,000 $ 400,000 City $ 227,000 $ 227,000 City $ 215,000 $ 215,000 QRSP $ $ 120,000 CDBG $ 28,000 $ 202,000 STP(U) $ 185,625 $ 1,375,000 STP(U) $ 4,580 $ 33,920 WUTC $ 9,640 $ 45,900 City $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Private $ - $ 55,000 $ 5,259,823 $ 21,158,709 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Funded Projects Added Projects 2013 Carry Over Projects P:\Public Works\Capital Projects\CIP-TIP Funding \2014-2019 TIP\Amended 2014 TIP Amended 2014 TIP.xlsx 6/3/2014 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 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: PUBLIC HEARING: Draft 2015 — 2020 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010, Perpetual advanced six-year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted 2014-2019 Six Year TIP last year on June 11, 2013, Resolution #13-006; Info RCA on Draft TIP Project List, April 15, 2014; Admin Report on Draft TIP Project List, May 20, 2014. BACKGROUND: The City is required by RCW 35.77.010 to prepare and after public hearing adopt a revised and extended comprehensive transportation program for the ensuing six calendar years. This plan must be adopted by June 30th and submitted to the Washington State Department of Transportation before July 31St of each year. The attached draft Six Year TIP incorporates comments received from the April 15th Council Meeting. Updates include modification of the Sprague/Barker project title to reflect intersection improvements, realigning project schedules to coordinate with Spokane County projects, and updating cost estimates based on recent grant applications. The Sidewalk Infill Phase 3 project was moved to the Unfunded List due to lack of available resources. The Sullivan Resurfacing Projects from Sprague to Broadway and Broadway to Mission have been merged into a single project to be completed in 2015. Added Projects: 1. Barker Rd Improvement Project, Appleway to 1-90 — Moved up in schedule due to WSDOT's interchange project. 2. Sprague/Long Sidewalk Project — Funding Received from CDBG 3. Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvements — Beginning design with Developer funds. 4. Pines (SR27)/BNSF Underpass — Moved up in schedule at council's request. Rescheduled Projects: 1. Barker/BNSF Grade Separation — Moved up to accommodate TIGER 6 grant obligation deadline. 2. Fancher/BNSF RR Overpass Bridge Joint Repair Project — CN delayed to 2015 from 2014 to take advantage of grant opportunity. 3. Broadway/Argonne/Mullan Concrete Intersection — Delayed to align with potential STP funding availability. 4. Mission Ave Improvement — Flora to Barker (CN) - Delayed to align with potential STP funding availability. 5. Appleway Trail Phase 3 — Evergreen to Corbin - Delayed to align with future funding opportunities. 6. Appleway Trail Phase 4 — University to Park/Library Site - Delayed to align with future funding opportunities. 7. Barker Rd Improvement — Spokane River to Euclid — Delayed to align with future funding opportunities. 8. Park Road #2 Improvement — Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) - Delayed to align with future funding opportunities. Staff reviewed historical funding levels for federal, state and City funds from the past ten years to estimate projected funding levels available during the next six years. This is done because the final adopted Six -Year TIP is required to be fiscally constrained and reflect realistic expectations of annual funding levels. Other needed and worthwhile projects that do not fit within the limited amount of funding anticipated from state, federal and local (non -City) grants and City revenues are listed in the Unfunded Projects List. Based on council discussion, staff will continue to develop the TIP centered on Council priorities and goals. This draft should be considered a 'work in progress'. It may be updated again after receiving comments from the Public Hearing. A Proposed Resolution to adopt the Plan is scheduled for June 24, 2014. OPTIONS: Public Hearing. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Public Hearing BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: As the proposed 2015-2020 Six Year TIP evolves, staff will coordinate with the Finance Department regarding the city's ability to meet local match grant requirements for future state and federal grants. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, P.E. - Senior Capital Projects Engineer Eric Guth, P.E. - Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: 1) Proposed TIP Projects List 2) Annual List of Projects 3) Projects List with no Current Funding (Unfunded Projects List) 4) Categorized List of Project 5) Total Project Cost Report City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department Public Hearing Draft 2015 - 2020 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Funding Sources: • ARRA • BR • City • CDBG • CMAQ • Developers • EECBG • FHWA • FMSIB • HUD • REET • Other Fed • Other RR • Other State • SP • SRTS • SW • STA • STP(E) • STP(U) • TA • TIB • UAP • UCP • WSDOT • WTSC • WUTC City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works 2015 — 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Glossary & Abbreviations American Recovery & Reinvestment Act Bridge Replacement Program City Funds Community Development Block Grant Congestion Management/Air Quality Private Developer Funds Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Federal Highway Administration Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Program Housing & Urban Development Real Estate Excise Tax Misc. Federal Funding Sources Railroad Funding Misc. State Funding Sources TIB Sidewalk Program Safe Routes to School City Stormwater Funds Spokane Transit Authority Surface Transportation Program (Enhancement) Surface Transportation Program (Urban) Transportation Alternatives Transportation Improvement Board TIB Urban Arterial Program TIB Urban Corridor Program Washington Department of Transportation Washington Traffic Safety Commission Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission Spokane .Valley Funding Status: • S Project Funding is Secured P Project Funding is Planned. The Most Probable Funding Sources have been Identified. Project Phases: • PE • RW • CN Preliminary Engineering Rig ht -of -Way Construction Construction Type: • PCC Portland Cement Concrete • HMA Hot Mix Asphalt • ITS Intelligent Transportation System (Integrated Traffic Signal Control Systems) Street Functional Classifications: Urban: • 14 • 16 • 17 • 19 Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Arterial Local Access Spokane Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 1 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade- 190 to Trent S 0.38 0 0 631 630 City 253 253 CMAQ 377 377 Revise Signal Phasing, Add NB Right Turn Lane at Montgomery, Intersection Improvements at Knox Funding Secured (SRTC 06-31), City Project#0060 Project Total 630 630 2 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Field to s Evergreen Rd (PE) Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned Railroad Right-of-way PE Funded; SRTC #TE10-04; City Project #0145 6.5 492 0 0 491 City STP(E) 248 243 491 Project Total 248 243 491 3 Sullivan Road West Bridge S Reconstruct and widen west (southbound) bridge Recv'd FMSIB, BR & TIB grants; City Project #0155 0.08 0 0 8,440 8,440 BR 2,852 2,852 City 893 893 FMSIB 1,000 1,000 Other 1,945 1,945 Fed UCP 1,750 1,750 Project Total 8,440 8,440 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 1 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 4 Citywide Safety Improvements o 0 0 31 31 City S Other 21 21 Fed Other 10 10 Fed Signal, pedestrian, bike & sign retrofit safety improvements HSIP & QRSP funded; City Project #0167 Project Total 31 31 5 Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements P Intersection improvements to improve capacity PE funded with Developer fees 0 0 12 422 434 City 12 422 434 Develop ers Project Total 12 422 434 6 ITS Infill Project S 0 0 0 301 301 City 41 41 CMAQ 260 260 Installs Fiber along University (4th to 16th), Fancher (Sprague to Broadway) and Broadway (Fancher to Park) CMAQ Funded, City #0201 Project Total 301 301 7 Sprague / Long Sidewalk Project S 0.2 0 0 236 236 City CDBG 236 236 Construct new sidwalk along south side of Sprague (Appleway to Arties Ln) and east side of Long (Sprague to school) CDBG Funded Project Total 236 236 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 2 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 8 2015 Street Preservation Project P 0.26 50 0 1,950 2,000 City 2,000 2,000 Project Total 2,000 2,000 9 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation P Construct Grade Separation at Barker/BNSF RR/ Trent (SR290) 0 FY09 Federal Earmark for $720K, 20% of CN (up to $10M) received from FMSIB 2,050 1,799 25,351 29,200 City 308 602 1,250 750 2,910 Other 180 540 720 Fed Other 1,500 1,706 1,218 731 5,155 State Other- 69 172 104 345 RR Other 3,000 7,500 4,500 15,000 Fed FMSIB 1,014 2,535 1,521 5,070 Project Total 1,988 6,931 12,675 7,606 29,200 10 Bowdish Sidewalk - 8th to 12th P Construct sidewalk along both sides of Bowdish 0.25 48 10 380 438 City 6 52 58 SRTS 46 334 380 Project Total 52 386 438 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 3 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 11 Park Road Sidewalk Project- Sinto Ave. to p Indiana Ave. 0.44 51 10 410 471 City 8 55 63 SRTS 53 355 408 Construct sidewalk along east side of Park Road from 200 -ft S. of Sinto to Indiana Ave. and 165 -ft gap on Mission Ave. east of Park Rd Project Total 61 410 471 12 Sullivan Corridor ITS - 1-90 to Trent (SR 290) 1.75 105 0 809 914 City 14 109 123 S CMAQ 91 700 791 Extend ITS conduit and contols along Sullivan Corridor CMAQ funded, Project Total 105 809 914 13 Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Sprague to Mission S Grind/Overlay; OCI: 31.2; OCI: 32.49 STP Funded 0.67 82 0 1,074 1,156 City 156 156 STP(U) 1,000 1,000 Project Total 1,156 1,156 14 Fancher/BNSF RR Overpass Joint Repair p Project Repair bridge joints on RR overpass 0 29 0 172 200 City BR 200 200 Project Total 200 200 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 4 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 15 2016 Street Preservation Project P 0 50 0 1,950 2,000 City 2,000 2,000 Project Total 2,000 2,000 16 Barker Rd Improvements - South City Limits to p Appleway Widen and Improve roadway to 3 -lane urban section 0.81 326 25 2,502 2,853 City 47 338 385 STP(U) 304 2,164 2,468 Project Total 351 2,502 2,853 17 2017 Street Preservation Project P 0 30 0 1,370 1,400 City 1,400 1,400 Project Total 1,400 1,400 18 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Concrete p Intersections (CN Only) Reconstruct intersections in concrete pavement 0 0 0 1,703 1,703 City 230 230 STP(U) 1,473 1,473 Project Total 1,703 1,703 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 5 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 19 Saltese/Sullivan Traffic Signal P Improvements to Intersection, Install Traffic Signal (In coordination w/ Spokane County) In Coordination w/ Spokane County, COSV only responsible for 1/4 of Project Cost 24 0 226 250 City 62 62 Spo. Co. 188 188 Develop ers Project Total 250 250 20 Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN) P Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement 0 0 0 2,128 2,128 City 287 287 STP(U) 1,841 1,841 Project Total 2,128 2,128 21 2018 Street Preservation Project P 0 30 0 1,370 1,400 City 1,400 1,400 Project Total 1,400 1,400 22 Appleway Trail Phase 3 - Evergreen to Corbin 2.35 214 0 2,860 3,074 City 29 386 415 p CMAQ 185 2,474 2,659 Construct Shared Use Pathway along abandoned Railroad Right -of -Way Project Total 214 2,860 3,074 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 6 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 23 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - 1-90 to p Montgomery Reconstruct pavement in concrete; OCI: 40.35 (2012) 0.25 512 0 3,211 3,723 City 69 433 502 STP(U) 443 2,778 3,221 Project Total 512 3,211 3,723 24 Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (CN) P Widen & Overlay with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities 1 0 0 3,697 3,697 City 499 499 UAP 1,599 1,599 STP(U) 1,599 1,599 Project Total 3,697 3,697 25 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Field to p Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned Railroad Right-of-way 6.5 0 100 4,280 4,380 City 14 289 289 592 TA 86 1,851 1,851 3,788 Project Total 100 2,140 2,140 4,380 26 2019 Street Preservation Project P 0 30 0 1,370 1,400 City 1,400 1,400 Project Total 1,400 1,400 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 7 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 27 Appleway Trail Phase 4 - University Rd. to p Balfour Park Extend Shared Use pathway to Balfour Park 0.5 100 400 700 1,200 City 68 94 162 TA 432 606 1,038 Project Total 500 700 1,200 28 Park Road #2 - Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) 0.75 0 150 2,877 3,027 City 20 388 408 STP(U) 130 2,489 2,619 Reconstruct to a 3 -lane section with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities Project Total 150 2,877 3,027 29 Barker Rd Improvement Project - Appleway to 1- p 90 0.28 382 1,146 2,397 3,629 City 167 324 491 STP(U) 1,065 2,073 3,138 Widen and improve to 5 -lane urban section, Roundabout @ Broadway, Realign east leg of Broadway Project Total 1,232 2,397 3,629 30 Pines (SR27)/ BNSF Underpass - (PE only) P Railroad underpass at Pines (SR -27) / BNSF / Trent 0 1,500 0 0 1,501 City 128 128 STP(U) 1,298 1,298 Other- 75 75 RR Project Total 1,501 1,501 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 8 Spokane _SValley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 31 Barker Rd - Euclid to 0.1 mi. S. of Trent Ave p (SR290) Reconstruct Barker to 3 -lane urban section 0.75 471 100 0 571 City 114 114 UAP 457 457 Project Total 571 571 32 Barker Rd Improvement Project- Spokane p River to Euclid Reconstruct and widen to 3 -lane urban section 0.53 378 25 0 403 City 81 81 UAP 322 322 Project Total 403 403 33 Broadway Improvement Project - Flora to p Barker 0 543 1,000 0 1,543 City 309 309 UAP 1,234 1,234 Extend Broadway arterial to Barker Rd, Realign Broadway connection east of Barker Project Total 1,543 1,543 34 Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) P 0.25 0 0 55 55 City Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road extension north also known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4 -lane roadway with 8 -foot shoulders and a 12 -foot two way left turn lane. Cost reflect City share of project, not total project costs 55 55 Project Total 55 55 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 9 Spolne _ Valley Project / Description / Current Status Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total 35 2020 Street Preservation Project P 0 30 0 1,370 1,400 City 1,400 1,400 Project Total 1,400 1,400 Totals: 7,527 4,777 74,273 86,577 15,460 11,201 18,507 16,031 11,493 13,587 86,279 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an, are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 10 Spokane _.Valley Draft 2015 - 2020 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Totals Secured Projects Planned Projects Totals Year Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total 2015 $7,040 $2,750 $0 $1,357 $11,147 $479 $1,500 $0 $2,334 $4,313 $7,519 $4,250 $0 $3,691 $15,460 2016 $943 $0 $0 $109 $1,052 $4,229 $2,720 $69 $3,131 $10,149 $5,172 $2,720 $69 $3,240 $11,201 2017 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,118 $3,753 $360 $3,276 $18,507 $11,118 $3,753 $360 $3,276 $18,507 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,977 $3,851 $104 $3,099 $16,031 $8,977 $3,851 $104 $3,099 $16,031 2019 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,730 $0 $0 $2,763 $11,493 $8,730 $0 $0 $2,763 $11,493 2020 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,317 $2,013 $75 $3,182 $13,587 $8,317 $2,013 $75 $3,182 $13,587 Total $7,983 $2,750 $0 $1,466 $12,199 $41,850 $13,83 $608 $17,785 $74,080 $49,833 $16,587 $608 $19,251 $86,279 7 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/14/2014 Page 1 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2015 - 2020 Dollars in Thousands 2015 Item # Project Name 1 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade- 190 to Trent 2 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Field to Evergreen Rd (PE) 3 Sullivan Road West Bridge 4 Citywide Safety Improvements 5 ITS Infill Project 6 Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements 7 Sprague / Long Sidewalk Project 8 2015 Street Preservation Project 9 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation 10 Bowdish Sidewalk - 8th to 12th 11 ancher/BNSF RR Overpass Joint Repair Project 12 Park Road Sidewalk Project - Sinto Ave. to Indiana Ave. 13 Sullivan Corridor ITS - 1-90 to Trent (SR 290) 14 Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Sprague to Mission Primary Source CMAQ STP(E) BR Other Fed CMAQ City CDBG City Other State SRTS BR SRTS CMAQ STP(U) City Amount 253 0 893 0 41 12 0 2,000 308 6 40 8 14 156 Total Amount 630 248 8,440 31 301 12 236 2,000 1,988 52 201 61 105 1,156 2015 Totals: $3,731 $15,461 2016 Item # Project Name 2 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Field to Evergreen Rd (PE) 6 Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements 9 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation 10 Bowdish Sidewalk - 8th to 12th 12 Park Road Sidewalk Project - Sinto Ave. to Indiana Ave. 13 Sullivan Corridor ITS - 1-90 to Trent (SR 290) 15 2016 Street Preservation Project Primary Source STP(E) City Other Fed SRTS SRTS CMAQ City City Amount 0 422 602 52 55 109 2,000 Total Amount 243 422 6,931 386 410 809 2,000 2016 Totals: $3,240 $11,201 2017 Item # Project Name 9 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation 16 2017 Street Preservation Project 17 Barker Rd Improvements - South City Limits to Appl eway 18 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Concrete Intersections (CN Only) 19 Saltese/Sullivan Traffic Signal 20 Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN) Primary Source Other Fed City STP(U) STP(U) Spo. Co. STP(U) City Amount 1,250 1,400 47 230 62 287 Total Amount 12,675 1,400 351 1,703 250 2,128 2017 Totals: $3,276 $18,507 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Wednesday, June 04, 2014 Page 1 of 2 2018 Item # Project Name 9 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation 17 Barker Rd Improvements - South City Limits to Appleway 21 2018 Street Preservation Project 22 Appleway Trail Phase 3 - Evergreen to Corbin 23 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - 1-90 to Montgomery 24 Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (CN) 25 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Field to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) Primary Source Other Fed STP(U) City CMAQ STP(U) STP(U) TA City Amount 750 338 1,400 29 69 499 14 Total Amount 7,606 2,502 1,400 214 512 3,697 100 2018 Totals: $3,099 $16,031 2010 Item # Project Name 22 Appleway Trail Phase 3 - Evergreen to Corbin 23 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - 1-90 to Montgomery 25 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Field to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) 26 2019 Street Preservation Project 27 Appleway Trail Phase 4 - University Rd. to Balfour Park 28 Barker Rd Improvement Project - Appleway to I- 90 29 Park Road #2 - Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) Primary Source CMAQ STP(U) TA City TA STP(U) STP(U) City Amount 386 433 289 1,400 68 167 20 Total Amount 2,860 3,211 2,140 1,400 500 1,232 150 2019 Totals: $2,763 $11,493 2020 Item # Project Name 25 Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Field to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) 27 Appleway Trail Phase 4 - University Rd. to Balfour Park 28 Barker Rd Improvement Project - Appleway to I- 90 29 Park Road #2 - Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) 30 2020 Street Preservation Project 31 Barker Rd - Euclid to 0.1 mi. S. of Trent Ave (SR290) 32 Barker Rd Improvement Project - Spokane River to Euclid 33 Broadway Improvement Project - Flora to Barker 34 Pines (SR27)/ BNSF Underpass - (PE only) 35 Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) Primary Source TA TA STP(U) STP(U) City UAP UAP UAP STP(U) City City Amount 289 94 324 388 1,400 114 81 309 128 55 Total Amount 2,140 700 2,397 2,877 1,400 571 403 1,543 1,501 55 2020 Totals: $3,182 $13,587 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Wednesday, June 04, 2014 Page 2 of 2 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Projects w/ No Currently Identified Local Match Within Existing Resources Dollars in Thousands Project Name Sidewalk InfiII Program, Phase 3 Bowdish Road - 16th to Sprague Bowdish Road - 24th to 16th Bowdish Road - 32nd to 24th Bowdish Sidewalk - 12th to 16th Greenacres Trail - Sullivan to E City Limits (RW&CN) Park Road #2 Sidewalk Project - Marietta Ave. to Buckeye Ave. Park Road / BNSF Grade Separation Pavement Management Program - Local Access Pines Corridor ITS - Sprague to 16th Pines (SR27)/ BNSF Underpass (RW, CN Only) Sprague / Argonne -Mullan Concrete Intersections Sprague / Fancher Concrete Intersection Sprague / Thierman Concrete Intersection Sprague / University Concrete Intersection Sullivan / Kiernan Concrete Intersection Sullivan / Marietta Concrete Intersection Sullivan Rd / BNSF Grade Separation Improvements Wellesley Realignment @ Barker/SR290 Description Completes gaps in sidewalk system throughout City, ADA upgrades Sprague to 8th: Inlay & Enhancement; 8th to 16th: Reconstruct as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk, bike lanes and new stormwater facilities Reconstruct Roadway as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk and new stormwater facilities; Reconstruct Roadway as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk and new stormwater facilities; Construct Sidewalk along both sides of Bowdish Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned railroad right-of-way Construct sidewalk along one side of Park Road and 160 -ft gap on north side of Buckeye Ave east of Park Road Reconstruct Park Road to separate the grades of Park Road and the BNSF railroad tracks. Annual street preservation projects Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor Construct grade separation at Pines Rd (SR -27) / Trent Ave (SR 290) / BNSF RR Reconstruct intersections in concrete pavement Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement. Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement Upgrade and widen grade separation at Sullivan/BNSF/Trent (SR290) Realign connection of Wellesley to Barker Rd and SR290, 3 -lane section, Part of Barker/BNSF Grade Separation Total Cost $o $2,858 $2,846 $2,637 $557 $1,095 $143 $16,520 $11,664 $785 $42,000 $2,342 $1,572 $1,243 $1,660 $1,423 $1,493 $45,000 $5,187 Totals: $141,025 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Wednesday, May 14, 2014 Page 1 of 1 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Total Project Costs (Including costs before and beyond the six years of this TIP) Projects Listed by Category for the 2015-2020 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Project Name 2020 Street Preservation Project Description Total: City Cost Total Cost $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 Arterial Improvements Project Name Description Barker Rd Improvements - South Widen and Improve roadway to 3 - City Limits to Appleway Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (CN) Park Road #2 - Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) Barker Rd Improvement Project - Appleway to 1-90 Pines (SR27)/ BNSF Underpass - (PE only) Barker Rd - Euclid to 0.1 mi. S. of Trent Ave (SR290) Barker Rd Improvement Project - Spokane River to Euclid Broadway Improvement Project - Flora to Barker Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) lane urban section Widen & Overlay with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities Reconstruct to a 3 -lane section with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities Widen and improve to 5 -lane urban section, Roundabout @ Broadway, Realign east leg of Broadway Railroad underpass at Pines (SR -27) / BNSF / Trent Reconstruct Barker to 3 -lane urban section Reconstruct and widen to 3 -lane urban section Extend Broadway arterial to Barker Rd, Realign Broadway connection east of Barker Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road extension north also known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4 -lane roadway with 8 -foot shoulders and a 12 -foot two way left turn lane. Total: City Cost Total Cost $385 $499 $418 $491 $255 $837 $661 $1,142 $55 $4,743 $2,853 $3,697 $3,102 $3,925 $3,000 $4,184 $3,302 $5,706 $55 $29,824 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Wednesday, May 14, 2014 Page 1 of 4 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Total Project Costs (Including costs before and beyond the six years of this TIP) Projects Listed by Category for the 2015-2020 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Bridge Projects Project Name Sullivan Road West Bridge Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation Fancher/BNSF RR Overpass Joint Repair Project Description Reconstruct and widen west (southbound) bridge Construct Grade Separation at Barker/BNSF RR/ Trent (SR290) Repair bridge joints on RR overpass Total: City Cost Total Cost $2,360 $19,750 $2,910 $29,200 $0 $201 $5,270 $49,151 Congestion Improvements Project Name Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade- 190 to Trent Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements Description Revise Signal Phasing, Add NB Right Turn Lane at Montgomery, Intersection Improvements at Knox Intersection improvements to improve capacity Total: City Cost Total Cost $434 $434 $868 $1,550 $489 $2,039 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Wednesday, May 14, 2014 Page 2 of 4 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Total Project Costs (Including costs before and beyond the six years of this TIP) Projects Listed by Category for the 2015-2020 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Pedestrian/Bicycle Program Project Name Description City Cost Total Cost Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Construct Shared Use Pathway on $0 $497 Field to Evergreen Rd (PE) abandoned Railroad Right-of-way Sprague / Long Sidewalk Project Construct new sidwalk along south $13 $283 side of Sprague (Appleway to Arties Ln) and east side of Long (Sprague to school) Bowdish Sidewalk - 8th to 12th Construct sidewalk along both sides $58 $438 of Bowdish Park Road Sidewalk Project - Sinto Construct sidewalk along east side of $63 $471 Ave. to Indiana Ave. Park Road from 200 -ft S. of Sinto to Indiana Ave. and 165 -ft gap on Mission Ave. east of Park Rd Appleway Trail Phase 3 - Evergreen Construct Shared Use Pathway $415 $3,074 to Corbin along abandoned Railroad Right -of - Way Spokane Valley -Millwood Trail - Felts Construct Shared Use Pathway on $592 $4,380 Field to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) abandoned Railroad Right-of-way Appleway Trail Phase 4 - University Extend Shared Use pathway to $162 $1,200 Rd. to Balfour Park Balfour Park Total: $1,303 $10,343 Safety Program Project Name Description Citywide Safety Improvements Signal, pedestrian, bike & sign retrofit safety improvements City Cost Total Cost $0 $674 Saltese/Sullivan Traffic Signal Improvements to Intersection, Install $62 $250 Traffic Signal (In coordination w/ Spokane County) Total: $62 $924 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Wednesday, May 14, 2014 Page 3 of 4 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Total Project Costs (Including costs before and beyond the six years of this TIP) Projects Listed by Category for the 2015-2020 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Street Preservation Projects Project Name 2015 Street Preservation Project Description Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Sprague Grind/Overlay; OCI: 31.2; OCI: 32.49 to Mission 2016 Street Preservation Project 2017 Street Preservation Project 2018 Street Preservation Project 2019 Street Preservation Project Total: City Cost $2,000 $156 $2,000 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $8,356 Total Cost $2,000 $1,156 $2,000 $1,400 $1,400 $1,400 $9,356 Street Reconstruction Projects Project Name Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Concrete Intersections (CN Only) Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN) Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - 1-90 to Montgomery Description Reconstruct intersections in concrete pavement Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement Reconstruct pavement in concrete; OCI: 40.35 (2012) Total: City Cost Total Cost $230 $287 $502 $1,019 $1,703 $2,128 $3,723 $7,554 Traffic Operations and Maintenance Project Name ITS Inf111 Project Sullivan Corridor ITS - 1-90 to Trent (SR 290) Description Installs Fiber along University (4th to 16th), Fancher (Sprague to Broadway) and Broadway (Fancher to Park) Extend ITS conduit and contols along Sullivan Corridor Total: City Cost Total Cost $45 $123 $168 $327 $914 $1,241 Overall Total: $23,189 $111,832 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Wednesday, May 14, 2014 Page 4 of 4 City of Spokane Valley Draft 2015 - 2020 Six Year TIP 1111 1111�P; Euclid Argonne Road 1-90 to Trent Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) Spokane Valley - Millwood Trail Felts Field to Evergreen Euclid Barker Road BNSF Grade Separation Barker Road Euclid to 0.1 mile south of Trent (SR 290) Euclid Pines (SR27) BNSF Underpass Euclid Barker Road Spokane River to Euclid Sullivan Corridor ITS Indiana to Trent (SR 290) Mission Ave Flora to Barker Fancher / BNSF RR Overpass Joint Repair Project 1•f 111111k.,_ mom ��.—i•��rj�ll 1111111► "':"::n.""—.. 'ro"`rr'n'+.r�i.+i `—ruIuuIu 1111"`.. Mission Nommrimi ■�' =min.� Alb _ -I -I s ...00-45---.. Ir.'u ufit". gip —0 ormina o .....�.�r..,.141 Arlidas mialia le .ijri. W4ITSI1iII Project fid Argonne Roa Concrete 1-90 to Montgor Park Road Sidewalk Project' �I +— Sinto to Indiana ' , ■.■■■ Broad Argonne Concrete Mission Co v / 1"A" Nomm Broadway11111way/JI ■ &Mullan .Flimuffil 62� ntersections S ew111111 y Trail Phase 4 ��'Tr versity To Balfour Park y VII A�11� ITS Infill ProjecT ��= rig7Boilliwdrilish = � m--- "■ �1 -- , ., ,� � 1I1IUt0=J �� -11 - �1 ::_1_� i`�L1:111�:4r10 . �� 1 ■.1•Iimi , , m 24th ' M. 4.1diratio 24th �1 — Saltese / Sullivan I CM MEMI�MINNEM� � Traffic Signal IIII Ur �=___�`,4` ��= ;, ,, 32nd Broadway Ave Improvement Flora to Barker Appleway Trail Phase 3 Evergreen to Corbin IIIIII um Mil. ■r Ili MEM ME ilrrrt "M� P '�i Ill NMI rllImillI rrlrl 1 .. 1111111111111111111111111 may'` �::me �laglian Emr.1.�rrlromm..,asm�r lm rr... r- —rrrr.rrrnrinrlrl1.-rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrlr IIIIIMii.liiiim.11...r. bsiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimillissiiiimm •!11...--. .=I In 1 I 11 IC ■ j�kaneUlle Sullivan Road Resurfacing Sprague to Mission Barker Road Improvement Project Appleway to 1-90 Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements Barker Road South City Limits to Appleway Sprague / Long Sidewa Ik Project 8th June 4, 2014 3 to O Legend Project Year 2015 2018 2016 2019 2017 2020 Note: Citywide Safety Improvement Projects and 2015 -2020 Street Preservation Projects not shown on this map. CITY Or SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 2014 Department Director Approval: 0 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: ❑ public hearing VOUCHER LIST 05/22/2014 05/23/2014 05/30/2014 05/30/2014 06/03/2014 VOUCHER NUMBERS 32304-32354 32355-32365 32366-32406; 529140034; 529140036 5727-5731 32407-32410 GRA TOTAL: TOTAL AMOUNT $339,063.55 $96,011.19 $1,977,208.25 $515.50 $10,036.96 $2,422,835.45 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on #001 - General Fund 001.011.000.511 City Council 001.013.000.513. 001.013.015.515. 001.016.000. 001.018.013.513. 001.018.014.514. 001.018.016.518. 001.032.000. 001.058.050.558. 001.058.055.558. 001,058.056.558. 001.058.057.558. 001.076.000.576. 001.076.300.576. 001.076.301.571. 001.076.302.576. 001.076.304.575. 001.076.305.571. 001.090.000.511. 001.090.000.514. 001.090.000.517. 001.090.000.518. 001.090.000.519. 001.090.000.540. 001.090.000.550. 001.090.000.560. 001.090.000.594. 001.090.000.595. City Manager Legal Public Safety Deputy City Manager Finance Human Resources Public Works Comm. Develop.- Administration Comm. Develop.— Develop.Eng. Community Develop.- Planning Community Develop.- Building Parks & Rec—Administration Parks & Rec-Maintenance Parks & Rec-Recreation Parks & Rec- Aquatics Parks & Rec- Senior Center Parks & Rec-CenterPlace General Gov't- Council related General Gov't -Finance related General Gov't -Employee supply General Gov't- Centralized Services General Gov't -Other Services General Gov't -Transportation General Gov't -Natural & Economic General Gov't -Social Services General Gov't -Capital Outlay General Gov't -Pavement Preservation Voucher Lists Other Funds 101 -- Street Fund 103 — Paths & Trails 105 — Hotel/Motel Tax 120 — CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121 — Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 123 — Civic Facilities Replacement 204 -- Debt Service 301 — Capital Projects (1' 1/4% REET) 302 — Special Capital Proj (211d 1/4% REET) 303 — Street Capital Projects 304 — Mirabeau Point Project 307 -- Capital Grants 309 — Parks Capital Grants 310 — Civic Bldg Capital Projects 311 — Pavement Preservation 312 —Capital Reserve 402 -- Stormwater Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 — Risk Management 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 05/22/2014 3:38:49PM Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32304 5122/2014 000921 ATO Z RENTALS 162232-1 Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 001.018.013.513 CHAIR RENTAL 347.84 Total : 347.84 32305 5/22/2014 000958 AAA SWEEPING LLC 51641 402,402.000.531 2014 STREET SWEEPING CONTRA 94,367.67 51642 402.402.000.531 2014 STORM DRAIN CLEANING 9,103.66 Total : 103,471.33 32306 5/22/2014 000648 ABADAN, REPROGRAPHICS & IMAGING 32004 402.000.193.531 PRINTED AND BINDED SPECS 201.14 32284 001.032.000.543 PRINTING AND BINDING 47.78 Total : 248.92 32307 5/22/2014 003089 ALL WESTERN MACHINE WORKS 21142 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 997.87 Total : 997.87 32308 5/22/2014 001017 AVTECH SOFTWARE INC M014031424 001.090.000.518 AVTECH MSUS RENEWAL 55.00 Total : 55.00 32309 5/22/2014 003090 BIG R STORES 54789/3 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES:PW 4.10 55029/3 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 8.69 Total : 12,79 32310 5/22/2014 002517 BROWN BEARING CO INC 5847863 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 18.48 Total : 18.48 32311 5/22/2014 000863 CENTURY WEST ENG CORP 234236 101.042.000.542 2014 TIP SERVICES 2,857.07 Total : 2,857.07 32312 5/22/2014 000835 CERIUM NETWORKS LLC 039145 001.090.000.518 CISCO SMARTNET RENEWAL 10,814.91 Total : 10,814.91 32313 5/22/2014 003319 CO -ENERGY, CONNEL OIL 0087202 -IN 101.000.000.542 - OIL PRODUCTS MAINT SHOP 880.72 Total : 880.72 32314 5/22/2014 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 77286214 001.090.000.548 LEASE CONTRACT 001-8922117-00 1,087.48 Total : 1,087.48 32315 5/22/2014 000686 DEPT OF LICENSING 23201 0036377 402.402.000.531 PROF. ENGINEER LICNESE 00363; 116.00 Page: 1 vchlist 05/22/2014 3:38:49PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32315 5/22/2014 000686 000686 DEPT OF LICENSING 32316 5/22/2014 003668 DEPT OF STATE LANDS 32317 5/22/2014 002920 DIRECTV INC 32318 5/22/2014 001926 FARR, SARAH 32319 5/22/2014 000106 FEDEX 32320 5/22/2014 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 32321 5/22/2014 003677 GOOD TO GO! 32322 5/22/2014 002568 GRANICUS INC 32323 5/22/2014 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. (Continued) 71-0914170 23073584845 EXPENSE 2-648-14515 Fund/Dept 001.239.90.01 101.042.000.543 001.018.014.514 Description/Account Amount Total : UNCLAIMED PROPERTY 2013 Total : CABLE SERVICES FOR MAINT SHC Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 001.032.000.543 SHIPIING CHARGES 41763 402.000.193.531 LEGAL PUBLICATION 41937 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 41941 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION TB -145305353 54665 270853 270854 271875 271876 271939 271940 271941 271942 271943 271944 271945 271946 271947 001.058.050.558 001.011.000.511 001.058.050.558 001.058.050.558 001.058.057.558 001.058.057.558 001.018.014.514 001.018.014.514 001.018.016.518 001.018.016.518 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.013.015.515 TOLL BILL FOR LIC. 38904D Total : Total: Total : BROADCASTING SERVICES- COUP Total : COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS 116.00 26.06 26.06 43.99 43.99 56.00 56.00 5.01 5.01 120.00 169.60 79.90 369.50 3.95 3.95 719.59 719.59 102.03 74.82 49.65 7.63 183.50 79.74 164.20 16.88 343.60 99.84 256.62 24.59 77.09 Page: 2 vchlist 05/22/2014 3:38:49PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32323 5/22/2014 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 32324 5/22/2014 000078 HARNOIS, MICKI 32325 5/22/2014 000393 INLAND AUDIO VISUAL 32326 5/22/2014 000864 JUB ENGINEERS INC. 32327 5/22/2014 000786 K & N ELECTRIC MOTORS INC. 32328 5/22/2014 002466 KENWORTH SALES COMPANY 32329 5/22/2014 003238 KPFF CONSULTING ENGINEERS 32330 5/22/2014 003185 LAMB, ERIK 32331 5/22/2014 001944 LANCER LTD 32332 5/22/2014 003251 MDI MARKETING (Continued) 271948 271949 271950 271951 271952 271967 271968 271971 EXPENSE 13342 0087611 0113512 988281 11226430-0314 EXPENSE 0445536 9959 Fund/Dept 001.013.015.515 001.058.057.558 001.058.057.558 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.076.000.576 001.076.301.571 001.058.057.558 001.058.056.558 001.018.013.513 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.000.000.542 403.000.173.594 001.013.015.515 Description/Account Amount COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS COPIER COSTS Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : TV RENTAL Total : TIP DATA MAINTENANCE AND SUP Total : Total : Total : Total : SERVICE FOR PUMP REPAIR WORK: 5-205 DESIGN SERVICES EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 001.013.015.515 BUSINESS CARDS 001.090.000.558 Total : ADVERTISING FOR APRIL 2014 Total : 14.90 496.07 66.44 251.39 28.44 346.21 22.48 5.94 2,712.06 17.39 17.39 326.10 326.10 7,343.74 7,343.74 538.88 538.88 968.08 968.08 239.69 239.69 914.19 914.19 36.14 36.14 13,407.00 13,407.00 Page: 3 vchlist 05/2212014 3:38:49PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 4 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32333 5/22/2014 002203 NAPA AUTO PARTS 32334 5/22/2014 002289 NICKERSON, DEVEN 32335 5122/2014 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. APRIL 2014 EXPENSE 704247276001 708310994001 708469122001 32336 5122/2014 000437 PERIDOT PUBLISHING LLC, LIBERTY LA 16807 32337 5/22/2014 002424 PITNEY BOWES GLOBAL 32338 5/22/2014 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. 32339 5/22/2014 000952 RECALL DESTRUCTION SVC 32340 5/22/2014 002570 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIPMENT CO 32341 5/22/2014 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 32342 5/22/2014 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS 32343 5/22/2014 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 32344 5/22/2014 000862 SPOKANE ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 1428301-MY14 44109 3901153901 612240 5-701852 5-701852-1 INVC064560 INVC064580 51502137 154350 Fund/Dept 101.000.000.542 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.018.014.514 001.090.000.518 001.018.013.513 001.090.000.518 101.042.000.542 001.058.057.558 001.016.000.521 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 Description/Account Amount SUPPLLIES: PW ACCOUNT 164025 Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: FINANCE SUPPLIES: GENERAL Total: ADVERTISING FOR CITY HALL Total : POSTAGE METER RENTAL Total : 2014 STREET AND STORMWATER Total : DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION PERMI Total : AMMO FOR SVPD SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES:PW EQUIPMENT RENTAL Total : Total : Total : APRIL 2014 WORK CREW INVOICE Total : SUPPLIES: PW 47.98 47.98 236.32 236.32 76.41 163.41 53.17 292.99 248.00 248.00 275.00 275.00 139,792.13 139,792.13 33.68 33.68 8,010.46 8,010.46 15.07 15.07 30.14 260.88 12,500.50 12,761.38 6,697.54 6,697.54 441.33 Page: 4 vchlist 05/22/2014 3:38:49PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 5 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32344 5/22/2014 000862 SPOKANE ROCK PRODUCTS INC. (Continued) PAY APP 3 32345 5/22/2014 000093 SPOKESMAN -REVIEW 32346 5/22/2014 000273 SRTC 32347 5/22/2014 003314 STALKER RADAR 32348 5/22/2014 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 32349 32350 32351 32352 32353 5/22/2014 000419 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 1171334 390643 SC0000107998 TS -1832 253008 3230539802 3230539803 3230539804 67662 5/22/2014 003666 SUNDANCE SPR]NKLER/LANDSCAPING 171 5/22/2014 001464 TW TELECOM 5/22/2014 000100 WABO INC. 5/22/2014 001885 ZAYO GROUP LLC 06228111 28797 APRIL 2014 APRIL 2014 B 32354 5/22/2014 000219 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 0168920 0169433 Fund/Dept 311.000.162.595 001.018.013.513 001.018.013.513 402.000.193.531 001.032.000.543 001.016.000.521 001.058.050.558 001.058.050.558 001.058.050.558 001.018.016.518 303.303.156.595 001.076.305.575 001.018.016.518 001.090.000.518 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 Description/Account Amount 2012 ST PRESERVATION PROJECT Total : MEMO INVOICE ACCOUNT 800193; ADVERTISING ACCOUNT 8001932 ADVERTISING ACCOUNT 42365 Total : SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE: SHAR Total : EQUIPMENT FOR SVPD SUPPLIES: CD SUPPLIES: CD SUPPLIES: CD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : Total Total : SPRINKLER INSTALL AT N HOUK R Total : INTERNET/DATA/PHONE LINES: Mf Total : JOB POSTING PLANS EXAMINER Total : HIGH SPEED INTERNET DARK FIBER LEASE SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW Total: 12,570.40 13,011.73 629.50 171.14 707.86 1,508.50 1,540.82 1,540.82 1,486.47 1,486.47 20.21 110.15 164.13 294.49 243.00 243.00 487.52 487.52 1,246.33 1,246.33 50.00 50.00 560.73 409.41 970.14 751.10 412.05 Page: 5 vchlist 0512212014 3:38:49PM Voucher List Page: 6 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32354 5/22/2014 000219 000219 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC (Continued) Total : 1,163.15 51 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 339,063.55 51 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 339,063.55 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: 6 v�;hlist 05/23/2014 12:26:37PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32355 5/23/2014 000030 AVISTA 32356 5/23/2014 000418 CLARK -PARSON, KAREN 32357 5/23/2014 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 32358 5/23/2014 003136 GIBSON, CARLY 32359 5/23/2014 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 32360 32361 32362 32363 32364 32365 5/23/2014 003177 GUTH, ERIC 5/23/2014 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT Apri[ 2014 MAY 2014 Expenses Expenses Expenses lst Qtr 2014 2nd Qtr 2014 Expenses May 2014 5/23/2014 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC June 2014 5/23/2014 000415 ROSAUERS FOOD & DRUG CENTER 681971 5/23/2014 003175 VISIT SPOKANE 6077 5/23/2014 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0059325-1518-1 Fund/Dept Description/Account 001.076.300.576 101.042.000.542 001.076.304.575 001.013.015.515 001.018.014.514 001.090.000.560 001.090.000.560 001.032.000.543 001.076.305.575 001.090.000.518 001.076.301.571 105.000.000.557 402.402.000.531 Amount UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTA UTILITIES: PW MASTER AVISTA Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 2014 ECO DEV GRANT REIMBURSI 2014 ECO DEV GRANT REIMBURSI Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : OPERATING SUPPLIES: CENTERPI Total: CITY HALL RENT Total : SUPPLIES FOR REG PROGRAMS Total : 2014 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB Total : WASTE MANAGEMENT: PW VACTC Total : 11 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 8,079.45 25,743.13 33,822.58 20.00 20.00 772.60 772.60 19.60 19.60 2,213.17 1.859.38 4,072.55 41.44 41.44 161.54 161.54 34,000.00 34,000.00 69.28 69.28 21,059.41 21,059.41 1,972.19 1,972.19 96,011.19 Page: vchlist 05/30/2014 2:20:19PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Z. Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32366 5/30/2014 000648 ABADAN, REPROGRAPHICS & IMAGING 32615 32616 32649 32654 32367 32368 32369 32370 32371 5/30/2014 003076 AMSDEN, ERICA EXPENSE 5/30/2014 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 137463 5/30/2014 000271 BAINBRIDGE, CHRISTINE 5/30/2014 003687 BEAUTY AVENUE 5/30/2014 000796 BUD[NGER & ASSOC INC 32372 5/30/2014 000322 CENTURYLINK 32373 5/30/2014 000571 CODE PUBLISHING COMPANY 32374 5/30/2014 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC 32375 5/30/2014 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 32376 5/30/2014 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST EXPENSE CSV REFUND S13573-2 S13573-3 MAY 2014 46579 JUNE 2014 RE-313-ATB40513055 RE-313-ATB40513057 MAY 2014 Fund/Dept 303.303.155.595 311.000-186.595 303.303.155.595 303.303.155.595 001.032.000.543 Description/Account Amount 11X17 BOUND CIP 0155 BOUND SPECIFICATIONS CIP 0186 SPECIFICATIONS PRINTED CIP 01: PRINT COVERS FRONT/BACK CIP 1 Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 001.013.000.513 001.000.000.321 303.000.196.595 303.000.196.595 001.076.000.576 001.013.000.513 101.042.000.543 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.076.305.575 Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total: REIMBURSE CSV ENDORCEMENT Total 0196 - GEOTECHNICAL & PAVEMEP 0196 - GEOTECHNICAL & PAVEMEP Total : 2014 PHONE SVCS: ACCT 509 Z14 - Total : MUNICIPAL CODE UPDATE Total : COMMON AREA MAINT FACILITY C Total: STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT SIGNAL & ILLUMINATION MAIN Total : 454.37 252.51 673.07 65.22 1,445.17 26.88 26.88 209.81 209.81 246.84 246.84 13.00 13.00 5,204.73 1,320.14 6,524.87 473.23 473.23 684.81 684.81 179.68 179.68 6,236.29 3,208.57 9,444.86 ADVERTISING FOR CENTERPLACE 225.25 Page: vchlist 05/30/2014 2:20:19PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32376 5/30/2014 000912 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST 32377 5/30/2014 003648 DUNDEE CONCRETE & LANDSCAPING 1286 32378 5/30/2014 000746 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 32379 5/30/2014 002507 FASTENERS INC 32380 5/30/2014 003261 FEHR & PEERS 32381 5/30/2014 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 32382 5/30/2014 002235 GRAFOS, DEAN 32383 5/30/2014 000007 GRAINGER 32384 5/30/2014 003667 GREEN SOLUTIONS LLC 32385 5/30/2014 002043 HDR ENGINEERING INC 32386 5/30/2014 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS (Continued) 217156-00-2 S3939508.001 S3944837.001 93281 41979 41980 EXPENSE 9447761611 GS1401-01 00146957-B FINAL INVOICE 102447 102451 102518 97827 98165 CM98936 Fund/Dept 303.303.168.595 501501000.517 Description/Account Amount CURBING FOR CIP 0168 1ST QTR 2014 UI TAX 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 303.303.159.595 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.011.000.511 402.402.000.531 001.090.000.513 303.000.177.595 001.090.000.513 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000,000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 Total: Total : Total : Total : 0159 - UNIVERSITY ROAD OVERPA Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : SUPPLIES: PW Total: SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLA Total : 0177 - FURURE TRAFFIC ANALYST; TIGER VI GRANT APPLICATION - B� Total : SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES:PW SUPPLIES: PW CREDIT MEMO SUPPLIES: PW 225.25 217.40 217.40 5,679.63 5,679.63 0.92 37.40 38.32 1,133.01 1,133.01 66.30 97.75 164.05 53.20 53.20 74.42 74.42 13,805.27 13,805.27 13,446.56 55,376.00 68,822.56 118.25 451.92 50.00 516.33 51.68 -112.83 Page: vchlist 05/30/2014 2:20:19PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: / Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 32386 5/30/2014 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 32387 5/30/2014 003185 LAMB, ERIK 32388 5/30/2014 003593 MCGUIRE BEARING COMPANY 32389 5/30/2014 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER LLP (Continued) CM99551 EXPENSE 2226663-00 492 32390 5/30/2014 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 92336 32391 5/30/2014 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 32392 5/30/2014 002294 PATRIOT DETECTION LLC 32393 5/30/2014 003686 PEEKAY INC DBA LOVERS 32394 5/30/2014 003688 PINE VALLEY ECO PRODUCTS INC 32395 5/30/2014 002288 SARGENT ENGINEERS INC. 32396 5/30/2014 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 32397 5/30/2014 003564 SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL INC 708571058001 714197659001 4634 CRY WOLF 0057355 29074 5968171 6031586 6036852 Fund/Dept 101.000.000.542 001.013.015.515 Description/Account Amount CREDIT MEMO SUPPLIES: PW Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 303.303.060.595 001.018.016.518 001.032.000.543 001.018.016.518 101.042.000.542 001.000.000.342 101.042.000.542 101.043.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 402.402.000.531 817218-R8-00501 001.090.000.513 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SLOTTED NAME BADGE SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: HR SUPPLIES: PW Total: Total: Total : Total : Total : Total : FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT V� Total : SUPPLIES: PW Total : ON-CALL BRIDGE CONSULTING TA Total : 2014 EMERGENCY TRAFFIC CONT 2014 EMERGENCY TRAFFIC CONT 2014 EMERGENCY TRAFFIC CONT Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES -513.61 561.74 188.54 188.54 1,907.78 1,907.78 1,691.20 1,691.20 16.85 16.85 168.47 5.37 173.84 304.63 304.63 130.00 130.00 699.00 699.00 465.33 465.33 169.57 211.97 254.36 635.90 10,320.00 Page: vchlist 05/30/2014 2:20:19PM Voucher List Page: f Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32397 5/30/2014 003564 003564 SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL INC (Continued) 32398 5/30/2014 000994 SIMPSON ENGINEERS INC. 15831-04 32399 5/30/2014 001892 SKILLINGS CONNOLLY INC 8892 32400 5/30/2014 000779 SOUTHARD, BRAD APRIL 2014 32401 5/30/2014 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 51502117 32402 5/30/2014 000311 SPRINT 959698810-078 32403 5/30/2014 001875 STRATA INCORPORATED SP140102-IN 32404 5/30/2014 003206 VAN NESS FELDMAN LLP 111382 32405 5/30/2014 000618 WA DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE 131256-2 32406 5/30/2014 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS INC 0000025304 529140034 5/30/2014 000497 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON JUNE 2014 529140036 5/30/2014 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 9290200594 43 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Total : 303.303.149.595 SIDEWALK INFILL PROJECT CIP 01 Total : 303.303.156.595 RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION SER' Total : 101.042.000.542 DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL SERVICE: Total : 001.016.000.523 APRIL 2014 HOUSING INVOICE Total: 001.058.057.558 GPS PHONE: MAY 2014 Total: 311.000.180.595 0180 - CARNAHAN, INDIANA & SPR Total : 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 303.303.155.595 HPA PROCESSING FEE Total : Total : 101.042.204.595 0204 - SIGNAL EQUIPMENT Total : 204.204.000.592 DEBT SERVICE 2003 LTGO BONDS Total : 001.016.000.521 LAW ENFORCEMENT MAY 2014 Total : Bank total : 10,320.00 274.13 274.13 2,946.30 2,946.30 1,226.00 1,226.00 122, 049.00 122,049.00 70.30 70.30 4,858.00 4,858.00 1,696.00 1,696.00 150.00 150.00 10, 389.77 10,389.77 178, 911.25 178,911.25 1,528,080.43 1,528,080.43 1,977,208.25 43 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,977,208.25 Page: vchlist 05/30/2014 2:28:55PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: /.s. .� Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5727 5/30/2014 003691 AT HOME CARE PARKS REFUND 001237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT ROOM 213 52.00 Total : 52.00 5728 5/30/2014 003690 FOUNDATION FOR PRADER-WILLI PARKS REFUND 001237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT DISCOVERY PL 52.00 Total : 52.00 5729 5/30/2014 003693 JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT FOR GREAT RC 149.50 Total : 149.50 5730 5/30/2014 003692 NEWPORT HIGH SCHOOL, CLASS OF 2C PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT FIRESIDE LOUD 210.00 Total: 210.00 5731 5/30/2014 003689 SERVATRON PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT MIRABEAU ME{ 52.00 Total : 52.00 5 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 515.50 5 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 515.50 Page: vchlist 06/03/2014 1 :47:42PN1 Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 11 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 32407 6/3/2014 001606 BANNER BANK 2321 APR 2014 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 100.00 2321 APR 2014 001.011.000.511 VISIT SPOKANE 40.00 2321 APR 2014 001.011.000.511 CASH & CARRY 15.74 2321 APR 2014 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 20.00 2321 APR 2014 001.011.000.511 ASSOCIATION OF WA CITIES 2,625.00 2321 APR 2014 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 20.00 2321 APR 2014 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 50.00 2321 APR 2014 001.013.000.513 ASSOCIATION OF WA CITIES 375.00 Total : 3,245.74 32408 6/3/2014 001606 BANNER BANK 7511 APR 2014 001.090.000.518 INTRODESK 108.65 7511 APR 2014 402.402.000.531 CIRCLE M CONSTRUCTION & LANE 72.29 7511 APR 2014 001.090.000.518 SCOOTER SOFTWARE 200.00 7511 APR 2014 001.090.000.517 HEART SMART TECHNOLOGY 1,218.60 7511 APR 2014 403.000.192.595 RODEWAY INN AND SUITES 108.69 7511 APR 2014 001.032.000.543 CONTRACT SOLUTIONS GROUP 25.00 7511 APR 2014 402.402.000.531 GREEN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLE 365.00 7511 APR 2014 001.018.014.514 GUITAR CENTER 497.90 Total : 2,596.13 32409 6/3/2014 001606 BANNER BANK 2223 APR 2014 001.018.014.514 ACC[S 250.00 2223 APR 2014 001.013.015.515 MRSC 35.00 2223 APR 2014 001.032.000.543 WA STATE DEPT OF ENTERPRISE 54.35 2223 APR 2014 001.090.000.518 SWEETWATER SOUND 285.90 2223 APR 2014 001.090.000.518 SWEETWATER SOUND 84.99 2223 APR 2014 001.090.000.518 ROAD READY CASES 708.99 2223 APR 2014 001.090.000.518 AMAZON.COM 49.92 2223 APR 2014 001.018.014.514 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS 79.95 2223 APR 2014 001.090.000.519 TARGET 29.15 2223 APR 2014 001.090.000.519 SHOPKO STORES 19.56 2223 APR 2014 001.018.016.518 ASSOCIATION OF WA CITIES 220.00 2223 APR 2014 001.090.000.518 SWEETWATER SOUND 279.99 2223 APR 2014 001.018.016.518 ICMA 445.50 Total : 2,543.30 32410 6/3/2014 001606 BANNER BANK 2784 APR 2014 001.076.301.571 SPOKANE YOUTH SPORTS 50.00 Page: vchlist 06/03/2014 1:47:42PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 79 �2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 32410 6/312014 001606 BANNER BANK (Continued) 2784 APR 2014 001.076.305.575 CONOCO GAS 8.00 2784 APR 2014 001.076.301.571 HOBBY LOBBY 55.10 2784 APR 2014 001.076.000.576 NRPA 524.00 2784 APR 2014 001076.000.576 NRPA 238.31 2784 APR 2014 001.076.000.576 DELTA AIRLINES 604.50 2784 APR 2014 00t076.301.571 HOBBY LOBBY 42.95 2784 APR 2014 00t076.305.575 DOLLARTREE 14.13 2784 APR 2014 001.76.305575 WALMART 33.39 2784 APR 2014 001.076.301.571 HOBBY LOBBY 8141 Total : 1,651.79 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 10,036.96 4 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 10,036.96 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: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 6-10-2014 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 31, 2014 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 263,901.42 $ 5,475.00 $269,376.42 Benefits: $ 150,061.50 $ 11,034.63 $161,096.13 Total payroll $ 413,962.92 $ 16,509.63 $430,472.55 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 20, 2014 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Dean Grafos, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Bill Bates, Councilmember Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Mike Jackson, City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Eric Guth, Public Works Director Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager Martin Palaniuk, Planning Technician Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. Deputy Mayor Woodard moved and it was unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. ACTION ITEM: 1. Motion Consideration: Comprehensive Plan Proposed Amendments — Lori Barlow Mayor Grafos explained the procedure for going through each amendment and after the question by Deputy Mayor Woodard, City Attorney Driskell and City Manager Jackson explained that if a Councilmember makes a motion, that Councilmember cannot speak against the motion but he is still able to vote for or against the motion. In addition, if a motion is not seconded, the motion dies without further discussion. Mr. Jackson further clarified that even if the motion dies, that amendment will still be included in the ordinance with the notation that it did not receive a second motion and findings as to why Council did not move it forward. Senior Planner Barlow explained this is the eighth time presenting the amendments and the only new information she has is the additional requested information provided in the packet pertaining to the property adjacent to the Mirabeau Park property for CPA -01-14, and right -of way and traffic information for CPA -03-14. CPA 01-14: Mirabeau Park, change from Parks/Open Space to Mixed Use Center: It was moved by Councilmember Higgins and seconded to place CPA -O]-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. As there were no questions from Council, Mayor Grafos invited comments from the public; no comments were offered. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he opposes the amendment and that he would like to have more information for additional parking for the trailhead and he said he wants the property to remain as open land and parks. Councilmember Hafner said he wants to see the amendment move forward because the City will have the say as to how it is developed and he said the amendment is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and it provides us with flexibility and ultimate decision making by the Council. Councilmember Wick said he agrees with Councilmember Hafner and said the businesses and hotels in the area want to be able to take advantage of the river as an asset and he said it is good for economic development. Councilmember Bates said he is for the amendment and said it is a great opportunity to develop the Mirabeau Park area. Councilmember Pace Council Study Session 05-20-2014 Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT said he hasn't heard any public comment speaking for the amendment so he said he thinks we can wait. Mayor Grafos said there is no rush and any building would block the view of the river and trail from Mirabeau Park and will change the character of the area. Councilmember Hafner said with the flexibility given to the City to determine what goes in there, it would not necessarily be a building or a negative use. Councilmember Wick said there was public testimony in favor of the amendment from a member of the economic development committee (EDC) and voiced clearly in the meetings of the EDC and in the report that was given by the EDC to Council that businesses and hotels in the area are for this amendment. Councilmember Higgins said he thinks that approving this amendment opens the door to options. Councilmember Pace said he hopes the City would sell the property so as not to compete with other businesses. City Manager Jackson said a purchase and sale agreement or a lease agreement could include provisions as to how the property would be used. Vote by show of hands: In Favor: Councilmembers Bates, Hafner, Higgins, Wick. Opposed: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, Councilmember Pace. Motion passed. CPA 02-14 SCRAPS, Bradley Rd. change from Low Density Residential to Corridor Mixed Use. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -02-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Councilmember Woodard asked about the fence height requirements on Bradley. Ms. Barlow said under residential zoning a six-foot fence is not allowed at the street and would need to be set back twenty feet from the street. Mayor Grafos invited public comment: Mark Schollenburger: said he fears the dogs could get over the fence to harm him or his children or pets and is that he is opposed to the longer operating hours. Nancy Hill, SCRAPS: said the secondary parcel will only be used for leashed adoptable dog -walking, will not have added lighting, and will be kept clean and free of debris and waste. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked if we can restrict the property to a fifty-year No -Build Zone. City Attorney Driskell said he would have concerns using a development agreement for a no -build zone. Councilmember Pace said SCRAPS makes a nice buffer between the commercial and residential neighborhood but said he would like to guarantee no future building. City Manager Jackson said legal will look into that suggestion and bring back to Council at future readings. Councilmember Bates said that SCRAPS is good for the citizens but said that he is not in favor of a zone change. Councilmember Hafner said he is in favor of changing the zone to enable SCRAPS to be what it should be. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, Councilmembers Bates, Hafner, Higgins, Wick. Opposed: Councilmember Pace. Motion passed. CPA 03-14: Barker and Sprague, Low Density Residential to High Density Residential It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -03-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he thinks this site would be better suited to town -homes and will not vote for the amendment. Councilmember Hafner said he agrees with the Planning Commission and that the amendment should be denied. Councilmember Pace said he will not support the amendment. Councilmember Higgins said the infrastructure in the neighborhood does not currently support changing the zone. Councilmember Wick said apartments would be out of place for the neighborhood and the infrastructure does not meet requirements. Mayor Grafos said he doesn't think the zone change is appropriate due to the lack of sidewalks and the traffic on Chapman Rd. Councilmember Pace said he agrees with what Council is saying but he wants to hear everyone's comments with new information. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. 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, vacant apartments in Spokane Valley, that the area is rural and should be kept rural, maintaining the integrity and characteristics of the Council Study Session 05-20-2014 Page 2 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT neighborhood, that they bought their homes based on current zoning; and depreciation of home values and property: Robert Hollick: said the amendment would increase in traffic that hasn't been mitigated. George Covax: said the neighborhood is important to the people who live there. Miranda Colombo: said schools are overcrowded and an apartment building would be a disconnect to the community. Scott Jutte: said the owner has promised to do a good job but they can't promise it won't be sold. Stephanie Colombo: said this is not a practical use of the land and that 400' notice to neighbors is not enough and should be reconsidered. Debbie Sinnerston: said the neighborhood is currently unable to handle the traffic, there are no sidewalks for kids and the schools are over -crowded. Dallas Williams- said there are plenty of apartments in the area, this is a disservice to the community. Jim Johnson: said his issue is the concept for the traffic signal and we should get a graph of the traffic. Zeta Smith: said Barker's two lanes would need to be improved and most houses in the area are single story homes so an apartment building would stick out. Russ Boucher: said he is against the amendment. Wayne Hoff: said he thinks the owner should live with the zone as purchased. David Colombo: said the neighborhood does not meet the guidelines for the proposal. Louis Deegan: said he moved to the area for a better life in rural Greenacres and asked if this apartment goes through, will that set a precedent for future apartments. Clyde Smith: said this will bring crime to the neighborhood and decrease property values. Sondra Belfry: said schools are over -crowded and they are losing high -interest classes to general studies. Gilbert Cook: said there is high traffic on Barker. Peter Higgins: said there is high traffic and we need a new traffic study. William Currier: discussed the core values of the City and said he wants there to be balance with the change. Jackie Williams: said the MF -2 designation was intended to be a retirement setting and the MF-lzoned property is not apartment buildings. Bill Deymonaz: said he is against the amendment and the community has come out to oppose it. Lee Nelson: said the nature of the neighborhood is rural and this is not just a land -use issue. Chelsea Woodward: said she is against the amendment and that we are only hearing from a fraction of the people. Deputy City Clerk Koudelka informed the Council of two comments received in email from Bob Hammond and Caroline Kroko to add to the record. Sean Kim: said he looks forward to seeing more decisions made using common sense. Speaking in favor of the proposal: Todd Whipple, of Whipple Consulting Engineers: said the property doesn't meet the standard of low- density residential (LDR) ground and it is adjacent to MF -2 zoning and across the street from MF -1 zoning. He said the more rural looking a property the more deceptive it is because it lulls people into a false sense of security in a rural setting. He said it is adjacent to a minor arterial and a collector arterial and by the City's definition, that is not LDR ground. He said sometimes the unpopular decision is the correct decision. Patrick Rushing — Airway Heights: did not speak to this issue but said he is impressed with the community involvement and representation at the meeting. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Councilmember Bates. Opposed: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, Councilmembers Hafner, Higgins, Pace and Wick. Motion failed. Mayor Grafos called for a recess at 7:47 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 8:05 p.m. Council Study Session 05-20-2014 Page 3 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT CPA 04-14: City Initiated Text Amendment It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -04-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Mayor Grafos invited public comment: no comments given. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion passed. CPA 05-14: City Initiated Text Amendment It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -05-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Mayor Grafos invited public comment: no comments given. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion passed. CPA 06-14: City Initiated Text Amendment It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -06-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Mayor Grafos invited public comment: no comments given. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion passed. CPA 07-14: City Initiated Text Amendment It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -07-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Mayor Grafos invited public comment: no comments given. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion passed. CPA 08-14: City Initiated Text Amendment It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -08-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Mayor Grafos invited public comment: no comments given. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion passed. CPA 10-14: City Initiated Text Amendment It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place CPA -10-14 in an ordinance for approval consideration at a subsequent Council meeting. Mayor Grafos invited public comment: no comments given. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion passed. NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2015-2020 — Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth discussed the CIP plan and said it is used to leverage funding and align planning to return the best value to our customers. He went through his Powerpoint presentation and explained how projects are programmed into the plan and how we fund the projects that have been programmed He said we have funds in the 402 Reserve fund and we have started spending down that fund balance. By the end of 2014, he anticipates spending $2.3 million with the ultimate goal of spending the fund down to $1 million. He said the projects for 2015 include Small Works projects, Underground Injection Control (UIC) Retrofits that include swales and drywells, Broadway and Havana to Fancher storm sewer improvements, pre -design of Chester Creek Wetland Overflow Improvements, and the Wellhead Protection study and pre -design. He said he would like to bring the plan to Council on May 27, 2014, for approval consideration. Councilmember Pace asked how we know if there is a problem with our wells and Mr. Guth said under our permit with the Department of Ecology, we are required to filter out drainage from roads before injecting it into the aquifer. He said wellhead protection is state regulated and is required of water purveyors to ensure the river is not taking in contaminants Councilmember Pace asked if it is actually measured by the state and Mr. Guth said all wells are tested for contaminants. It was the consensus of Council to advance for a motion consideration. 3. Appleway Landscaping Phase 1 — Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth said this project is on Appleway from Dora to Park Roads and Council approved the project for 2014. He said $250,000 is funded from the street fund plus some additional Council Study Session 05-20-2014 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT stormwater funding. He went through his Powerpoint presentation and discussed the two landscaping options proposed. Option 1 offers landscape behind the sidewalk and edging at the property line. Option 2 separates the sidewalk from the street with landscape between the sidewalk and curb. He said staff recommends Option 2 for its safety and aesthetic enhancements and he said the extra $80,000 to $100,000 for this option can be paid from the utility fund. Mr. Guth said there are areas where the sidewalk can't be separated from the street due to right-of-way issues and existing private fences, but they would be moved wherever possible. It was the consensus of Council to move forward with Option 2. 4. Draft 2015-2020 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) — Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth said the TIP is a work in progress and he asked for further comment from Council as to what they would like brought forward. He said the public hearing is scheduled for June 10, 2014. Councilmember Pace asked if they should go further south to the city limits on Barker Road. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he thinks that portion comes later in the TIP and if not, he'd like that to be added. Councilmember Wick said that portion is scheduled for 2017 in the TIP. Councilmember Bates asked what type of intersection is proposed for Sprague and Barker and Mr. Guth said that is not yet decided and they are seeking to get more input from the neighborhood. He said a roundabout is preferred but that hasn't been decided. It was the consensus of Council to move forward with the projects on the TIP. 4a. Solid Waste Transfer, Transport & Disposal — Mike Jackson, Erik Lamb City Manager Jackson began by clarifying the solid waste system, starting with collection at curbside, then transporting to a transfer station, and then final disposal. He said tonight he is only talking about the transfer, transport and disposal of solid waste and not the collection from residences or businesses. He said this won't change services provided to residents unless they typically self -haul their refuse. He went through the Powerpoint presentation detailing the two options, a Sunshine Recyclers Inc. contract and a Spokane County Interlocal agreement. He said it is important to consider all aspects of the two options. Mr. Jackson said the services provided and the business hours are the same for both options. He then explained the process for selecting a provider going forward, beginning with his administrative report tonight, a motion consideration next week for Council to determine which option to proceed with, then another motion consideration June 3rd to proceed with a final agreement with the vendor selected by Council. Proceeding through the presentation, he said that Sunshine is a ten-year term contract with two three-year extensions and no early opt -out provision. The County agreement is a seven-year term with four five-year extensions and a three-year opt -out provision. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded, and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting for one hour. Mr. Jackson said the rates with sunshine are set at $98.15 per ton for solid waste and $50 per ton for "clean green." He said the County has not provided us with their rates but they estimate $104.59 per ton for solid waste and $47 per ton for "clean green." The escalation with Sunshine is ninety percent of CPI with the first escalation taking place December 1, 2015. He said the escalation is unknown with the County. Deputy City Attorney Lamb highlighted a few important points in the draft contract and draft interlocal agreement. He said section 2, page 3, of the interlocal discusses the three-year opt -out and the seven-year term and said we must give twelve months written notice to the County in advance of opting out. He said if we opt out, we are not required to pay for the balance owed on the transfer station. He said we received updated language today that authorizes us to use either our own plan or the County's plan with regard to planning requirements. He said in section C-1, the County would require the City to adopt flow control and enforcement. Mr. Lamb said staff sees flow control as a benefit to the system so it is not in the best Council Study Session 05-20-2014 Page 5 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT interest of the City to spend our general funds on enforcement of flow control. He said the County has changed that and said they will be required to enforce flow control. Mr. Jackson said that could cause the rates to the system to increase. Mr. Lamb said section C-2 discusses the formation of a Solid Waste Advisory Committee for use as an advisory board and the responsibilities of that board. In the Sunshine contract, Mr. Lamb said page 9 outlines the contractor responsibilities, the provision of transfer, transport and disposal services, which are services currently provided to us from Spokane County. He said page 17, section 4.1, outlines the City's responsibilities and that we have agreed that our collection contracts will designate that we will use Sunshine transfer stations and the City will be responsible for enforcement. He said the City is not obligated to impose mandatory collection. Mr. Lamb said page 26 lists the various defaults and he said six of the major defaults include failure to provide services, release of hazardous waste, improper utilization of the Emergency Operations Plan, assignment of duties, assignment of ownership, and bankruptcy. He said the consequences for defaults are listed on page 27 and include liquidated damages, termination of agreement, keeping the agreement while seeking other services at the expense of Sunshine, court proceedings, a $1 million performance bond to ensure services, and any combination thereof. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded, and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting forty- five minutes. 5. Centennial Trail Draft Agreement — Mike Stone Parks and Recreation Director Stone said the City has been working on this agreement since just after incorporation in 2003 and the draft plan was reviewed by the staff of Washington State Parks, Spokane County and the Cities of both Spokane and Spokane Valley. He said the trail is thirty-seven miles long from the State Line to Nine Mile Falls and gave a brief history of the development and design of the trail. He said the cooperative agreement is comprised of a management plan and a trail maintenance fund as detailed in the presentation included in the packet materials. He said Spokane Valley's portion to contribute to the maintenance fund is $20,000 per year, beginning February 1 of 2015. It was the consensus of Council to bring the agreement forward for approval consideration at a future meeting. 6. Advance Agenda — Mayor Grafos Councilmember Pace said he would like an administrative report to revisit commercial truck parking in neighborhoods. Councilmember Hafner said he doesn't think we are ready to bring it back yet and asked if there have been any complaints or citations issued since the ordinance was adopted and he asked what has changed to warrant revisiting the issue. Woodard said he would like to know if there have been any violations or citations in the no -truck routes and said he would like to see what's happening before moving forward and he also asked if Council thinks there is something wrong with the ordinance now. City Manager Jackson suggested staff provide Council with an information item at a future meeting and then Council can decide if want they want to revisit. Mayor Grafos said he thinks we should bring it back and said he would like it on the advance agenda and Councilmember Pace said he wants an administrative report rather than an information item. Mr. Jackson said staff will add an administrative report for Truck parking to present to Council in the next few weeks. He said we will schedule solid waste for May 27th and June 3rd. Councilmember Wick asked if we could get someone from Washington State Department of Transportation to update Council on the North/South corridor. Mr. Jackson said we will arrange for that. Mayor Grafos asked for information to be provided concerning the rezone of Trent Avenue getting "down -zoned" in 2007 and asked how to get it amended and added onto the Comprehensive Plan and when to start that process. Mr. Jackson said he will check and come back to Council with information. INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS: 7. Commercial Vehicles Parking in Residential Areas was for information only and was not reported or discussed. Council Study Session 05-20-2014 Page 6 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT 8. Council Comments — Mayor Grafos There were no Council comments. 9. City Manager Comments — Mike Jackson Mr. Jackson said Finance Director Calhoun will provide Council with a report pertaining to potential changes to streamlined sales tax mitigation and outline any ramifications or areas of possible Council involvement. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 10:42 p.m. Dean Grafos, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session 05-20-2014 Page 7 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, May 27, 2014 Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: City Staff Dean Grafos, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Bill Bates, Councilmember Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Mike Jackson, City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Mark Calhoun, Finance Director Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Eric Guth, Public Works Director Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director 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 agenda. Due to the possibility of lengthy agenda action items, and as a courtesy, Mayor Grafos said that agenda item #7, admin report from the Spokane Conservation District, will be moved to just prior to the New Business. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Hafner: said he attended several Board of Health meetings regarding governance; went to the CarMax celebration; attended several seminars regarding SCOPE; went to the Health Department meeting where they continue the evaluation of the health officer; and attended several others STA (Spokane Transit Authority) meetings. Councilmember Pace: said he also attended the CarMax opening; went to a Department of Ecology meeting regarding in -stream flows and new rules to protect the aquifer; attended the AWC (Association of Washington Cities) course on the basics for elected officials, which he said was not a good use of taxpayer dollars as he could have just read the material instead of wasting taxpayer's money; went to the STA Board meeting, and a meeting about the Plaza remodel project. Councilmember Higgins: reported he attended the CarMax opening; went to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee where the meeting was more focused than several past meetings, and where Michelle Leonard, leader in the Solid Waste Management planning and facilities, sought to gather input regarding the County's solid waste plan. Councilmember Bates: had no report. Councilmember Wick: said he had no actual meetings but was preparing for the AWC Conference and Joint Legislative Committee; Deputy Mayor Woodard: said he attended a Washington Policy Council health care forum at the Davenport where a Chamber of Commerce representative spoke about some of the challenges of Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 1 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT Chambers and the Affordable Care Act and that so many aspects of that act don't work; said he attended the Lilac Festival Military Lunch; was asked to represent for the Mayor at the Wohelo Awards, which is the Camp Fire's highest youth honor. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Grafos reported that he attended the CarMax opening; was interviewed by Business Talk Radio; presented the outstanding business awards at the Martin Woldson Theater; attended the Council of Mayors' meeting, and the GSI (Greater Spokane, Inc.) Board of Directors 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 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 It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. 7. Spokane Conservation District — Walt Edelen, Garth Davis Spokane Conservation District Water Resources Program Manager Walt Edelen said they are here to make Council aware of some new programs and associated grants and/or low interest loans, and mentioned the Livestock and Land Program and the Septic System Financial Assistance Program, adding that funding for the project is from the Washington State Department of Ecology; he said almost as soon as they released the information, there was a waiting list of applicants; he said the loans are based on income, and they typically have a five-year term repayment plan, although there is criteria for severe hardship cases all the way up to 100% in some cases. Forestry Program Manager Garth Davis then explained about the Tree City USA requirements and that he would like to work with us to make Spokane Valley a Tree City USA. The handouts contained in the Council packet were also referenced. NEW BUSINESS: 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-005, Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Lori Barlow After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded, to advance Ordinance No. 14-005 to a second reading. Senior Planner Barlow explained that this is the ninth meeting where these items have been discussed, and that she was not intending to provide a lot of background, but she briefly highlighted the amendments as contained in the Ordinance. Mayor Grafos said before Council votes, he would go through each amendment individually to determine if anyone wants to amend the motion and that otherwise, all issues will continue to move forward as presented last week. Concerning CPA 01-014, Mirabeau Park Trailhead, Councilmember Higgins said he wanted to discuss this proposal as he would like to disapprove the amendment; said he is not certain approving this would permit any flexibility, but that he is convinced "we can do what we need to within the framework of the current zone;" he also noted by not changing the zoning, it would ensure that a 50' building would not be constructed on the area. After brief discussion on this amendment, all other Councilmembers except Mayor Grafos said they would like to see it approved. It was then moved by Councilmember Higgins and seconded to amend the motion to exclude CPA 01-14 and deny that amendment. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Patty Blakesley, and JoLynn Hill, sisters, individually commented that they would like the park to be left as is; that they walk in the park every morning and enjoy the area, and if it were changed, there would be nothing to prevent another council in the future from allowing a building Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 2 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT there, which they said would ruin the area and add traffic to a currently peaceful area. Dan Allison said he also wants to keep it as is; that he doesn't know why we would propose the change and is not sure where this even came from and asked if staff is pushing to sell or change the area; and suggested leaving it alone. Councilmember Hafner said this is a small piece of property; that we want the natural habitat and there is a misconception that this Council would do anything other than the best thing for this city. Councilmember Wick added that during the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee meetings, it was noted that the River is a real asset but we are not using it to the fullest, and such things as bike, skate or other rentals could be a positive asset. Vote on whether to amend the motion: In Favor: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Higgins and Pace. Opposed: Councilmembers Bates, Wick and Hafner. The motion passed to amend the motion. Concerning CPA 02-14, Bradley Road, SCRAPS proposal, there was discussion concerning what uses would be permitted on that parcel if the zone were changed, and Ms. Barlow explained that a range of commercial uses would be permitted including lodging, retail and some light assembly, and she also noted that the County owns the property. Mr. Jackson said a question arose last week about staff researching other alternatives, and City Attorney Driskell explained that most other options would take some time to work through; that a deed restriction is possible as well as amending the current Interlocal agreement for the provision of animal services; said based on where this issue is now, if Council wants to look at implementing conditions for this proposal, that perhaps Council should consider denying this and bring it back in the future, as today's issue is whether it can be approved as it is. Councilmember Pace said there is no need not to trust that this use will occur as SCRAPS indicated, and he encouraged approval. Councilmember Bates noted that there is nothing in writing about the use if this were to proceed and Mr. Jackson concurred that there is nothing specific in the current Interlocal agreement about this parcel. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Nancy Hill summarized the highlights of the proposal and the use of the lot and emphasized that leash dog walking has far less impact than the currently allowed three dogs pre residential; she said there is no outside lighting on the parcel and none will be added, and that this is a fifty-year plan and SCRAPS promises to be a good neighbor. Mark Shollenberger said his biggest fear is the animals escaping and said it will happen and after it happens the first time, this Council will regret it; said his dogs have never escaped from his backyard but with this change, his dogs would have a reason to escape; asked what if someone gets mauled by a dog; said the area needs a 20' beauty zone and a minimum eight foot fence; that he has tried to buy that property for over thirty-five years and it was never for sale. County Commissioner Todd Mielke said they have worked on this issue for a long time; and if that man's dogs have never escaped, he likes to think the SCRAPS dogs won't either; said theirs is a long term goal; and he spoke for having the parcels consistent; said the people who work at SCRAPS are probably the most experienced animal workers in the entire region. There were no further comments and no proposed motion amendments. Mayor Grafos invited public comments concerning CPA 03-14, and no comments were offered. For the record, City Clerk Bainbridge stated that she received an e-mail from Clyde and Zita Smith, Jake Bloomer, Mindy Simonson, and Marc Lippincott, all opposed to this amendment. Mayor Grafos invited public comments on any of the remaining amendments and none were offered. There were also no further proposed motion amendments on any of the remaining proposals. Vote by Acclamation on the amended motion to Advance Ordinance 14-005 to a second reading and to exclude 04-014 and deny that amendment: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-006, Zoning Map — Lori Barlow After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to advance ordinance 14-006 to a second reading and to deny proposed amendment CPA 01- 014 (Mirabeau Park). Planner Barlow explained that this ordinance reflects the changes in the comprehensive plan as noted in the previous ordinance, but ordinance 14-006 only pertains to the zoning map, and would implement the changes to correspond with that previous ordinance. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 3 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT 4. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Appleway Resurfacing — Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to award the Appleway Boulevard Street Preservation Project CIP #0202 to Spokane Rock Products in the amount of $294, 624.45 and to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract. Public Works Director Guth explained that this project's bid opening was last Friday, that there were four bidders and Spokane Rock Products was the lowest bid, adding that the bid is within the City's budget. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Dan Allison said that Spokane Rock Products was the company who did the last paving along Sprague and that on the north three lanes, it is very rough for new paving; said he doesn't know if they have faulty operators or equipment, and if they are going to pave again, someone needs to watch what they are doing; and perhaps they shouldn't be doing our paving. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked Mr. Guth about Mr. Allison's concerns, and Mr. Guth said that the project was within the specifications; said that although that we don't have a smoothness requirement, he agreed it rides a little rough and said staff will be meeting with the contractor to talk to them to prevent that from happening again. Mr. Guth said they are looking to add a smoothness criteria into the specifications, but that is a difficult one to measure as it is somewhat qualitative. City Manager Jackson said staff will follow up on the comments; but that there is nothing to cause us to exclude the vendor and it is a responsible low bid. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Hafner, Higgins, Wick and Bates. Opposed: Councilmember Pace. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: 2015-2020 Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan — Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded 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. Public Works Director Guth briefly explained the plan as noted in his council packet materials. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Mayor Grafos called for a short recess at 7:22 p.m.; he reconvened the meeting at 7:35 p.m. 6. Motion Consideration: Solid Waste Selection of Provider — Mike Jackson, Erik Lamb It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize a contract with Sunshine Recyclers, Inc., 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. City Manager Jackson clarified concerning the second part of the motion, that there would be very few remaining contingencies with either contract and that the final contract will be brought to Council at the next meeting. Mr. Jackson stressed that we are not talking about the collections or about the Waste Management or Sunshine trucks that collect the waste; and the intent of tonight's motion is to open discussion on the issue. Mr. Jackson noted that Mr. Erik Lamb, Mr. Eric Guth, Mr. Mark Calhoun, and Mr. Morgan Koudelka, worked on the numerous aspects of this issue. Previous to the start of this discussion, Councilmembers were given a copy of a four-page letter from Spokane County, dated May 27, 2014, with a six-page Comparison of Private vs. County Options; and concerning that handout, Councilmember Pace asked if the County has given a rate. Mr. Jackson replied that the County's rate in the letter is an estimate, and that they will do a rate study later, and said the rate is also not included in the Interlocal Agreement proposed by Spokane County. In response to a question from Councilmember Pace, Mr. Jackson confirmed that the rate included in the Sunshine contract is the actual rate and not an estimate. Mr. Jackson also confirmed, in response to a question from Deputy Mayor Woodard, that to - date there has been no rate adjustment to cover landfill closure; that those costs have either come from the initial bond issues or from insurance settlements, and that the County currently does not have a landfill closure fee as part of their rate; but that is not included in our rate nor to his knowledge, the County's rate. Mr. Jackson said there is a county fund of about $8 million dollars that they can draw from for landfill closure, but that rate was not included based on the fact that there was not a County rate for the landfill closure. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 4 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT Mr. Steve Wolf, Sunshine Disposal and Recycling Region Manager, and resident of Spokane Valley, said he appreciates Council's willingness to enter into a contract; said they have included the major issues the City wanted to see such as identical services; cost savings of overall savings of $4.8 million which includes road wear, administrative rate and the difference in rate structure based on 45,000 tons; rate predictability, with 90% of the CPI included in the contract, which is based on the rate of transportation and disposal at $92; and control. He went over some of his company's expertise in transfer stations; said they have operated the University Road transfer station in Spokane Valley since 1993, said they do about 115,000 tons at peak time, and handled traffic counts of 75,000 annually; said they operate four other transfer stations in Stevens County, and have operating contracts in Pend Oreille County, Kootenai County, and Adams County, and were involved in modifications of the Wenatchee Transfer Station. Mr. Kevin Cooke, Spokane County Utilities Director, said Mr. Jackson did a very thorough job last week in giving Council an overview of the private contract versus the County interlocal; he explained that the landfill closure costs are included in the County's best estimate of $104.59 per ton; that it has less to do with the current rate and more to do with what the County is looking at after November 17 when they take over the transfer stations and systems; said the two rates are $1.79 per ton apart which equals 6¢ a month for a 35 -gallon curb -side customer; the difference in the organic waste is $47 per ton from the County, and $50.00 per ton from the private contractor; between the minimum charge of $10 for yard waste as compared to the County's $5.00 for self -haul, and said the commercial rate equates to about $93,000 a year in additional charges to citizens. He said that the level of service is completely different from the standpoint that the regional system has transfer stations with three scales and two scale houses with the middle scale being able to be used in either direction; the site size is more than four times the size of the private transfer station, and said there are three transfer stations, including the Waste to Energy plant; all of which means more flexibility. Spokane County Regional Solid Waste Coordinator Bill Wedlake stated that he, Mr. Jackson and Mr. Guth have been working on this project for several years and all were on the HDR Study Team; he said he just invited Mr. Jackson to have a representative on the evaluation committee to go through the operations contracts if Spokane Valley decides to join the County; he said Spokane Valley citizens would incur increases of more than 27% in self -haul yard waste, and commercial haul of yard waste would go up over $33,000 a year which will get passed on to Spokane Valley citizens. He also questioned how one looks at the system over a forty or fifty year span; and asked if Council is looking at the economic benefits of keeping all the tons together; he said the City of Spokane is taking over the Waste -to -Energy Plant with the intent of not having to pay the profit to Wheelabrator and said the City of Spokane potentially can be just as efficient as going out for competitive bidding for long-haul; he said the County listened to Council's concerns and agreed to the three-year opt out option; said the Council can't possibly be complaining about the County giving them what was asked for as that three year time allows the Council to change if not happy, or stay with the County if happy and combine all the tons for all the citizens of the community; he said the County sees the economies of scale if you're talking about 350,000 tons of waste, which is a lot better than dealing with 55,000 tons. He reiterated that the County is not in this to make a profit; that their rates will be set based on their needs and that everything is transparent while the contract may not be. County Commissioner Shelly O'Quinn said everyone is interested in what is in the best interests of the Spokane Valley citizens since the Council and the Commissioners serve the same citizens; she said the issue is having a conversation about what are the accurate details and information provided to Council to enable Council to make a decision for its jurisdiction; said she is obviously an advocate for a regional system and said she believes it provides a more cost effective system while also providing a higher quality of regional customer service. Concerning cost, Commissioner O'Quinn said the comment in the newspaper that the City of Spokane Valley will save about a quarter of a million dollars a year by going with the alternative option, is inaccurate and misleading to the citizens; and said the alternative option would cost Spokane Valley residents more while receiving less service and at the same time put the City's Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 5 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT general fund at risk. Regarding customer service, Ms. O'Quinn stated that the regional system has three transfer stations that provide citizens free recycling and moderate risk household hazardous waste drop- off; said there are several scales at the regional system, and it's not uncommon for the Valley transfer station to handle 700 to 800 daily transactions during summer; said there are over 16 acres at the valley station compared with 3.6 acres at the alternative site. From the citizen's perspective, Ms. O'Quinn said the system won't change on November 16 although behind the scenes will have changed, but the citizens will still have the same great award winning nationally recognized service they have been receiving for twenty years. Concerning the impact to the general fund, she said that we have $125,000 to cover administrative costs and other costs like education, but said she would like to see how Spokane Valley would be able to accommodate that with the estimated budget; she said Spokane Valley hasn't taken into consideration the comprehensive plan which could cost up to $100,000, nor the cost of enforcement which is covered under the county's proposal and not the alternative option. In speaking for the regional system, County Commissioner Todd Mielke said we have the same objective of having elected officials trying to solve the issues confronting citizens; he said they are hoping for a seamless transition from the current twenty-year agreement to the next one; he said people are accustomed to the process of how they get rid of their solid waste and the County is working to have as little disruption as possible in this process. Mr. Mielke said they want the lowest cost, responsible way of disposing solid waste and that as indicated previously, they will meet or beat the current rate, and said he believes they will beat them by coming all together; he said they have committed to contracting out the operations, and under Washington State law, the contract is awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. He said one of their priorities was to protect the general funds of each jurisdiction and avoid those add-on hard to predict costs, and said they are creating an enterprise fund to protect those general funds. He said they moved to a shorter term contract as a means of providing maximum flexibility, and said they also want consistency across the region. Concerning cost, Mr. Mielke said the information that was provided to Council was mischaracterized; he said the recent reports have projected a savings of $250,000 a year by going with the alternative proposal; however, he said the rate the County currently operates under is $104.59 opposed to the proposed rate of $98.15, and he said the $4.65 for landfill disclosure is already included in their rates and has been part of the rates up until the time the bonds were paid, so the tipping fees didn't change once the bonds were paid, that money was still being collected but the regional system no longer cuts that check to Spokane County. He reiterated that the rate doesn't change, as it already built in an amount to go for landfill closure. He said we are talking about a difference between the current system rate of $104.59 as opposed to $102.80, and said we are down to $1.79; he said when you look at the $250,000 in savings, about $195,000 is just for the landfill closure; we said we have Greenacres Landfill and said they want to monitor that landfill to make sure it is not contaminating groundwater. He said we are now down to a difference of approximately $55,000 between the proposals; he said the minimum cost for disposing of green waste will increase from $5.00 to $10.00 per load, and that represents a 27% increase to Valley residents and Spokane Valley would be paying about $60,000 more plus another $33,000 for commercial users; and that is not taking into consideration flow control enforcement, comp planning costs, audited financial, and additional administrative and education costs. Mr. Tim Crosby, of Mill Creek Washington (distributed four pages of a Waste Management handout to Council); asked Council to strongly consider the Sunshine proposal; said his company has partnered with Sunshine to provide the disposal sites and background including pollution control; said he realizes this is a difficult task but heard the City wants to control its own destiny and this is an opportunity to do that; he asks Council to put their faith in a company that has been in the valley for many years. Mr. Marc Torre, business address of 2405 N University Road, Spokane Valley; said he is not trying to negotiate any changes in the terms of the agreement; that that task was given to staff and said he feels City Manager Jackson and staff have done a good job; said in choosing his business' proposal, Council will have control, will establish a rate that hasn't been in the government since 1996, which is a base rate of $92.00 per ton of which $1.00 will be returned to Spokane Valley in a road wear fee; he said Mr. Steve Wolf had mentioned a total benefit of nearly $5 million; said they selected a landfill partner of Waste Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 6 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT Management which has several regional landfills to provide for environmentally sound cost effective disposal. Mr. Torre said that as noted in his proposal, they will have four scales, two inbound and two outbound; he said the current facility has operated at a peak tonnage of 115,000 tons a year, and said they can handle the volume of our city as well as other smaller regional cities; said they will have a free drop- off service of household moderate risk waste and recyclables and said the services are identical including hours of service. He said there would be a higher minimum for the green waste which means people will collect it longer and then bring it, and said that was demonstrated from SWAC when they raised the minimum from $7.00 to $15.00. Mr. Torre said that the $250,000 in savings to the ratepayer is real, and said he looks forward to a strong, long-term successful partnership. There were no further public comments. Deputy Mayor Woodard disclosed that he received campaign contributions from almost everyone in the room, including Sunshine Recyclers Steve Wolf and Commissioner Todd Mielke, and that he can make a decision on this matter based on the widespread support from everyone to make the best decision for the City. Concerning the garbage matter, Councilmember Pace said that 6¢ does matter; concerning yard waste, he said customers can control that by making fewer trips, or even composting it; concerning the acreage of the facility, he said size doesn't matter but performance does; and said he supports Sunshine because it is the people having trust in government and said we need to re -earn that trust, and we can't earn their trust if we sign a contract where we don't really know what the exact rate is; he said our core values state we are a contract city and said it is important that the contracts be with private business instead of other government agencies; and said another core value is local economic development, and said Sunshine is a long time local business. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he has been working on this topic long before he became a Councilmember; said he went through the HDR Study as well as a mass of other information to make sure he understood the facts and that they were accurate; after going over some of the cost comparison, he said the HDR report indicates the minimum operations and maintenance of the transfer stations is about $3.651 million annually; he said he understands that the RFP has come between six and seven million; he said the $3.651 million equates to $23.65 per ton plus other costs; he said Council has been asking for a rate for three years and still doesn't have it; adding all costs he said would be a minimum of $105.87, with a 2.5% cost of living increase for the following year; he asked what happens if it does cost six to eight million to run those transfer stations; he said he wants to make the best decision from a cost and service standpoint; that there hasn't been any choice for solid waste for years; he said there is no 3.5% landfill cost in the County's proposal; and he suggested there would be a landfill tax at some point. He said a regional concept ended long ago; that Spokane Valley has never and will never be a partner with the City of Spokane because they don't see us as an entity to deal with; however, he said he feels Spokane Valley is a partner in a number of things with the County, and he expressed his appreciation to the County Commissioners and staff coming tonight to give their input. Mayor Grafos added his thanks to the County Commissioners for their hand work in presenting Spokane Valley with what they felt was the best agreement possible considering their available options; he said we currently have over fourteen interlocal agreements with Spokane County, and that all total those contracts account for approximately 70% of our general fund; he said Council understands the benefits of working together in a regional format; however, he said the County's proposed agreement doesn't provide lower costs or certainty or control over future rates; he said the HDR study clearly pointed to a substantially long term cost to all county ratepayers if a long haul option for waste disposal were implemented in lieu of the vendor of choice, and he mentioned the waste burner owned and operated by Spokane City; he said this choice by Spokane County ensures that Spokane's Waste -to -Energy plant, which is an aging 30 -year old technology would continue to add noxious chemicals as well as 200,000 metric tons of Co2 emissions to our area; he said a comparison of just the first year contract rate presented by Sunshine compared to the rate now being charged results in a savings to Valley residents of approximately $250,000 annually; he said with Sunshine there is certainty of a ten-year contract with future rate increases limited to 90% of CPI, along with the ability of our city to manage the performance of the vendor; but signing with the Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 7 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT County would mean a contract signed with only an estimated rate as actual charges wouldn't be provided until after the contract were signed. Mayor Grafos said there would also be no control over County future transfer station hours; and that the CPI increases with the County are unknown; all of which he said makes his choice clear for the private vendor. Mayor Grafos also disclosed that during the 2011 election, along with his over one hundred contributors, he received a $300 campaign contribution from Sunshine, and said that will have no influence on his vote. Councilmember Wick said he recognizes the difference in clean green and self -hauling rates; that we don't have any guarantees of cost from the County, and that we all strive to keep costs as low as possible; said we have done a great job of being a contract city; he said we made some offers earlier such as offering to buy out the transfer stations or align contracts together, and each time we thought we had a solution, it never came to fruition; he said building the West Plains transfer station would also increase cost greatly. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 8. Advance Agenda Councilmember Pace asked about adding the item of trucks parking in residential areas, and Mr. Jackson said we can add that to the June 10 Council meeting. There were no objections. Mr. Jackson also mentioned that the agreement with Mr. Travis Lumpkin has been completed and he hopes to have it executed tomorrow, and that Mr. Lumpkin will start in June. Mr. Jackson brought Council's attention to the draft letter before Council concerning the Composition of the Law and Justice Council, suggesting Spokane Valley have a representative on that Council; he said the letter also states that we pay more than $20 million dollars of our budget to Public Safety, which is quite different from most other jurisdictions. Mr. Jackson asked if there was Council consensus to submit the letter with the Mayor's signature. Council concurred. INFORMATION ONLY The (9) Department Monthly Reports; and (10) Browns Park Master Plan were for information only and were not reported or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS n/a It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. ATTEST: Dean Grafos, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting 05-27--2014 Page 8 of 8 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 2014 Department Director Approval Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Second 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; First Reading — Proposed Ordinance May 27, 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 CPA -02-14 SCRAPS Bradley Road x CPA -03-14 Whipple Barker and x Engineering Sprague COSY Mirabeau Park x Trailhead CPA -04-14 COSV CPA -05-14 COSV CPA -06-14 COSV CPA -07-14 COSV CPA -08-14 COSV CPA -10-14 COSV CPA -09-14 COSV Deny Forwarded without a recommendation Deny Land Use Approve Transportation Approve Capital Facilities Approve Utilities Approve Economic Development Approve Bike and Pedestrian Approve 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. On May 27, 2014 Council voted on a motion to advance Ordinance 14-005 to a second reading. The motion was amended to advance Ordinance 14-005 to a second reading, and to exclude and deny amendment CPA -01-14. Amendments CPA -02-14, CPA -04-14 through CPA -08-14, and CPA -10-14 have been placed in the draft ordinance for adoption. CPA -01-14 and CPA -03-14 are included in the ordinance stating that each will be denied. At this time the Council will consider the consolidated proposed amendments as a group in one ordinance for final adoption at second reading with appropriate findings included. Staff has prepared a separate ordinance with the zoning map change that corresponds with the proposed amendment, which will also be considered for second reading on the same agenda as the ordinance approving or denying the proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendments. OPTIONS: Approve the ordinance with or without further amendments; or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 14-005. 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 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, and Ordinance No. 13-008; 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 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 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 motions to approve CPA -01-14 and CPA -03-14 failed and are 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. 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 -01-14 and 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 -01-14 and 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" (map). Section 4. Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, the Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as set forth in Attachment "A" (map) 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 1/4 of Section 10, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington. Council Findings: 1. 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. Ordinance 14-005: 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 4 of 9 DRAFT 2. The proposed amendment is not consistent with GMA Chapter 36.70A, Planning Goal 9 which 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. 3. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. Development has occurred in the surrounding areas as anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan, and allowed by the Zoning Code. 4 The amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the City determined that the proposed amendment would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. However, the area has been identified in the City Priority Habitat Species 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 MUC 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. 7. Development requirements would mitigate significant impacts. However the park and trail would experience increased traffic and noise impacts from new development. Commercial development would not be generally consistent with the surrounding parks, open space and natural area uses. 8. 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 9. The proposed amendment is not consistent with, and may negatively affect, the following chapters of the Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 8 - Natural Environment, Chapter 9 — Parks, Recreation and Arts, and Chapter 11 — Bike and Pedestrian Element. Council Decision: The request is denied. 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 1/4 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 Ordinance 14-005: 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 5 of 9 DRAFT 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. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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 Ordinance 14-005: 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 6 of 9 DRAFT 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. 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 Ordinance 14-005: 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 7 of 9 DRAFT 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: 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. Ordinance 14-005: 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 8 of 9 DRAFT 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. 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. ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Dean Grafos Ordinance 14-005: 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 9 of 9 ATTACHMENT A Existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Map 35124.0815 35124.0807 35124.0808 35123.2204 35124.0908 35124.0814 i24 .081 35123.2107 -11 SPOKANE VALLEY 35124.0907 35123.2006 35123.2004 35124.0812 35124.0302 35124.0303 35124.0304 35124.0305 35124.0306 35124.0307 4.5077.0002 CPA 2014-0002 Applicant: Nancy Hill, Director, Spokane County Regional Animal Protections Services Parcel #: 35124.0813 Address: 2117 N Bradley Avenue Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Low Density Residential, LDR to Corridor Mixed Use, CMU; and Subsequent Zoning change from R-3, Single Family Residential to CMU, Corridor Mixed Use. 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 period. "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 Neighborhood Commercial _ 0.1% Mixed Use Center 3.5% Medium Density Residential 4.1% Light Industrial 5.1% Office Parks and 2.0')/i) Open Space 1 2.2% Regional Commercial 3.2% Community Commercial 2.3% Corridor Mixed Use 4.2% High Density Residential 4.0% Low Density Residential 54.2% 2.2.1 City Center Plan Heavy Industrial 15.2% • 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) Page 5 of 34 Chapter 2 — Land Use 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 essentially residential community with retail 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 2001. 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. 1. 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 27/3244 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) Page 6 of 34 Chapter 2 — Land Use 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. 'l.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. -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 th 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. • - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ 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: 1. 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) Area Vacant and Partially Used Land Net Developable Potential New Acres Dwelling Units Potential Population Increase Spokane Valley (Incorporated Area) 3,3782271 1245-4-.2 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 guidance for annexation of territory within UGAs. Annexation will have financial impacts on the city; it may be positive or negative. The City may need to develop an annexation study to assess the financial impacts especially for larger annexations. The Capital Facilities chapter identifies current service providers within the Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) as 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). a starting point for the detailed 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 example, areas such as Rotchford Acres and Ponderosa will likely require minimum 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 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 the automobile dealerships located along the western end of the Sprague Avenue corridor and the "big box" retail area found in the Sullivan Road area from Sprague Avenue north to the Interstate 90 interchange, and includes the Valley Mall and Wal-Mart. Regional Commercial allows a large range of uses. A wide range of development types, appearance, ages, function, and scale can be 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 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 eliminated. 2.5.3 City Center The intent of Valley is to create a higher density, mixed use designation where office, retail, government uses, and rosidential usoc aro concentrated. The City Contor will also bo region's high capacity transit (HCT) cystem. 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 residencos into dos() proximity; • Providing retail and service needs in close proximity to residential and ornployment centers; • Improving feasibility of a development project. The proximity of urban services makes housing projects more dosirablo and a nearby source of consumers help make a commercial project more viable. 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 affordable than traditional single family housing. Second, the convenience and proximity to work, City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan needed services and cultural activities is very desirable for many people. Finally, many people find that they do not need a large, single family detached house. Given their lifestyle, they appreciate the low maintenance and security relationship between higher density residential uses and 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 e_ eee 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 .. 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 ac tho numbor of lanos incroasos. 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) Page 15 of 34 Chapter 2 — Land Use 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 benchos, trash receptaclos, and landscaped corner troatmentc 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 Contor will tako tomo timo to dovolop. Tho City can facilitato thoco 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 scenario presented here accounts for the timing of market projections and future actions. As noted above, the implementation strategy is keyed to projected trends and regional planning goals. Its form and character, as envisioned in this Plan, are dramatically different from anything that now exists in the proposed City Center area. It will take some time for the development community to redirect its energy and investments to produce development that rospondc to tho direction of the Plan. The demand for more intense development opportunities in the City Center is not forecasted within the next few years. In the meantime, the City should discourage continued low -scale investment in this area since new development will take several years to be amortized, and will delay the accomplishment of preferred development. As regulations are applied to modest renovations, it should be possible to gain some basic improvements. However, the City should not oxpect full implementation of the vision for the City Center until major property owners in the area are ready to install long term, major development projects. The figures (computer generated as part of the TOD Study) at the beginning of this section first show the existing conditions of the City Center; the second figure illustrating potential redevelopment of the area over time. The pictures are taken from approximately Farr Road looking oast toward tho U City Mall area. The photos do not necessarily indicate specific recommendations for the area, but are merely could evolve through several coordinated, incremental steps taken over time. 2.5.43— Office Designation Spokane Valley has areas of quality office development. Several developments within the Argonne/Mullan Couplet, Pines Road, and Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 16 of 34 Chapter 2 – Land Use 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 proximity to the retail or commercial use. Primary uses which are representative of this comprehensive plan category, include medical and dental facilities, education services, insurance, real estate, financial institutions, design firms, and legal services. 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. 111111111111111111111111111111111101. - �f��Y�irsr� �411trtflNli;,i The 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 development type would be more likely to occur Mixed-use. Corridor Mixed -Use City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • in the areas designated as 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 industrial activities, which include, but are not limited to, manufacturing, processing, fabrication, assembly/disassembly, freight -handling and similar operations. Heavy industry may have significant noise, odor or aesthetic impacts to 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 Light Industry The Light Industry designation is a planned industrial 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 cases be associated with permitted industrial uses. The Light Industry category may serve as a transitional 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. 2.5.76 Parks/ Open Space The Parks and Open Space designation is intended to protect parks, open physical assets of the community. City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan space, and other natural 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 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's identity. People especially value our authentic, homegrown cultural resources that set us apart from other areas of the state. Spokane Valley is the location of several "Firsts" to occur in the Spokane Region. The first permanent settler in the Spokane area 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, packing plants, and box manufacturers. The apple industry which thrived in the early century was destroyed by killing frost of the 1950s. Newman Lake supplied the water that irrigated these orchards via the Spokane Canal Company. The flow control gate at Newman Lake (a great 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 canal ran behind Otis Orchards High School, neither of which 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 in the valley until the late 1950s. A now exists. The picture on page 25 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 respondents indicated that having a recognizable downtown or city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley (figure right). Female respondents, respondents at lower income levels, and respondents residing in one or two person households were most likely to report that having a recognizable downtown was important to the future of Spokane Valley. There was strong support among respondents for spending public money to create a city center. Seventy-four percent of respondents either somewhat or strongly supported Spokane Valley officials to develop a city center. Only two percent strongly opposed the use of public money to create a city center. 100% 80% 6109 40% 20% ■ n495 13, 35% 17% 9 26% Very Somewhat Meurral Somewhat Very unirnpolarit vninwortent important important Most Ideal Location for a City Center Over half of the respondents (52%) felt the University City area would be the most ideal Spokane Valley location for a city center. Other areas considered appropriate for the City Center included Mirabeau Point, Pines and Sprague, and Evergreen and Sprague. using public money Other 5'ti. i Everygreen and Sprague 124 Pines and Sprague 116% Mit abeam] Porno 18r4 University Crty area IN n=233 52% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 22 of 34 Chapter 2 — Land Use 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 officials should place on stronger sign and billboard controls were very mixed. However, 67% of respondents indicated that Spokane Valley officials should place a medium or high priority on stronger sign and billboard control and as such, it is probable that the majority of residents would be supportive of stronger billboard control and sign regulations. 100% 80% • 60% 40% 20% Q0/ 33%%n 34% ■ n=398 33°'D 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 home and mail it to the city. In many cases the responses to the questions were similar to the responses of the formal survey conducted by Clearwater Research. These question numbers are right of the survey itself. The following are the results of the "unscientific" survey: How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having an area of the City that is recognized as the "downtown"? Would you say...? The responses to this question are very similar to 100% - ■ n=177 80% 60% 33% 40% 26% 18% 19% 4% Very Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very important important important unimportant unimportant nor unimportant Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 23 of 34 Chapter 2 — Land Use 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 somewhat different from the results of the formal community survey. In the formal survey only 26% of the respondents felt that the City of Spokane Valley has an identity or something that makes it unique. The results in the graph at the right indicate that a majority of those surveyed at the community meetings (52%) felt there was something unique about Spokane Valley. How important to the future of Spokane Valley is 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. having a "community identity? Would you 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Very important Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very important important nor unimportant unimportant unimportant Would development of a "community changes, such as the development of a points of entry into the city, or through social changes, such as more community events like Valleyfest? When asked what types of changes would be needed to develop a community identity" best be accomplished through physical city center or the building of gateways at the major Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Pag E • n=160 I Physical Changes Social Changes Both Changes Equally Important E ■ n=170 39% 34% 13% 5% 9% Very important Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very important important nor unimportant unimportant unimportant Would development of a "community changes, such as the development of a points of entry into the city, or through social changes, such as more community events like Valleyfest? When asked what types of changes would be needed to develop a community identity" best be accomplished through physical city center or the building of gateways at the major Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Pag E • n=160 I Physical Changes Social Changes Both Changes Equally Important E • n=1661 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 survey where 59% of respondents felt this should be either a medium or high priority for the city. 100% - 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 41% 41% 18% 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 -45 Provide neighborhood and community scale retail centers for the City's neighborhoods. Policies LUP-54.1 LUP-45.2 LUP-45.3 LUP-45.4 LUP-54.5 LUP-45.6 LUP-45.7 LUP-45.8 LUP-45.9 LUP-45.10 Goal LUG -56 Policies LUP46.1 LUP46.2 City Center Goal LUG 6 Policies Integrate retail developments into surrounding residential areas with attention to quality design and function. Encourage pedestrian and bicycle access to neighborhood shopping and services. Encourage retail and personal services to group together within planned centers to allow for ease of pedestrian movement. Encourage Mixed-use residential and commercial and office development in Neighborhood Commercial designations where compatibility with nearby uses can be demonstrated. Ensure compatibility between mixed-use developments and residential areas by regulating height, scale, setbacks, and buffers. Develop community design guidelines to promote common open space, public art, and plazas in commercial and office developments. Develop design guidelines that encourage quality design and pedestrian and vehicle circulation in commercial, office and Mixed-use developments. Develop design guidelines to encourage commercial development to locate along the street edge (where deemed appropriate) to provide pedestrian street access. Identify and designate streets where on -street parking can be safely provided without unduly slowing traffic flow or jeopardizing traffic safety. May provide incentives to encourage developers to include housing in mixed-use projects. Identify appropriate locations for the Auto Row Overlay designation. LUP 6.1 Identify other appropriate automobile related uses within the Auto Row Overlay designation that are complementary to automobile dealerships. Develop appropriate development standards for permitted uses within the Auto Row Overlay designated area. Create an identifiable City Center that serves as the social, cultural, LUP 6.2 Define a City Center with distinct boundaries, unique building types, and special features. Strengthen existing connections of the City Center area to the region's high capacity transit system. LUP 6A through appropriate development regulations and design standards. Develop land use regulations that allow higher intensity development in the City {FAR) and permitted uses. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 28 of 34 Chapter 2 — Land Use LUP 6.5 LUP 6.6 LUP 6.7 LUP 6.8 LUP 6.9 LUP 6.10 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Coordinate with urban service providers to ensure sufficient capacity is available for anticipated development. 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. The City should always consider City Center sites regarding potential civic and cultural uses the City develops, such as a City Hall. 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. Develop land use regulations that encourage higher density residential uses on High density housing should be accompanied by residentially oriented retail and service uses. Provide amenities such as community services, parks and public spaces to meet the residential needs in the City Center. Goal LUG -7 Policies nearby lower density residential development. Provide a balanced transportation network that accommodates public transportation, high occupancy vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, automobiles and integrated parking. 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. Require clear and safe pedestrian paths to enhance the pedestrian network. 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 LUP-7.2Z LUP-7.43 Goal LUG -8 Policies LUP-8.1 LUP-8.2 LUP-8.3 Mixed-use Go Create appropriate development standards for Office designated areas. Allow commercial, residential and recreational uses in conjunction with permitted uses in Office designated areas. Integrate sidewalks, bike lanes, landscaping, and area lighting in office areas to provide a safe and attractive working environment. Allow office uses in high density residential zones to provide some of the service needs generated from multifamily development. als & 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 LUP-11.2 LUP-11.3 LUP-11.4 Goal LUG -12 Policies LUP-12.1 LUP-12.2 LUP-12.3 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Conversion of designated industrial lands to other uses should be strictly limited to ensure an adequate land supply. Provide appropriate buffering, landscaping and other development standards for industrial areas. Retail outlets shall be allowed for industrial businesses that manufacture and/or assemble products on-site. Designate and protect a variety of strategically located light industry areas. 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. Light industry areas shall include lighting, sidewalks, bike lanes and landscaping to provide a safe and attractive working environment. 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 LUP-13.2 Urban Design Goals LUG -14 Policies LUP-14.1 LUP-14.2 LUP-14.3 Maximize efficiency of the development review process by continuously evaluating the permitting process and modifying as appropriate. Assist developers with proposals by continuing to offer pre -application meetings in order to produce projects that will be reviewed efficiently. and Form Goals & Policies Improve the appearance and function of the built environment. 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. 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. 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 including those who cannot or choose not options; • In the future, increasing numbers of people drive; • All people are pedestrians at some point; and all people should be respected. All citizens, to drive, should have viable transportation may not physically or financially be able to • 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 Planninq 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; c. parks and recreation; e. public sewer; g. solid waste disposal and recycling; b. police protection; d. libraries; f. public water; 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 existing, or develop new, public multimodal transportation systems. 11. Each jurisdiction shall address land use designations and site design 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. strategies to support requirements that are 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 ROAD RIGHT OF WAY OA*: 2S, SIDEWALK LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE BIKE LANE LEFT TURN LANE COLLECTOR ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTION - N.T.S s,< ft LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE 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 SIDE LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY 81KE LEFL-FANE TURN 1KANE LANEE PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTION - N.T.S LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE SIDEWALK 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 Functional Class STATE CITY TOTAL 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. a 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. —22.7 C .= '........m. 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 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 aim 14 Arterial 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 Roadway From To AVI Average TModel2 2020 SB NB EB WB 1-90 Sullivan Havana 7:45 Freeway 0.84 1-90 8:41 Havana Sullivan 8:03 1-90 Broadway 10:46 Freeway Argonne/Dishman/Mica Sprague 1-90 32nd Ave 2:23 2:13 Barker Road Sprague 1-90 Upriver Dr 0.99 5:59 6:34 Sprague Avenue Sullivan Argonne 7:00 6:37 Argonne Sullivan 6:45 7:10 University Road Sprague 32nd Ave 3:34 3:46 Pines Road Sprague 1-90 2:41 2:23 1-90 SR 290 2:28 3:11 Sullivan Road Sprague 1-90 2:03 1:40 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 Class V/C Ratio 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 street pattern within tho city contor. Ac tho illustration indicates, a possible grid pattern of approximately 300 /100 feet would bo ideal for the development of a city center. Pedestrian and bicycle mobility is a vital part BUILDING FACADE r1• Ak SIDEWALK/ / TREE WELL ON STREET PARKING OAD RIGHT OF ON STREET PARKING CITY CENTER TYPICAL SECTION - N.T.S IDEWALK TREE WELL BUILDING FACADE of the future City Center transportation system. Improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists should support increases in transit services and promote the development of the City Center. As the street system is developed to better accommodate the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists, a network of facilities for people on foot and bikes should be established. Reducing the size of the street grid, improving auto circulation and creating pedestrian linkages through larger parcels is critical to ostablish walking pattorns that roduco dopondency 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 pedostrian amenitioc aro- important roimportant 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) Page 14 of 28 Chapter 3 — Transportation 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 additiona4 amenities 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: 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 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 this category. 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 No. Route Name Weekday Saturday Sunday 31/32 Garland/Trent/Indiana 30 60 60 72 Liberty Lake Express 30 None None 73 VTC Express 30 None None 74 Valley Limited 30 None None 91 Mission 60 60 60 94 E. 5th Street 30 30 60 95 Millwood 30 60 60 96 Pines 30 60 None 97 South Valley 30 60 60 Sunday/holiday service is operated 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. New Year's Day New Year's Federal/State Holiday Observed (January 1.) Memorial Day Labor Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day Christmas Federal/State Holiday Observed (December 25) A special schedule is in effect for Independence Day 8:00 AM to approximately 10:30 p.m. (Service after the fireworks). 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. Spilkalie 4Calley 101. eJ 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 Sharing segments of UPRR Tracks LEGEND • LpM f; 4 SLadaan • UgM Rua Stabana wM Park 8 Fbde Lrg`r Hail 41.grmoot 0 Lit). of Lfbarty Lok© City of Spok:au. Gatyr of Spnknnw , Ih ' • 4 Affivg 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) Page 18 of 28 Chapter 3 — Transportation City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Passengers 3L/21R 3R/21 L Length 4,500 3,059 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 an east -west route from Chicago to Seattle and Portland. The UPRR provides service to Canada, the Yakima Valley and Portland. 3.6.2 Bridging the Valley The Bridging the Valley (BTV) project is a community -initiated project to explore the creation of one (1) common railroad corridor from which BNSF and UPRR would operate between Spokane, Washington and Athol, Idaho. LI 1 MOW WAS-IINGTON STATE RAIL SYSTEM This 42 mile corridor presently has 72 railroad crossings (46 in Washington) with over 494 trains in operation per week. Growth in train traffic is forecast to increase annually by 3.4% over the next 20 years. Traffic accidents, traffic congestion from roadway closures, increased carbon monoxide emissions in the serious non -attainment area and noise significantly affect the economy, health, safety and general welfare of the public in Spokane and Kootenai Counties, and therefore, the Inland Northwest. The BTV project would eliminate approximately 51 at -grade crossings through closure (35 in Washington), and relocation of the Union Pacific Railroad mainline into the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway corridor. The SPOKANE VALLEY AREA RAILROAD NETWORK .... Sandpoint Area no - e °°mss ceonlealal Trackage H9us¢Y '5 Rights 5p5 a,o ileo •- ',Napa Jct. WA o aealar. to 72 155gradc Pf afe Gt Area Pest Coeur Falls q'Aleue IAO Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railro d U�lo Paafle one Iln�t -neon Pacific Ro Iroatl tJcrhan' Snl,ta FauRn Ir�B 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 Builder • • ---4,,._._z_.•— •1.- r ----^- • • _ • Wolf Point, MT Seattle, WA -•---4-,--- Spokane, WA Portland, OR Empire Builder Route Fargo, ND. • Minneapolis -St. Paul, MM • •. • Chicago, IL Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 06-06-2012) Page 21 of 28 Chapter 3 — Transportation 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".7 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, MULTIMODAL 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. 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. g. 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 to work and nine out of ten drove to work. A majority of the respondents (69%) believed that the construction of the Sprague/Appleway Couplet had been a useful transportation improvement and should not be returned to two (2) -way traffic. The graph right indicates responses rating the statement "Sprague/Appleway Couplet has been a useful improvement to overall roadway system." Further, 69% of the respondents indicated Appleway Boulevard east beyond its current terminus at University Road. Although 56% of the respondents indicated that they either strongly or somewhat supported the extension of the Couplet to Evergreen Road, another 35% were either strongly or somewhat opposed to this proposition. Surveyors also asked citizens about the priority level for making major streets friendlier for pedestrians and bicyclists. Forty-four percent of the respondents said that the City should make this a high priority, while 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. 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% The Sprague/Appleway Couplet has been a useful improvement to the overall roadway system. ■ n=393 25% 44% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly disagree disagree agree agree either strong support or somewhat supported extending 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% — 0% — Should making the streets friendlier for pedestrians and bicyclists a low, medium, or high nrinrity for the City ■ n=399 34% 22% Low priority 44% Medium priority High priority 22% stated that this should be 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 3.10 Goals and Policies Streets and Roadways Goals & Policies Goal TG -1 Policies TP -1.1 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Establish appropriate design standards for transportation facilities. 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. Ensure that roadway systems are designed to preserve and are consistent with community character. Goal TG -2 Policies TP -2.1 TP -2.2 Street design should complement adjacent development. 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. 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. Goal TG -8 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 TP -11.3 Work with STA to facilitate neighborhood business areas are served by transit. 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 a. fire protection; c. parks and recreation e. public sewer; g. solid waste disposal and recycling; i. schools. City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan b. police protection; d. libraries; f. public water; h. transportation; Table 4.1 Regional Level of Service Standards FACILITY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD (LOS) Domestic Water 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 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. Sanitary Sewer 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 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. Stormwater 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 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. Law Enforcement Each jurisdiction shall specify in its Comprehensive Plan a level of police protection that addresses 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) Page 4 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.1 Regional Level of Service Standards FACILITY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD (LOS) Solid Waste Solid waste processing will meet Federal and State regulations, including maintaining any required facilities licenses. Street Cleaning 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 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). Public Transit Jurisdictions within the Public Transit Benefit Area (PTBA) shall have policies consistent with the level of service adopted by the Spokane Transit Authority Board of Directors. Fire and Emergency Services 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 hydrant placement per the International Fire Code adopted by that jurisdiction. Urban areas must 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 Statewide Statewide Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Category Regional Transportation Facilities Regional Transportation Facilities Regional Transportation Facilities Regional Transportation Facilities Regional Transportation Facilities Regional Transportation Facilities Regional Transportation Facilities Solid Waste, Wastewater & Water Facilities Social Service Facilities Social Service Facilities Name Interstate 90 Centennial Trail Pence -Cole Valley Park & Ride and Transit/Transfer Center Pines Road/I 90 Park & Ride STA Maintenance — Bowdish (Fleck Service Center) SR -27 (Pines Road) SR -290 (Trent Avenue) Address N/A N/A 414 S. University Rd E. Montgomery, Pines Rd &I-90 123 S. Bowdish N/A N/A Valley Recycling -Transfer 3941 N. Sullivan Rd Valley Hospital & Medical Center 12606 E. Mission Ave 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 Transportation LOS D for Signalized Intersections 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 CFP -2.4 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 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 Policies CFP -3.1 CFP -3.2 CFP -3.3 CFP -3.4 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. Encourage inter -jurisdictional cooperation among law enforcement agencies and fire districts to further develop, where practical, shared service and facility use. Develop a comprehensive emergency management plan that meets the needs of the City and coordinates with regional emergency planning efforts. Require adequate emergency vehicle road access and water supply/pressure for new development within the City. 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. Coordinate sewer planning with appropriate jurisdictions for consistency with the SVCP. CFP -4.2 CFP -4.3 CFP -4.4 CFP -4.5 CFP -4.6 CFP -4.7 CFP -4.8 Solid Waste Goal CFG-5 Policies CFP -5.1 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. 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.). Discourage new, private domestic wells within the Spokane Valley City limits. New development must connect to public sewer and water. Consider grey water re -use and rainwater harvesting technology when and where appropriate and feasible. Encourage use of less water -intensive, native vegetation where possible. Promote the reduction, re -use and recycling of solid waste. 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 CFP -5.2 CFP -5.3 CFP -5.4 CFP -5.5 Stormwater Goal CFG-6 Policies CFP -6.1 CFP -6.2 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Participate in updates to the Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management plan and support its implementation. Work toward reducing waste at City -sponsored events through the provision of recycling canisters and other means. Provide links to reduction, re -use and recycling information on the City web site. Encourage the recycling of construction site waste. 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. Require stormwater management systems for new development. 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 CFP -7.2 CFP -7.3 Schools Goal CFG-8 Policies Encourage continued free, reciprocal library services among all libraries within the Spokane region. Land use regulations should allow siting of library facilities in locations convenient to residential areas. Work collaboratively with the Spokane County Library District to develop long- range library plans consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. School sites and facilities should meet the education needs of Spokane Valley citizens. 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 20-1-314 201-820 203334 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 Current Revenues General Fund (Sales Tax, fees, property tax, utility tax, etc.) Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) Impact Fees Bonds Non -voted General Obligation Voted General Obligation Revenue (payable from a particular utility or enterprise) Local Improvement District (Assessment Bonds) Federal Grants Surface Transportation Program Bridge Replacement Funds Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) Land and Water Conservation Fund Community Development Block Grants State Grants/Loans Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account (ALEA) Transportation Improvement Account Centennial Clean Water Fund Public Works Trust Funds Interagency for Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC) 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 Other Developer Contributions 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 • Schools • Fire Protection Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • Open Space • 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 management. The CWSP is updated as needed at the direction of the Board of County Commissioners or the Washington State Department of Health (DOH). 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 Coordination Act of 1977 (Chapter 70.116 RCW). 3. Any system experiencing problems related to planning, operation determined by the Department of Health. 4. All new systems. 5. Any expanding system. Public Water System and/or management as 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 Group A Systems Connections Current Non Residential Connections Storage Capacity (gallons) Bayou On Barker 0 4 0 Burger Royal 4 1 50 Carnhope Irrigation District 7 495 31 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) Page 17 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.8 Group B Systems Group B System Connections Holiday Trailer Court Janzen & Janzen Levernier Const. Water System Mercer Trucking Co Inc Middco Tool & Equipment Systems Transport Inc Tci Water System Tds Union Pacific Railroad - Trentwood Westco S Apparel Service Western Structures Inc WSDT-Pines Road Maintenance 12 1 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 3 2 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 the southern part of the City (see Fire Districts Map at the end of this chapter). Both districts serve the 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 20112014 apparatus inventory includes 489 Type I Engines, 42 Type 11 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 limits providing additional coverage, No. 81 at 6117 South Palouse Highway and No. 85 at 3324 South Linke Road. Stations 81 and 84 each have two Class A engines and two wild land brush engines. Station 85 has one Class A engine and one wild land brush engine. Level of Service The Level of Service goals for response time are described in SFVD's Standard of Cover. SVFD's Standard of Cover is consistent with the regionally adopted minimum level of service for fire protection and emergency services. The following table shows the number of calls per year. Table 4.9 Spokane Valley Fire Department Station Locations University Station 4" 10319 East Sprague Millwood Station 2 9111 East Frederick Liberty Lake Station- 2218 North Harvard Otis Orchards Station 22406 East Wellesley 4 Sullivan Station" 15510 East Marietta Edgecliff Station" 6306 East Sprague Pindecroft Station ." 1121 South Evergreen Evergreen Station" North 2110 North Wilbur South Valley Station .g" East 12121 East 32°d Greenacres Station" East 17217 East Sprague " Inside Spokane Valley City Limits Table 4.10 Spokane Valley Fire Department City Responses Year City Responses 2946 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 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. 4.4.9 Library Service Library services are provided by the Spokane County Library District (District).The District is a municipal corporation established by voters in 1942 under provisions of RCW 27.12.040. An independent special purpose district, The District's sole purpose is to provide public library services to the unincorporated county and affiliated municipalities. A five -member Board of Trustees appointed by Spokane County Commissioners governs the District. A Board -appointed 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 Table 4.11 SVFD Capital Projects Plan Project 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Fire Station No. 11 (New construction) $9 $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 corporation established by voters in 1942 under provisions of RCW 27.12.040. An independent special purpose district, The District's sole purpose is to provide public library services to the unincorporated county and affiliated municipalities. A five -member Board of Trustees appointed by Spokane County Commissioners governs the District. A Board -appointed 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 Recreation[Ibl] Spokane Valley has a wide range of recreational opportunities available to residents and visitors. City 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. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 22 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.13 Spokane Valley Park Facilities Spokane Valley Parks Acreage Status Neighborhood Parks Balfour Park 2.86 Developed Browns Park 8.253 Developed Castle Park 2.74 Minimally Developed Edgecliff Park 4.74 Developed Greenacres Park 8.3 Developed Terrace View Park 9.24 Developed Subtotal 35.948 Community Parks Valley Mission Park 24.01.91 Developed Sullivan Park 16.1 Developed Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 22 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.13 Spokane Valley Park Facilities Spokane Valley Parks Acreage Status Subtotal 40.121.91 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 13.68 Developed Subtotal 31.67 Undeveloped Park Land Myrtle Point Park 31.187 Undeveloped Valley Mission Park (South) 7.22 Undeveloped Valley Senior CenterBalfour Park Expansion 2.098_4 Undeveloped Subtotal 46_70,38 Total Park Acres 180.3171.75 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. The National Recreation and Parks Association suggest that cities adopt LOS standards for different park types, such as mini (pocket), neighborhood, community and major parks. Spokane Valley does not have a well-developed 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 X25 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 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 44-5 acres of park land by the year 294-82020. 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 k1b2} Note: Amounts in $1,000 Project 2013 2-044 2015 2046 12017 2018C1b3} Total Parklmprovcmcnto $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $600 Ta4a4 $100 $100 $100 $4-00 $490 $490 Revell-Lle-Sourse General Fund REET tt1 Grants $600 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $300 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $300 $0 $Q $9 $4-00 $4-00 $4-00 $100 $4-00 $100 $600 Table 4.17 Parks Capital Facilities Plan Note: Amounts in $1,000 Project 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Park Improvements 263 100 100 100 100 100 $763 Total 263 100 100 100 100 100 $763 Revenue Source _ _ _ _ _ _ _ General Fund 193 100 100 100 100 100 $693 REET #1 0 0 0 0 0 0 �0 Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0 �0 Fund balance 70 0 0 0 0 0 70 Total 263 100 100 100 100 100 $763 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 24 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.15 Future Park Demand Year Population Total Park Acres Available Acres Required at 1.92 acres/1000 Net Deficiency Acres 2-4492014 91 94090 550 18(13171.75 176.52173.86 (3.78)2.11 20192020 96, 65795, 332 18(13171.75 185.58183.01 5.2811.23 2$2034 106, 831105, 668 18(13171.75 205.12202.88 24.8231.13 *Assumes 20 -year growth of 14 89145,-148 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 44-5 acres of park land by the year 294-82020. 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 k1b2} Note: Amounts in $1,000 Project 2013 2-044 2015 2046 12017 2018C1b3} Total Parklmprovcmcnto $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $600 Ta4a4 $100 $100 $100 $4-00 $490 $490 Revell-Lle-Sourse General Fund REET tt1 Grants $600 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $300 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $300 $0 $Q $9 $4-00 $4-00 $4-00 $100 $4-00 $100 $600 Table 4.17 Parks Capital Facilities Plan Note: Amounts in $1,000 Project 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Park Improvements 263 100 100 100 100 100 $763 Total 263 100 100 100 100 100 $763 Revenue Source _ _ _ _ _ _ _ General Fund 193 100 100 100 100 100 $693 REET #1 0 0 0 0 0 0 �0 Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0 �0 Fund balance 70 0 0 0 0 0 70 Total 263 100 100 100 100 100 $763 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 24 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities 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 Edgecliff 10621 East 15`h 522 S. Thierman Rd. Trentwood Central Valley 2400 N. Wilbur # 79 115 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) Page 26 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities 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 163,030 1,323 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) Page 27 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities 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. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 28 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.23 Central Valley Enrollment Projection School Attendance Area Student New Projected Student Enrollment in Student Enrollment 2005 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) Page 28 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.23 Central Valley Enrollment Projection Student New Projected Student School Attendance Area Enrollment 2005 Enrollment in 2008-2009 Student Increase High Schools University High 1922 2055 Central Valley High 1642 1804 133 162 Total 3564 3859 295 Total Student Enrollment 11,480 12,459 Projected Enrollment 979 Source: Central Valley Linkages Committee - John Bottelli, Spokane County GIS Grade 2001 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. 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 4.24 Central Valley School Enrollment Actual Enrollment Projected Enrollment Grade 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 11,985 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. 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) Page 29 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities 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 2,082 2,022 1,974 1,964 1,931 1,917 7 - 8 743 735 732 716 690 681 659 599 572 564 9 - 12 1,592 1,565 1,544 1,500 1,396 1,354 1,322 1,337 1,292 1,217 K-12 4,690 4,588 4,443 4,355 4,168 4,057 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) Page 29 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities 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. 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 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 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 Valley Accounts ERU's Single Family 20,860 20,860 Duplex and 2,160 9,220 Multi -Family Commercial 1,767 7,210 13 270 Mobile Home Parks TOTAL 24,800 37,560 Other County Service Areas Total for County Service Areas Accounts ERU's Accounts ERU's 11,820 11,820 32,680 32,680 610 2,290 2,770 11,510 270 1,230 2,037 8,440 0 0 13 270 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 ERUs 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 guidance 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 through 2019. Table 4.34 Storm Water Mana • ement Bud • et Summar of Revenues and Ex •enditures Dollars are in $1 000's Note: A means the A. uifer Protection Area Fund and G means 2011 2012 2013 Bud • et 2014 Actual Actual 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) - 576,629 - 314,673 _ (706,191) _ (986,478) expenditures Beginning fund balance2,697,333 1,991,142 Ending fund balance - _ - _ 1,991,142 _ 1,004,664 _ Table 4.35 2014 -02019 Stormwater Capital Improvement P an Summary Grant Dollars are in $1 000's Note: A means the A. uifer Protection Area Fund and G means Project 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Totals G A Annual Small Works $600 $600 $300 $300 $300 $300 $2,400 _ x Projects Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 35 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Retrofits w/Pavement $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $300 $1,800 x x Preservation Protects Broadway, Havana to $100 $1,200 $1,300 x x Fancher SD Retrofit Havana -Yale Diversion $300 _ _ _ - $300 x x Ponderosa Surface $250 _ _ _ - $250 x x Water Diversion Strategic Property $250 - $250 x Acguisition(s) Chester Cr Wetland $200 - - _ $200 x x Overflow Improvements SE Yardly Retrofits $100 $900 $1,000 x x (Area SE of Fancher/Broadway Wellhead Protection - _ $80 _ _ - _ _ - $80 x x Study and Pre -Design Dish man -Mica _ _ $40 _ _ - $40 x x Infiltration Facility Plan Glenrose Surface $300 - $300 x x Water Diversion Montgomery, Argonne _ _ 115 $1,185 _ - $1,300 x x to Mansfield Retrofit Petroleum Transport _ - 200 _ _ - $200 x x Routes, Spill Protection NW Yardly Retrofits $100 $1,150 $1,250 x x (Area NW of Fancher/Broadwayl Dishman-Mica, 16th to _ _ - _ _ _ $300 _ $300 x x Appleway Retrofits NE Yardly Retrofits _ _ _ $100 _ $900 $1,000 x x (Area East of Fancher & North of 1-90 Veracrest _ - - - $350 $350 _ x Groundwater/Sto rmwat erConveay nce Argonne, 1-90 to _ - - - - $400 $400 x x Montgomery Retrofits Sloan's Addition - - - - - $250 $250 _ x (15th/Stanley) 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 Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier 1th / Adams 2-9&7 4 way stop A A - A - - 1th / Bowdich 2-9&7 2 way stop G 8 - € - - 1th / Carnahan EST 2008 2 way stop A A - A - - 4th / Dishman Mica EST 2008 2 way stop G 8 - G - - 4th / Evergreen 2-096 2 € € - € - - way stop 4th / Farr EST 2008 2 way stop S 6 - S - - 4th / McDonald 2007 2 way stop G 0 - .P - - '1th / Park 2008 2 way stop S G - € - - Ath / SR 27 EST 2008 2 way stop G 0 - € - - '1th / Sullivan 2007 Si a4 S S - S - - /1th / Thierman 2007 1 way stop A A - S - - 1th / University 2008 S4-1 S S - S - - 8th / Adams 2-9&7 41 way stop A A - A - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 37 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier 8th / Barker 2005 2 way stoK 8th / Bettman EST 2008 2 way stol. - 8th / Bowdich EST 2008 2 wa\ 8 Bowdich TWLTL from 8th 32nd 8th / Carnahan 2005 /1 way stop B - - 8th / Dishman Mica 2008 .6igaal B - - 8th / Evergreen 2006 .6igaal A r - - 8th / Farr 2047 2 way stop B - - 8th / McDonald 2007 2 way stop C ;I - 8th 8th / Park 2008 2 way stop B B - € - - 8th / SR 27 2001 2 C G - € - - way stop 8th / Sullivan 2007 &g+aa4 B B - € - - 8th / Thierman EST 2008 2 way stop C G - C - - 8th / Univercity 2008 A A - A - - -4a1 16th / Adamc 2008 /1 way stop A - A - - 16th / Bowdich 2008 /1 way stop € G l3 G Bowdich TWLTL from 8th 32nd 16th / Carnahan EST 2008 2 way sto4 B - - 16th / Dishman Mica 200/1 Bigaal C - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 38 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier 16th / Evergreen 2006 Sig- a1 A A A - - 16th / McDonald 2008 4 way stop A G - - 16th / Pincs 2008 2 € 4= A 4= S TBD"` way stop 16th / Saltcsc EST 2008 2 way stop 8 _ 8 - - 16th / SR 27 2008 83gaa4 G G A € S TBD"` 16th / Sullivan 200'1 83gaa4 43 6 - G - - 16th / University 2000 Sao B 6 - G - - 2'1th / Adams 2007 4 way stop A A - A - - 2'1th / Blakc EST 2008 4 way stop A A - A - - 2'1th / Bowdish 2007 2 way stop G G G G G Bowdish TWLTL from 8th 32nd 2'1th / Evergreen 2008 '1 A A A 5 A Evergreen TWLTL from 16th 32nd way stop 2'1th / McDonald EST 2008 2 way stop 8 6 - 5 - - 2'1th / Pincs EST 2008 2 5 6 - 43 - - way stop 2'1th / SR 27 2007 2 way stop G G - - - 2'1th / Sullivan 2008 83gaal 5 G - - 2'1th / University EST 2008 2 A A - way stop 32nd / Bowdish 2006 S1gna4 5 5 43 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 39 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier 32nd / Dishman Mica EST 2008 2 way stop € 6 € - - 32nd / Evergreen EST 2008 2 € G G € - way stop 32nd / Pines 2005 Sigaa4 € _ S - - 32nd / SR 27 2005 Sigaa4 € € - - 32nd / University 2005 Signal A a € - - '11th / Schafer EST 2008 4 A A - A - - way stop Appleway / Barker 2005 Sigaa4 G 0 - .P - - Appleway / Dishman Mics 2008 Sigaa4 B 6 - 8 - - Appleway / Farr 2008 Sigaa4 A A - A - - Appleway / Park 2008 Sigaa4 B 6 - 0 - - Appleway / Thierman 2005 Sigaa4 0 0 .P - Appleway / University 2008 Sigaa4 46 6 8 Appleway / Vista 2008 Signal A A A Blake / SR 27 EST 2008 2 B 6 46 way stop Broadway / Adams 2005 2 way stop 43 0 € Broadway / o. ne 2008 Sgna4 B i, S Broadway / Barker EST 2008 2 `- 5 way stor Broadway / Bowdish 2005 Sigaa4 A A Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 40 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier 2009 2 , ; �t, ,,.,n, 1,ea/ .ri, Broadway / Evergreen 2005 .,,y. Broadway / Fancher 2007 Sigaa4 G -- Broadway / Farr Broadway EST 2008 2 way stop G o Broadway / Flora 2008 2 way stop G 1= f, Ro 44 Broadway / Heacox 299,9 2 way stop G G - G - Broadway / McDonald 2005 Sigaa4 A A - A - Broadway / Mullan 2008 Sigaa4 B G - G - Broadway / Park 2008 Signa4 43 43 G 4= 1 Park Road Broadway Indiana Broadway / Pincs 2-0&9 S1-g-na4 G G - G - - Broadway / Sullivan 2007 S143+aa1 G G - G - - Broadway / University 2007 S143+aa1 A A - A - - Broadway / Victa 2007 &143+aa1 A A A - Broadway / Yardley 2006 2 way stop 13 13 - Buckeye / Park EST 2008 2 way stop A G - Buckeye / Vista EST 2008 2 way stop 8 G Dishman Mica / Bowdish 2-095 81g-na-1 8 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 41 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier Euclid / Park 2005 2 way stop S S B - - Euclid / Sullivan 2006 4 way stop G G - - Euclid West / Barker 200'1 2 S _ € - - way stop Euclid East / Barker EST 2008 2 way stop S _ B - - Euclid West / Flora 2007 2 way stop B S B - - Euclid East / Flora 2007 2 way stop B S - G - - Indiana / Evergreen 2000 Sal B 6 - 8 - - Indiana / Mirabeau 2000 Sal A 6 - 8 - - Knee 2008 Sigaal G G - ID - - Knox / Vista EST 2008 2 way stop B 6 - 8 - - Mansfield / Mirabeau 2000 2 way stop G G - G - - Mansfield / Pincc 2008 Sigaal G G - S - - Mirabcau / Pines 2008 2 l= F l= B Install Signal way stop Mission / Adams 2005 2 way stop B 6 - B - - onkel,,. e 2005 Signal B G - - Mission / Bowdich 2005 2 way stop l3 l= - - Mission / Flora 2000 2 way stop l= A Roundabout Indiana Extension Mission / McDonald 2-096 Signal A - - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 42 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier ..r 2008 2 way stol 2005 -6[gna4 Mission / Park 2006 Sigaa4 Mis-ion / Pines 2007 -6[gna4 S - Mission / Sullivan 2005 -6[gna4 B 6 - Mission / Thierman EST 2008 2 way stop 6 6 - S - Mission / University 2008 2 way stop G 0 - 4= - Mission Conn. / Evergreen 2007 Sigaa4 A A - A - - Montgomcry / Argonnc 2008 Sigaa4 S G € € G 1 90 to o Trent Montgomery / Mansfield 2008 RB6 A G - 0 - - Montgomery / University 2007 2 way stop 0 0 - € - - Rutter / Park 2998 2 way stop B S - 0 - - Saltese / McDonald EST 2008 /I way stop A 8 - € - - Saltese / Sullivan 2008 2 0 .7 S 4= 6 Install Signal way stop Schafer / Dishman Mica 2008 Blg-aa-1 -F - Spraguc / Adams Blg-aa-1 S - Sprague / Appleway Blg-aa-1 S - Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 43 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier Sprague Argonne 2008 Sig -nal € S S - - Sprague / Barker 2008 4 way stop A € S 1= G Install Signal Sprague / Bowdish 2008 Sig -nal G _ G - Sprague / Conklin 2009 Signa4 A A - - Sprague / Evergreen 2006 Signa4 G o G - Sprague / Fancher 2007 Signa4 0 0 - 0 - - Sprague / Farr 2008 Signal A A - A - - Sprague / Flora 2005 Signal B 6 - 0 - - Sprague / 190 WB On Ramp EST 2008 Signal A A - A - - Sprague / McDonald 2009 Signal 0 0 - 0 - — Sprague / Mullan 2008 Signal B 6 8 - Sprague / Park 2008 Signal 8 A - Sprague / Pincs 2008 Signa4 0 0 Sprague / Progress 2008 Signa4 B 8 Sprague / Sullivan 2008 Signa4 0 € Sprague / Thierman 2005 Signa4 B 8 Sprague / University 2008 Signa4 0 0 Sprague / Vista 2008 Signa4 Q Q A Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 44 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier Thorpe / Dishman Mica EST 2008 2 way stop B 43 B - - Thorpe / Madison 2007 2 way stop A B - - Tree+ Re 2008 Sgna4 43 _ € - - Trent / Barker 2007 2 way stop 43 _ 4= F/B West Trent TWLTL Trent / Evergreen 2008 Bigna4 B 43 - B - - Trent / Flora 2003 2 way stop € € - 4= € STV Eliminate NB Movement Trent / McDonald 2007 2 way stop G 0 - € - - Trent / Park 2008 Sigaa4 B 6 - € BAG STV Reconfigure - Intersection Trent / Pines 2000 Sao G 0 - I= - - Trent/ Progrccs 2007 2 way stop G G - € - - Trent / Sullivan N Ramp 2007 Bigna4 A A - A - - Trent / Sullivan S Ramp 2007 Bigna4 A A - A - - Trent / University 2008 2 G G - — - 8TV Eliminatc Intersection- ntersectionTrent way stop Trent/ Vista 2008 Bigaa4 B a B - - Wellesley / Evergreen 2005 4 way stop A P 8 - - Wellesley / McDonald 2000 /I way stop S 7 € - - Wellesley / Progrccs ''n(-17 /I way stop a G A Bigelow Gulch Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 45 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier Wellesley / Sullivan 2007 41 way stop G G S l3 G Bigelow Gulch Install Broadway / Thierman 2009 Sig+aa1 A A - A - - Broadway / 190 WB Ramp 2009 Signal A A - A - - Broadway / 190 EB Ramp 2009 Signal S S - 8 - - Argonne / 190 WB Ramp 2008 Signal 8 6 - G - - Argonne /1 90 EB Ramp 2008 Signal € 6 - G - - MuIlan /1 90 WB Ramp 2008 Signal € S - € - - MuIlan /1 90 EB Ramp 2008 Signal G G - G - - Indiana / Pines 2008 Signal S 0 - € - Pines /1 90 EB Ramp 2008 Signal G € € - Evergreen /1 90 WB Ramp 2009 Signal G € Evergreen / 1 90 EB Ramp 2009 Signal B S Indiana / Sullivan 2007 Signal G 0 Sullivan / 1 90 WB Ramp 2006 Signal B G Sullivan / 1 90 EB Ramp 2006 Signal € Indiana / 1 90 WB Ramp 2006 Signal B 8 Barker / 1 90 WB Ramp EST 2008 Signal " r € Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 46 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2008 LOS 2014 LOS 2014 Mitigated LOS 2030 LOS 2030 Mitigated LOS 2010-2015 Project Identifier EB Ramp EST 2008 S4gn-a4 _ LOS - _J LOS Note: See Table /1.38 for a listing of capital improvement ects. - - pro " Includes from Bigelow Gulch Road - - - - volumes project " Intersection may be impactcd by Applcway Extcnsion but analysis was not complctcd duc - to uncertainty of ROW projcct, - - - - - - A """ Improvement - - - - - options are still under evaluation BTV: Bridging the Valley - - - Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Proiect LOS LOS LOS 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 - - 4th / 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) Page 47 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS Identifier — 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) Page 48 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS 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) Page 49 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS 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 _ _ Applewav / Thierman 2011 Signal C D F Applewav / University 2008 Signal B B B Applewav / 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) Page 50 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS Identifier — 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) Page 51 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS Identifier — 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) Page 52 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS Identifier — Mission / Park 2006 Signal B C D Park Road 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 / Applewav 2006 Signal B B B Sprague / Argonne 2009 Signal B B B Sprague / Barker 2012 4 -way stop B F B F C Install Signal or Roundabout Sprague / Bowdish 2008 Signal C C C Sprague / Conklin 20012 Signal A B _ B _ _ Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 53 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS Identifier — 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) Page 54 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS Identifier — Trent / Flora 2012 2 -way stop C C _ F BTV- Eliminate NB Movement Trent / McDonald 2007 2 -way stop D E- F Trent / Park 2008 Signal B B _ D BTV- 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 _ _ Trent / University 2008 2 -way stop B B _ C _ BTV- 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 Wellesley / Sullivan 2011 4 -way stop E F F Bigelow 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) Page 55 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.36 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection Count Control 2012 2018 2018 2040 2040 2013-2019 Mitigated Mitigated Project LOS LOS LOS 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 _ _ Sullivan / 1-90 EB Ramp 2012 Signal F F _ F _ WSDOT planned low- cost safety Indiana e/o Sullivan / 1-90 WB 2012 Signal B — B — - B — - - Ramp Barker / 1-90 WB Ramp 2012 Signal A A _ A _ WSDOT Barker Interchange Barker / 1-90 EB Ramp 2012 Signal A B _ B _ WSDOT 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 Tying 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 Expenditures 2014 Table 4.37 Pavement Preservation Revenues and Expenditurc.s 2016 - 2013 2-044 2015 2-01-6 2017 201-8 Revenues General Fund $888,823 $888,823 $888,823 General Fund $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 $855,857 Street F un�nd $282,000 $282,000 $282,000 $2427000 $2427000 $282,000 Civic Facility $616,281 $616,281 $616,284 $5.5479.96 $0 $0 Replacement F end REET 1 $450,000 $150,000 $150,000 $450,000 $450,000 $150,000 BEET 2 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 Total Revenues $2,054,141 $2,054,141 $2,054,141 $1,992,853 $1/137,857 11,437,857 Total deo $2,054,141 $2,054,141 $2,054,141 $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 §/n0() 282 000 282 000 282 000 282 000 282 000 Civic Facility $616,284 $616,284 $554,996 �0 �0 �0 Replacement Fund REET 1 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 $184,472 REET 2 5L18,z72 184 472 184 472184 472184 472 184 472 Grants $2,763,272 $971,032 �0 20 20 20 Total Revenues $4,919,323 $3,127,083 $2,094,763 $1,539,767 $1,539,767 $1,539,767 Total $3,595,521 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 $2,156,051 Expenditures Beginning Fund $264,354 $1,588,156 $2,559,188 $2,497,900 $1,881,616 $1,265,332 Balance Fund Balance $1,588,156 $2,559,188 $2,497,900 $1,881,616 $1,265,332 $649,048 2013 (dollars in thousands) Item if Primary Sour -se City Amount Total Amount 4 Argonne Road 190 to Tren CMA4 $420 $882 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 59 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 2 Mission Ave. Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (PE/RW) STP(U) 489 $650 3 Sidewalk Infill Program CMA4 $66 $324 4 Sullivan Road Wcct Bridgc BR $24 $1 208 2'lth Ave Sidewalk Adams to Sullivan City $432 $258 6 Mansfield Ave Connection Pines (SR 27) to 200 ft East of Houk Rd UCP 464 $--1754-1- Sidewalk 4;544 Sidewalk & Transit Stop Accessibility Project Other FTA 422 44-1-4 Spokane Valley Millwood Trail SCC to Evergreen Rd (PE) STP(E) $8 $560 Sullivan Rd/UPRR Overpass Bridge Resurfacing Project BR $92 $46-4 University Rd/I 90 Overpass Study CMA4 $26 $188 44 Wellesley / Adams Sidewalk Project Other Statc 42 $570 42 Park Road tt2 Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) STP(U) $20 $150 4-3 Park Road tt1 Sidewalk Project Sinto Ave. to Indiana Ave. Other Statc $2 $49. 44 Park Road tt2 Sidewalk Project Marietta Ave. to Buckeye Ave. Other Statc 44 $23 4-5 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Fancher to Dollar City $249 $249 4-6 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Havana to Fancher (EB Lanes) City $500 $500 47 Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN) STP(U) $214 $1,562 4-4 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study 190 to Wellesley STP(U) $27 $200 2013 Totals: $1,861 $9494 2011 (dollars in thousands) Item it Primary Source City Ar aunt Total Amount 4 Sullivan Road Wcct Bridgc Other Fed $21-3 $8,110. 42 Park Road tt2 Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) STP(U) $388 $2,877 4-3 Park Road tt1 Sidewalk Project Sinto Ave. to Indiana Ave. Other Statc $4S $385 44 Park Road 1t2 Sidewalk Project Marietta Ave. to Buckeye Ave. Other Statc $6 $4-20 46 Argonne Road Resurfacing Sprague to Broadway City 429-5 4295 20 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Concrete Intersections (CN Only) STP(U) $2,115 24 Euclid Ave Rcconctruction Flora to E City Limito City $1,615 $1,61-0 22 Evergreen Road Resurfacing Sprague to Mission City $995 $99-5 23 Greenacres Trail Sullivan to E City Limits (RW&CN) STP(E) 40 $1,095 24 Mission Ave. Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (CN) UAP $683 $3,116 25 MuIlan Road Recurfacing Dishman Mica to Broadway City $29 4296 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 60 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 26 - -- - - - _ _ STS $0 $100 27 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Herald to University City $40-5 $d05 - - -- e STP(U) $32 $236 2014 Totals: $5226 $22,374 item it Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 4 Sullivan Road West Bridge Other Fed $243 $8,'M0 26 Spokane Valley Millwood Trail SCC to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) STP(E) SO $2,1/10 28 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 1 Marietta to Euclid STP(U) $336 $2J85 29 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) so $490 30 Dishman Mica Resurfacing Sands to Thorpe City $353 $353 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 Reconstruction 'lOth to Thorpc City $4-550 $4-550 34 Mission Ave Resurfacing Argonne to Herald City $/170 $/170 35 Mullan Road Resurfacing Broadway to Mission City $34-4 $344 36 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Argonne to Herald STP(U) $96 $740 33 Sullivan Road Resurfacing Broadway to Mission STP(U) $38 $280 2015 Totals: $5,317 $18,784 2046 (dollars in thousads) item it Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 26 Spokane Valley Millwood Trail SCC to Evergreen Rd (RW&CN) STP(E) SO $271-40- Appleway 2-440 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) $0 $4-90 38 Appleway Blvd Resurfacing Vista to Dishman Mica City $1,155 $1,155 39 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement 190 to Montgomery City $362 $362 40 P. City $280 $280 44 Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing Thorpe to S City Limit City $210 $210 42 Euclid Ave Reconstruction Sullivan to Marietta STP(U) $2,110 43 Farr Road Reconstruction 'lth to 8th City $525 $525 44 Progress Road Reconstruction Wellesley to Crown City $/185 $485 45 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Vista to Argonne STP(U) $90 $67-0 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 61 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 46 $a-1-31 $8aa 2016 Totals: 1 $3,505 1 $8,877 Item it Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 29 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) so $1,000 39 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement 1 90 to Montgomery City $2,,76 $2,776 47 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE & RW Only) Other Fed $101 $a0 48 Euclid Ave Reconstruction Marietta to Flora City $1,135 $1,135 4g Evergreen Road Resurfacing 1 90 to Indiana City $280 $288 rag Farr Road Reconstruction Appleway to 'lth City $250 $250 54 Sprague / Fancher Concrete Intersection STP(U) $242 $1,572 52 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Flora to Corbin STP(U) $/30 63 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Park to Vista STP(U) $595 54 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Sullivan to Conklin STP(U) $94 $695 as Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 Euclid to Kiernan STP(U) $39 $291 2017 Totals: $5,325 $10,071 Item it Pr ma y Source City Amount Total Amount 29 Appleway Trail University to Evergreen STP(E) so $1,000 47 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE & RW Only) Other Fed $256 $1,899 as Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 Euclid to Kiernan STP(U) $4-1-4 $3,06-9 a6 Sprague / Argonne Mullan Concrctc Intersection& City $2,342 $242 2018 Totals: $3,012 $8,340 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 62 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.38 Six -Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2014 (dollars in thousands) Item # Project Name Primary Cy Amount Total Source 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) 3_0 $440 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 62 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities 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 Prosect - 4th to Sprague CDBG 27 $195 8 Citywide Traffic Sign Protect 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 §12 87 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 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 63 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.38 Six -Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2015 (dollars in thousands) Item # Protect Name Primary Com( Amount Total Source 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 A..lewa 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 Protect - Sinto Ave. to Indiana Ave. SRTS 55 40 22 Sullivan Corridor ITS - Indiana to Trent (SR 290) CMAQ §14 $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) Page 63 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 64 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.38 Six -Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2016 (dollars in thousands) Item # Proiect Name Primary Cy Amount Total Source 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 §1 $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 Prosect - Flora to Barker UAP $309 $1,543 28 2016 Street Preservation Prosect City $2,000 $2,000 2016 Totals: $3,193 $10,097 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 64 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.38 Six -Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2017 (dollars in thousands) Item # Proiect Name Primary City Total 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 Prosect City $1,400 $1,400 2017 Totals: $3,086 $11,687 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 64 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.38 Six -Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2018 (dollars in thousands) Item # Proiect Name Primary City Total 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) Page 64 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 35 Ar. onne Road Concrete Pavement -1-90 to Mont. 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 4.39 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Summary 2014 through 2019 (in $1,000) Secured Projects Planned Projects Totals Year Federal State Other City Total 2014 I 8325 3542 146 1293 $13,306 2015 15550 2750 0 1010 $9,310 2016 1 0 0 0 0 30 2017 1 0 0 0 0 L0 2018 1 0 0 0 0 30 2019 1 0 0 0 0 L0 Total $113,875 $6,292 $146 $2,303 $22,616 Federal State Other City Total 2296 0 0 2359 $4,655 1133 2733 0 2861 $6,727 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 $19,930 $10,395 $231 $19,055 $49,611 Federal State Other City Total 10621 3542 146 3652 $17,961 6683 5483 0 3871 $16,037 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 $33,805 $16,687 $377 $21,358 $72,227 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 65 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.38 Six -Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan Table 4.39 Six Yeasportation 2019 (dollars in thousands) Item # Project Name Primary City Total Source Amount Amount 35 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - 1-90 to Montgomery City $2,749 $2,749 36 Spokane 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 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 2014 I 8325 3542 146 1293 $13,306 2015 15550 2750 0 1010 $9,310 2016 1 0 0 0 0 30 2017 1 0 0 0 0 L0 2018 1 0 0 0 0 30 2019 1 0 0 0 0 L0 Total $113,875 $6,292 $146 $2,303 $22,616 Federal State Other City Total 2296 0 0 2359 $4,655 1133 2733 0 2861 $6,727 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 $19,930 $10,395 $231 $19,055 $49,611 Federal State Other City Total 10621 3542 146 3652 $17,961 6683 5483 0 3871 $16,037 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 $33,805 $16,687 $377 $21,358 $72,227 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 65 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities Table 4.39 Six Yeasportation Improvement Program Summary 2013 through 2018 (in $1,000) - I - Secured Project& - - Panned-Rrejests - Total& Xe4r Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total Federal Statc Other City Tt..-. 2012 $378 64-484 $4# $749 60,388 1228 169 $8 $47-182 $.17-1-94 $4494 49 $4# 14843g7494 2013 $77227 $4-008 :. e $213 S8440 35713 33213 :. e $574. $43,939 $42,940 $4724 :. e 357226 $22,379 2011 $7227 $44189 40 $213 387448 $.9724-5 38 $8 $.97-144 $10,319 47472 $44189 38 3.941- 484-89. 2015 ::! ::! ::! ::! ::! $5472 :;! :.e $375€15- $87877 $5372 :.e :.e337505 $87877 20'16 $9 $9 $e $8 $8 $44-44 $e $88 $.942-4 $44174 $44-14 $8 $38 $.942-5 $441,7-41- 49;0742017 $87310 2017 ::! ::! :;! :;! ::! 357203 :;! $95 $3,012 $87340 $5233 :.! $95 $37042 Tett $18,332 $3;486 $1-77 $1,185 $23,180 $28,267 $37282 $4.333 $23,061 $54,743 $46,599 $6,769 334-0 $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 2014 I 8325 3542 146 1293 $13,306 2015 15550 2750 0 1010 $9,310 2016 1 0 0 0 0 30 2017 1 0 0 0 0 L0 2018 1 0 0 0 0 30 2019 1 0 0 0 0 L0 Total $113,875 $6,292 $146 $2,303 $22,616 Federal State Other City Total 2296 0 0 2359 $4,655 1133 2733 0 2861 $6,727 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 $19,930 $10,395 $231 $19,055 $49,611 Federal State Other City Total 10621 3542 146 3652 $17,961 6683 5483 0 3871 $16,037 5632 1234 38 3193 $10,097 4854 3652 95 3086 $11,687 4164 2319 98 3004 $9,585 1851 457 0 4552 $6,860 $33,805 $16,687 $377 $21,358 $72,227 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 65 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.40 Six Year Transportat Projects without on Improvement Program 2014 Through 2019 (in $1,000) Local Match within Existing Resources Project Name Project Description Total Cost Arterial Improvement Projects Bowdish Road - 16th to Sprague Sprague to 8th: Inlay & Enhancement; 8th to 16th: Reconstruct as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk, bike lanes and new stormwater facilities; $2,851.002,858 Bowdish Road - 24th to 16th Reconstruct Roadway as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk and new stormwater facilities; $2 846-09 Bowdish Road - 32nd to 24th Reconstruct Roadway as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk and new stormwater facilities; $2,637-o9 Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road extension north also known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4 -lane roadway with 8 -foot shoulders and a 12 -foot two way left turn lane. $55,00 Wellesley Realignment @ Barker/SR290 Realign connection of Wellesley to Barker Rd and SR290, 3 -lane section, Part of Barker/BNSF Grade Separation $5,18700 Bridge Projects Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (CN Only) Construct Grade Separation at Barker/BNSF RR/ Trent (SR290) $22,200,2044 500 Park Road / BNSF Grade Separation Reconstruct Park Road to separate the grades of Park Road and the BNSF railroad tracks. $16,52000 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 Improvement Traffic Control Systems Upgrades for Evergreen(Broadway $708-00 to 16th) Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to 16th Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor $785400 Saltese/Sullivan Traffic Signal Improvements to Intersection, Install Traffic Signal (In coordination w/ Spokane County) $586,00 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 Prosect - 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 $1,2432-09 Sprague / University Concrete Intersection Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement; $1,66000 Sullivan / Kiernan Concrete Intersection Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement; $1,423,00 Sullivan / Marietta Concrete Intersection Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement $1,49300 Sprague / Argonne -Mullan Concrete Reconstruct intersections in concrete pavement $2,342 Intersections Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase Concrete Pavement OCI: 37.28 (2013) $2,933.00 3 Inland to Marietta Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phaec Concrete Pavement; OCI: 37.28 (2013) $2,398.00 'I Spokane River to Inland Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 07-24-2013) Page 66 of 69 Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase Concrete Pavement; OCI 37A5 $2,720.00 5 Kiernan to Trent (2013) Southeast Street Preservation Projects Ponderosa Edgecliff Pavement Management Program 2013 Annual street PMP $3,729.00 Consolidated preservation projects per - - ! Annual PMP $1,229.00 . - -- -- - street preservation projects per - - ! Annual street PMP $3,806.00 -- - - preservation projects per - - ! Annual street PMP $3,206.00 -- - preservation projects per - - ! Annual PMP $3,911.00 -- - street preservation projects per - - ! Annual street PMP $1,200.00 -- - preservation projects per Pavement Management Program - Local Access Annual street preservation projects $12,000.0011664 S.C. Library Dist. Total S.C. Library Dist. $113,722.00190 335 S.C. Library Dist. 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 Services 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 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 flicf 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 Il 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 CIP Sewer not available Percentage 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 Planninq 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 6.2.1 Bonneville Power Administration The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) was established in 1937 and is a federal agency under the U.S. Department of Energy that markets wholesale electrical power. BPA operates and markets electrical transmission services in the Pacific Northwest. The power that is marked by BPA is generated at 31 federal hydro- electric projects, one non-federal nuclear plant and several other non - Figure 6.1 - BPA's Transmission System & Federal Dams 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 2of9 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 with customers. The "Bulk Transmission System" is operated by BPA, which operates a region wide, interconnecting, transmission system that supplies electric power to utilities from federal hydroelectric projects east and west of the Cascades. The primary service BPA provides to Avista and other electricity utilities is wheeling electrical energy throughout the region. A majority of the transmission lines 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. Figure 6.2 - Avista Hydro Facilities 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 substations including the Locust station, located south of Interstate 90 on the west side of Locust Street; Nelson station, located south of 4th Avenue east of Walnut; and the Opportunity station located at Modern's main office site on Pines Road, north of Broadway. 6.2.5 Inland Power & Light — Description of Utility Inland Power & Light (IP&L) began operation in 1937 providing electrical service to some 160 farms and homes northeast of Spokane. IP&L's now serves electrical customers in 13 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 City of Spokane Valley. 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. The Spokane area is the largest metropolitan region served by Avista with a population of over 350,000. Avista is advantageously located on two interstate natural gas pipelines. Williams Pipeline — West, (still referred to as Northwest Pipeline Corporation — NWP), provides both firm and interruptible natural gas transportation service to access both British Columbia and domestic Rocky Mountain gas. Pacific Gas & Electric Transmission — Northwest (PG&E GT -NW) provides both firm and interruptible transportation to access Alberta natural gas. °Nesyelem Cedonia Valley PEN❑ Newport FERRY ° .. OREILLE BOI Keller oOHumers Lon Lake ° Haae,,,.. °Sgirgdale .EIL , ° 'Coulee Eam Emerynse° STEVENS rPaM , O'Easi Heights - :ForSpokane .FON ° ,SaNe° LINCOLN rincoln :Nine MleC.Ibett •VNlbur. Creston Falls ° 'Hayden Hanson ° .Telford Post Falls ;fir Rocklyna R1 SpokaneWE °Eavenpon IOtikraeale Medical La k Valley oN MI."' Canby South' d v.!".Downs Fart. ° ",,,.:pr. PI. .Schoonover,........lvkrgellus _. SpaAne...._ Rosalu.._ WEaNa St Packard' > 'lamom Tensed She Rhzville / lo Oakesdale ° de h. aohn ° Fatminl • �NaNen e° Hlllcres[' 'Carlmar Step, Eatheld ey M1kson Plate Pa, Penge° rThera .Palouse A, A E A M 3 ,Entlicol[ °Colfax SM1ano L3 Cmise WHITMAN gbion ° Washmcna Hooper p,„Pullman 'ac. 'Connell o Iota Lo o 'Swih w_.. RlapatM1 W- r'ohon Figure 6.3 - Inland Power & Light Service Area Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 6 — Private & Public Utilities Page 4 of 9 � ;Ai:; ___ ��.YY. .'t^t- t� DIY dkY'Y to t• M-�IW �IUEI_ AIM a. Figure 6.5 - Natural Gas Supply System 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 utilizes existing telecommunications infrastructure for this service. Comcast is regulated by the WUTC as well. Proposed Improvements — Qwest and Comcast are 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 capacity is easily and quickly added to the system. Figure 6.5 - Cricket Wireless Coverage Area 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 capabilities and features available to wire line users are available to cellular users. The wireless/cellular communications sector of the economy is growing rapidly. wiry Hca Sp Hemi hliJ mei' I • L; aka- 4 9 ney :.ue Figure 6.6 - Qwest Wireless Coverage Area Wireless or personal communication services (PCS) works by splitting a region into smaller geographic areas called 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. Figure 6.7- T -Mobile Coverage Area dale Dee,' Park Athol Spokane - C euj d' Alene 45. Figure 6.9 - Sprint Wireless Coverage Area 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 vegetation of the area. Radio frequency engineers must design and optimize cell site heights and locations within the PCS network to enable sufficient overlap between cells to provide continuous coverage. Staff has identified the major wireless providers in the Spokane Valley area. The maps and graphics indicate the individual wireless providers service areas. Information regarding current and future predicted number of subscribers is considered by the purveyors to Figure 6.8 - Cingular Coverage Area 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 anticipated that subscriber numbers will continue to increase over the time horizon of this Plan. SorldpOorbt Priest Rirviv Post poi F2Il+ C .r•_,ur d' Alan °maturity , r Chonwy Athol 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 and are not shared for purposes of local comprehensive planning. 6.4.3 Internet Service Forecasting for new cellular facilities uses a relatively narrow time frame of typically two years. Expansion of the wireless system is demand driven; therefore wireless providers ani iur 1 1 Figure 6.11 - Verizon Wireless 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. The signal can be received either off a hard line (cable), satellite dish, microwave antennas, and/or TV antenna. Main trunk cable lines (coax and fiber) distribute 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 residents within its franchise areas. Factors Figure 6.12 - Cable Television Schematic 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 ""NAICS INDUSTRY TITLE (numbers in thousands) Spokane, September 2011 Washington 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 1l 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) Page 3 of 18 Chapter 7 - Economic Development 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 212,000- 210,000- 208,000- 206,000- 204,000- 202,000- 200,000 Nonfarm industry employment, not seasonally adjusted, in Spokane County (Spokane MSA) I,hhk�kwl�u Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009 MI 2010 2011 Source: Washington State Employment Security Department, Labor Market and Economic Analysis Branch Figure 7.2 Unemployment Trends 12.0%- 11.0%- 10.M- 2.0%-11.0%-10.0%- 9.0% - 9.0%- 8.0% 8.0% Unemployment rates, not seasonally adjusted, in Spokane County (Spokane MSA) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec - 8- 2009 2010 - zoll 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 Show All Occupations Estimated Employment Annual Growth Rate AvAvg.g. Annual Opening Due to Growth Avg. Annual Total Openings 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) Page 4 of 18 Chapter 7 - Economic Development City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 7.3 Employment Forecasts Show All Occupations Estimated Employment Annual Growth Rate AvAvg.g. Annual Opening Due to Growth Avg. Annual Total Openings 11.3 Occupation Group 2009 2014 2019 2009- 2014- 2009- 2014- 2009- 2014- 2014 2019 2014 2019 2014 2019 25.3 337.9 Total 40.9 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 (in thousands) Spokane Valley County State 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 Wholesale Trade, 5.18 Information. Administrative, lste P, 1.jnd},en,ent, R gmediatron - rv,ccs.1,49 I ,t.,t F,.:vital & Leasing, 1.72 Min..1facturing,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 & remediation Services 23,560,170 1.49 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) Page 6 of 18 Chapter 7 — Economic Development 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 ■ 2004 ■ 2005 11 2006 ■ 2007 ■ 2008 ■ 2009 ii 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 4.00 I 0 4 °' 3.00 -1 c co a 2.00 3 1.00 0.00 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year r Total Retail Sales (Billions), City of Spokane Total Retaih Sales (Billions), City of Spokane Valley • Annual Growth Rate, Spokane County • Annual Growth Rate, City of Spokane Annual Growth Rate, Cityof Spokane Valley 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% -5.0% -10.0% a6ue4D Jo aleb Year City of Spokane Valley City of Spokane County of Spokane 2004 Taxable Retail Sales (in billions) 1.54 3.29 N/A Annual Growth Rate N/A 2.2% 5.9% 2005 Taxable Retail Sales (in billions) 1.73 3.48 N/A Annual Growth Rate 12.5% 5.7% 7.9% 2006 Taxable Retail Sales (in billions) 1.88 3.84 N/A Annual Growth Rate 8.7% 10.3% 9.2% 2007 Taxable Retail Sales (in billions) 1.97 4.00 N/A Annual Growth Rate 4.5% 4.5% 5.6% 2008 Taxable Retail Sales (in billions) 1.80 3.92 N/A Annual Growth Rate -8.6% -2.1% -4.2% 2009 Taxable Retail Sales (in billions) 1.61 3.73 N/A Annual Growth Rate -8.3% -4.9% -6.9% 2010 Taxable Retail Sales (in billions) 1.59 3.67 N/A 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) Page 8 of 18 Chapter 7 - Economic Development 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 s 2004 2005 Commercial Multi -Family 1 IN Single Family/Duplex 29 1 3.6 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 IEMEMENEMEEllEM MEM 1 • MEEEES SE 344 1 mum 4', 7 5 Source: Spokane Valley Community Development Depa tment - Building & Code Compliance Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Page 9 of 18 Chapter 7 - Economic Development City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Figure 7.7 Construction Valuation „n. 2004 2005 ■ 2006 ■ 2007 ■ 2008 ■ 2009 ■ 2010 ■ 2011 Figure 7.8 Permit Revenue 2004 2005 112006 ■ 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 1-1-12 Number of Buildings Pinecroft Business Park 12310 — 12825 E. Mirabeau Parkway 350,000 DND 12 Riverview Corporate Center 16021 E. Indiana 250,000 158,000 1 Redwood Plaza 11707 E. Sprague 107,400 12,900 3 CenterPointe Business Park 200 N. Mullan 68,000 10,000 3 Argonne Mullan Plaza 920 N. Mullan 54,000 8,000 2 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Page 10 of 18 Chapter 7 — Economic Development City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 7.8 Largest Spokane Valley Office and (Ranked by total square footage) Business Parks Park Name / Address Total Square Footage Space Available as of 1-1-12 Number of Buildings Montgomery East Commercial Center 11616 E. Montgomery 53,000 11,710 4 Broadway Avenue Business Park 5501 E. Broadway 52,700 17,000 4 North Valley Business Park 11303, 11306 & 11327 E. Montgomery 51,300 6,390 3 North Pines Center 1014 N. Pines 51,000 2,000 6 Argonne Forrest Office Park 8815 - 8775 E. Mission 44,360 3,860 3 Mullan Center 1410 & 1420 N. Mullan 43,000 4,200 2 North Pines Professional Center 1005 N. Pines 37,580 8,940 7 Montgomery CommerCenter 2721 N. Van Marter 29,050 2,300 2 Boulder Creek 505 N. Argonne 25,000 2,300 2 Argonne Mullan Center 708 & 720 N. Argonne 20,000 775 2 Pinestone Business Center 2310-2314 N. Cherry 7,900 1,550 3 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 Address Total Square Footage Space Available as of 1-1-12 Park Size(acres) Number of Buildings Zoning Spokane Business and Industrial Park 3808 N. Sullivan 3,800,000 " 425,000 615 55 LI Central Business Park 11016 E. Montgomery 513,000 180,000 300 26 LI East Spokane Industrial Park Broadway and Fancher 110,000 none 8.5 5 I Montgomery Business Park 9922 E. Montgomery 105,800 4,100 6.8 2 LI Bielec Industrial Park 18001 E. Euclid 105,000 25,000 14.5 4 HI Vista Industrial Park 111 N. Vista 95,600 9,000 18 8 HI Empire Industrial Park 12009 E. Empire 90,000 2,200 7.5 13 LI Trent Center 6206 E. Trent 56,700 none 4.2 7 LI Argonne Commercial Center 9516 - 9608 E. Montgomery 56,600 5,100 2.4 3 LI Fancher Bridge Business Park 5805 E. Sharp 56,000 15,300 3 5 HI Carstens Industrial Park 415 N. Thierman 48,000 none 5 3 I Van Marter Warehouse 2701 N. Van Marter 45,000 none 3 1 LI Farr Industrial Park 9708 E. Montgomery 44,500 none 3.6 3 LI Ella Industrial park 525 N. Ella 40,000 none 3 6 I Adopted April 25, 2006 (Update 06-06-12) Page 11 of 18 Chapter 7 - Economic Development City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 7.9 Leading Industrial Parks (Ranked by total square footage) Park Name Address Total Square Footage Space Available as of 1-1-12 Park Size(acres) Number of Buildings Zoning Thierman Warehouse 1419 and 1507 N. Thierman 30,000 none 1.5 2 HI Alki Industrial Park 6002 — 6010 E. Alki 13,000 1,800 DND 2 HI " includes office and felx space I Industrial; HI Heavy Industrial; LI Light Indus rial; 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 Spokane Valley 11/1/11 11/1/10 FTE Employees Elsewhere 11/1/11 11/1/10 Parent Organization, Location Business Activity Wal-Mart Stores 1,332 1,362 DND DND Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Bentonville, AK Retail Sales Central Valley School District 1,248 1,245 0 0 Spokane Valley Public School 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 Group 360 340 18,000 17,500 AutoNation, Inc. Ft. Lauderdale, FL Auto Sales, Service, Repair Spokane Industries, Inc. 282 211 3 3 Spokane Valley Stainless Steel 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 System International LLC 176 201 206 DND Spokane Valley Corrugated Box Handling and Machines KeyTronicEMS 176 166 2,480 1,842 Spokane Valley Contract Manufacturing Good Samaritan Society 175 168 27,000 27,000 Sioux Falls, SD Retirement Community Principal Financial Group 169 177 DND 14,200 Des Moines, IA Investment, 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 Strenqths & 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-221—Develop zoning, permitting, and incentives that encourage prioritized development consistent with the SVCP. EDP -2.Q 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 EDP -3.2 Encourage the region's world-class education consortium. 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 EDP -3.6 EDP -3.7 Goal EDG-4 Policies City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Encourage cooperation among businesses, schools, labor unions and other organizations in developing job training through apprenticeships, mentoring and other programs. Promote opportunities that employ Spokane Valley residents in Spokane Valley. Encourage regional tourism as a sustainable provider of jobs and markets. 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 EDP -4.3 EDP -4.4 Goal EDG-5 Policies EDP -5.1 EDP -5.2 EDP -5.3 EDP -5.4 EDP -5.5 EDP -5.6 Goal EDG-6 Policies EDP -6.1 EDP -6.2 EDP -6.3 Goal EDG-7 Encourage the development of local attractions, recreational, cultural and sports events which take advantage of the four seasons. Encourage and promote the marketing of appropriate facilities that are consistent with Spokane Valley's tourism objectives. Expand and develop neighborhood and regional linkages and improvements to the Centennial Trail and Spokane River frontage. Collaborate with other governmental agencies and the business community to promote a sustainable, strong, diverse and healthy regional economy. Improve the effectiveness of capital improvement programs by encouraging greater communication and coordination between local governments and the private sector. Develop and implement strategies to identify and use appropriate Federal, State and regional economic resources and incentives. Encourage the continued support and funding of active duty, reserves and National Guard components of the United States Armed Forces. Collaborate with other local governments and business organizations in promoting legislation in support of economic development when appropriate. Encourage development of and participation in a recognition/certification program for businesses and non -profits moving toward local, sustainable practices in their operations. Encourage development of and participation in a "buy local" campaign. Establish a balanced approach to environmental sustainability which complements the utilization of area resources and economic growth. Encourage the retention, development and recruitment of environmentally friendly businesses. Encourage programs that foster and promote sustainable business practices. Encourage the development of clean technologies. 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 m m x Wabash m Valley .Sorin.s =City of Spokane Frederick a\\e S Mandalay Spokane River Buckeye urro E H kik 1 Wab II I Sanson Wellesle c,-eslwood MMMM d Boone Cataldo a ith 3th 3ih ra tt 3 r 14 13 21st L 17th 14th llth Jennie 25th Proposed collectors removed. Appleway Blvd not to be extended 2 8th 21st e 27th 31st a Co 32nd 37th m C7 e a` Mario Sumac Corke E 2nd 44th 44thWIMP xro° ey 0 erret !II 44th m J To a Bes( cpe E m Cctes M4 roe a Map 3.1 Arterial Street Plan Legend Current Classification State or Federal Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Proposed Principal Arterial Proposed Minor Arterial Proposed Collector Railroad Proposed Railyard City of Spokane Valley Other Municipalities Urban Growth Area Water Bodies Effective Date: 07/24/2013 4, Ordinance No.: 13-008 Map Location 0 0.35 0.7 1.4 Miles 1 1 1 I I I 1 Notice: The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision. The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department, Division of Planning, (509) 921-1000. Product of the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department ,/, i. ( Boone Cataldo a ith 3th 3ih ra tt 3 r 14 13 21st L 17th 14th llth Jennie 25th Proposed collectors removed. Appleway Blvd not to be extended 2 8th 21st e 27th 31st a Co 32nd 37th m C7 e a` Mario Sumac Corke E 2nd 44th 44thWIMP xro° ey 0 erret !II 44th m J To a Bes( cpe E m Cctes M4 roe a Map 3.1 Arterial Street Plan Legend Current Classification State or Federal Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Proposed Principal Arterial Proposed Minor Arterial Proposed Collector Railroad Proposed Railyard City of Spokane Valley Other Municipalities Urban Growth Area Water Bodies Effective Date: 07/24/2013 4, Ordinance No.: 13-008 Map Location 0 0.35 0.7 1.4 Miles 1 1 1 I I I 1 Notice: The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision. The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department, Division of Planning, (509) 921-1000. Product of the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department y of Spokane Sp .-ikaf?e River to slag 441ill. IIIII��_ .� 11111 Illlilllllll ■:::: 111■li�'�— rwilmo �■� om i■ Iii n :1■ IIID •,_ it __sub --^w liaziorprovam 290 1 I Po n'�J =_1 3. ■.._rie-L MO __I!1111iIjir. i■tom g_ _ 1lHEi!IIlIE!iI!IUILp1I!f qmpluiNF EMMIIES _ 1141446 1 is 11 mir • • 1 armpit a� Pi Map 7.1 2013 Development Activity lbw • ad II I MEM 11# zF • offirpip UM d IMIr ■■__1_IrMMEINEIM ■ ■ 11 `___!S■ r. • _ ImmominigifigErimigi■ t " vapaiiiirm N444111" er__,rm r Val*. S. r4: Mint -.4444 • \\Loom- 44=IELIW. I= i1 my 4 r -z1- 1 Womir - n ♦ � 1 1 _ ( 27 • Lak • • Li lop -sp Legend _ Urban Growth Boundary n City of Spokane Valley Other Municipalities Permits New Commercial New Residential Tenant Improvement Land Actions (Plats and Rezones) Effective Date: 07/24/2013 Ordinance No.: 13-008 S`pokane .Valley' Map Location 0.45 0.9 1.8 Miles I 1 1 1 1 i i 1 I Notice: The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision. The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department, Division of Planning, (509) 921-1000. Product of the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department eaK City of Spokane Clements Joseph Mandalay Su��".V o VIS r Wabash VW ellesley Wellesle Upriver 0 0 arland ell 0 'age 1111.6b. -kindirr Sanson Heroy E E a Crest° 0 - '® m oQ .•we\\ m Lacrosse Indu.trial �A In(� ck Sp0 a (5 O Gra e Buckeye River Orc '�arn`zQ Orchard Ave "' Park ��■[� � • ' 111•1111111 r_ IiJ P I • �� o LJmmo N■■ Da\toll redenc Dalton 11 0 0 Mirabeau Park Fairvie LL Shannon Sullivan Park I90 Valley -Mission 1)4.. 17,k Mission Broadway 0 w Valle 1111/11 gallE1111 S rogue 5th /-1 5_.� ~ .,,.. ,3 8th 9 m 5th lth 6th 7t .�, .... 0 14th • /9 29th 4 0 c 12th m _ vgi 17th N � 1 1th 14th 21st La 25th 27th 31st 37th eve 0 C7 Marr e 0 tr 32nd 0 0 E Edgecliff Park 42nd peway Jennie 44th 18th Ci c 0 e a CPA -OX -2013 irdalIndiana Mirabeau to I-90 Milirra3 ►OyIIE 0 . IEEE MI PAIN Alki Balfour �� Opportunity Township11- Park 1. ■ .�HallFPI ,rmil ®2nd "MAI 5thS>zelley� 5t6th IMMIIa ��NMEEMI=UWE LakenthmaimmiliMILI 8th w® �allp : //e C' W®11th o ' e CJ■L"l=NDEM�� , JY6idc �17h •S• F Flora plt :_ Ni Well( Euclid Bucke r. „ 1 n Kn. Indiana issio' • - LJL a Broadwa Valleyway U • Main O a CPA -OX -2013 Schafer to S. of 15th Ave r- ill ' ° Sth Vfew Park Gdoc vi o Terrace IkFi1 � /-Pool l . . ww.....iwes ,Irp.,,,, Ti �EIjL;: .rk 11fidirilimm `� 1 —lig% A Castle `rrd , Park c 6th ip ah , F• eagle 411 ondra 1 44th �uvmi_c+� LL I Holman a 41 0 b cNes e Those roe 2nd 2 St alaxyc 2 w 46th nlc To 6 m APachP q .3c30 Ilessa Best 5th r Belle Te e 45th h Ge 44 s 44th 3 0 E 0 a Map 11.1 Existing Bike Facilities Legend Existing Facilities Existing Bike Lane Existing Shared Use Path CentennialTrail Trailheads Schools Railroad Other Municipalities City of Spokane Valley Parks Water Bodies Effective Date: XX/XX/XX Ordinance No.: XX -XXX 4, Spokane ' .Valley 0 0.5 1 1 1 Map Location 2 Miles 1 1 Notice: The information shown on this map is compiledfrom various sources and is subject to constant revision. The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department, Division of Planning, (509) 921-1000. Product of the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department City of Spokane Frederick Fairy .• MEM IIII■MEV Spokane ce Buckeye OrC River iatr Wabash Sanson -0 0 0 Welle Y1 li mot . til ellesley Crosse ily arland Orchard Ave Park 11112tmcm filsROIlAll an. oflMillwood SIA IEI E■I Induallnal IAIA limmiliaiumm IL■ arI.r.Ta10 k Dalton 0-0 W 0.1 Fairview Mirabeau Park airvie 0 LL VINE Sullivan Park Shannon vok.gomery Kn •RIM. ora min gfr-..:3111•111sti sinto I!!UIIEtRIMiimm win MEM 7 ueIMMEMIK PIN MEM ffr a°°* Sprague 111.111Wo beT 14th 13 G, 29th =adds ill adds 1111111111111111 Harr rri \\� ee-I -: Boone Mu pildr411111 Cataldo MEM .to s�� E Opportunity Township'► Ritmo!' Balfour Park �� i 111 =mmiim mina }': i ummer im IMM iILIT MI �,�� - p lorkwaim !M A. eway 4th o .,M 1 5�d y 1„idA1.1.grl: angraral IPA F yrrYii Ott, adlegim Ir3W hME .. Park NV, er, 2th 1th 14th Edgecliff 6�r 17 h 21st 25th 27th Cho eie ac 164h 31st 0 0 LL 37th 0 32nd ■ 57th Nrie Co rke ry -ped 0 E 2nd Jennie 44th 18th 4 0 ae VEIN stwoo Bucket gyF.,yie'a ac% In 4 sr Cataldoz CPA -0X-2013 1""ay .. City limits to ° Appleway trail Main IMEIP row!) a ' ` .-Tr 11 'smfflit �'wm� �� Terrace Vit fm env 2OR /-Po( CPA -OX -2013 I Schafer to S. ammmorig I' of 15th Ave .my y NC, -T fi rt u > z =cj�$� Browns • enora • tags Park M. o w c, =� Castle ° i .9441. NIO ri ry 0 arart E 0 p Bio 35th NMI 0 500 Terre 44th 0 cn Holman c MI6 =•Ilessa c.ces erre tee rude 0cn u ° Bes'. °Fe5s -o A (ataxy 44th a° 0 E 0 Cotes 32nd Elia_mu-. EL 12 h 21st Map 11.2 Recommended Bikeway Network Legend Bicycle System .... . Existing Bike Lane Existing Shared Use Path Proposed Bike Friendly Route Proposed Bike Lane Proposed Shared Use Path Ped/Bike Bridge .... ' Proposed Ped/Bike Bridge OPotential Crossing Treatments Centennial Trail Trailheads Schools 11 1 1111 1 Railroad IIIIIIII■ Other Municipalities City of Spokane Valley Parks Water Bodies Effective Date: 07/24/2013 Ordinance No.: 13-008 41> 0 Spokane jValley 0.5 1 Map Location 2 Miles I 1 1 1 1 t t 1 I Notice: The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision. The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department, Division of Planning, (509) 921-1000. Product of the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department ■ vanta� �i C-ity of Spokane Frederick Sp ' .t e EllommEN • Buckeye OM - Clements Joseph E Mandalay River tom.. Broadwa MEM .: • Kno 0/ su Lu 0 m 1 Orchard Ave Park 0 a� o°I Sand ..-_. 0 Lcrosse Bnd Mart Wabash ellesley 10111011111111116191 , 111 m City F.i—i N■ ey B ckey:_ • Carlisle oco �,� Mission Nora I diana 'D adand • Dalton of Millwood ENNNI Shar MEM 11 -. MN MUD MN 11 14th -1711h1 15th 0 0 0 10th m 0 �s 0 21st Park Road \PO OI� Hea°oi- Main' 0 0 w Val e I IJ _ I Sinto 1 aldI MEM!. c NMIMEM II — oo' 'E3r 115th 6th 1 Pp' eway ME = Edgecliff– rl■ �� 12th 14th ` ego m 17th • 7y 18th 11th La 25th 27th 31st 0 u - 37th 0 0 Trw 32nd c 4 ove' ho le 0 MIN �-o ,ca 0 0 0 0 Marie Co rke -PedF nay e 0 w E 0 ~ 2nd Jennie 44th `0 by 0 0 Le ce 0 • �•• ora awl Mill 1st 4th u_ In Fairview monk pvo%d redenncc -- _M Valley -Mission P ark r Vall S.nn.Sel. Balfour P rk r 1 II 5th - 6th �a 7th E Mai6 • -o 9th BOB 1014 T,2 o f m 11 u 11 1 0 44th ra Holman 5111.11 • m 31945',0 Ci te4°° • Well este Sanson 0 m 0 D 0 0 0 w Heroy � Adams Trent to U Wellesley, West side 11k prne6r °tt, • Mir abeau Mirabeau -� > o 0 8 uee_a SS Wl J n ;anLEM . °off Wellesley Sullivan to Isenhart, North side Buckeye N Park ad: tta ' • • • • 19 Maxwe Nora ui--.. m 1 r $Into 1 N Boone T2e m— L 0 fIesmet I m I 0I I co �A aldo ' I Cat do U Broadway II -11—..........—.1.11=1..—. Alki II I 1 11� 6pnngleld Alki ll 11111000 Opportunity Township Nixon Hall i •••• live 1stl j NI 4th'1 11 MUM M=M_ LL MMEN a MII NEt 1 env. -- • II —© d 1 24th 1-1- - == - -- raralinr �j30tm� YY m �Gastle th .ParkiltS‘ . i` �r 0 �i 40th L) 8111 LL 12th 016th I� G� D18th h1 Browns Park Aron O 5th 1 O 6th 2 7th 9th 10th 26 18 .1• 11 5 3rd n Kie Lacrosse Indu.trial MA _Lau �:11��TV�..I'N 1�1—II i Sullivan Park 13th 14th m — 15th m F Terrace\V ew Park /,Pool Po dra 1 LD o .11= MIEPI Pierce Thor e redv nnic Knr 1 0 2nd o_ 1st ErPri iu r 4 ■ Flora pit • .. • 0 o y alleyway 0 9th: 1 11th 1 • `0 r Dalton -o w 1' • • • • • 000t\lgomery • Kn. 8 rr Bal In timet A Greenacres 0 �a oa Crest0° 1 "1-1 Indian. a,I 1� ram U Missiorw iii Maxwe r. M 5 .< ;Into 00 •I ar Cataldo 11 in . 14th mob • 0 24th Adams to Sullivan, North side 32nd 46th ellessa 35th 50e Terre u) 45th ces4, Ball BeVM Mort Whip Riverside Main 3eG°a'h =11E -6th 71.7 44th 0)1 2nd Core 32nd 8th Oth th- Map 11.3 Existing Sidewalk Network Legend Sidewalk Inventoty Sidewalks • Curb Ramps Textured Curb Ramps imim Centennial Trail Trailheads Schools Railroad Other Municipalities City of Spokane Valley Parks Water Bodies Effective Date: XX/XX/XX Ordinance No.: XX-XXXI Sjiioliane 0 0.5 1 Map Location 2 Miles Notice: The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision. The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department, Division of Planning, (509) 921-1000. Product of the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department J Wabash Valle ` S run City of Spokane 'Mt u• Frederick Spokane U Buckeye 0 Clements Joseph l0 E Mandalay Sui oi-°'� o' e 9 0 Crest44o a Sanson E erett .w Wabash Wellesley Sullivan to Isenhart, North side ellesley .s0°, 1U 000°.• Welle river Adams Trent to Wellesley, West side 4_ Crosse yaq� Orchard Ave Park _ worm 111®.. ., rietta rlisle .000' _ Wso adand Dalton ofTMillwood F lid Mirabeau Park Sullivan Park ndiana Flora Pit 13C0,303 hiU■dII I NE I!! =MEM z�tn 3th 4th int o2li 11'21 I Li 1 .111 MEM NE I ffi Smear I I a . 0 Maxwell m Balfour Park iversid 2.=immimaam 21h Edgecliffke �r at Park /'' Ell a NM •%:111i ; ■■ iFl■7■ %Il. •�o I 18th Sih th 7..Eauaim 8th am 1 O�0 s 'a F�� ,,r Ter: ��[.� �� cit;MAIMIT to Le Jennie k1 l -. „:. Ti t : :W1"1= .4,j -::7 il mN#BPrown 1mNrril rks' !E!. a Castle � A �`rd ra � eron Whir/ 0 24th Adams to Sullivan, North side 32nd 44th 44th Co rke 45th cess, Holman 5 mess � U nac` e 0 0e Map 11.4 Recommended Pedestrian Network Legend Pedestrian Network Sidewalks Proposed Sidewalks Existing Shared Use Path Proposed Shared Use Path Ped/Bike Bridge MEMEI EMENI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Proposed Ped/Bike Bridge Centennial Trail Trailheads Schools Railroad Other Municipalities City of Spokane Valley Parks soWater Bodies Effective Date: 07-24-2013 Ordinance No.: 13-008 Spokane _Valley Map Location 0 1 2 Miles I I I I Notice: The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision. The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department, Division of Planning, (509) 921-1000. Product of the City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department Attachment C - Findings FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2014 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 01-14 THROUGH 10-14 March 27, 2014 A. Background: 1. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan) includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2nd to November 1St of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1St in late winter/early 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 11 — Bike and Pedestrian. The Comprehensive Plan text amendments are designated as CPA -04-14 through CPA -10-14. B. Findings: 1. Spokane Valley Municipal Code (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 43.21C (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. 6. The DNS'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 of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 8. The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and SVMC Title 21 have been fulfilled. 9. The Planning 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 36.70A (Growth Management Act). Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments 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 -01-14 and CPA -03-14 with a recommendation for denial; CPA -02-14 with no recommendation; and CPA -04-14, CPA -05-14, 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 1), CPA -02-14 (Attachment 2), CPA -03-14 (Attachment 3) and CPA -04-014 through CPA -10-014 (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 are 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 -10-14. 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 -10-14, 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 27th day of March, 2014 Joe Stoy, Chairman ATTEST aitin Deanna Horton, Planning Commission Secretary Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for proposed 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 2 of 2 Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Findings and Factors for CPA -01-14 — SVMC 17.80.140(H): Findings 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, GMA 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. d. 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. f. 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 lead 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 Species 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 MUC 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 not 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 of 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 8 - Natural Environment, Chapter 9 — Parks, Recreation and Arts, and Chapter 11 — Bike and Pedestrian Element. Planning Commission Findings and Factors CPA -01-14 - Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1 Attachment 2 - Planning Commission Findings and Factors for CPA -02-14 — SVMC 17.80.140(11): Findings: a. 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 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. SCRAPS 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 (GMA) 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 regional 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 facility. iv. 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. 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 zone 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. SVMC Planning Commission Findings and Factors CPA -02-14 — Attachment 2 Page 1 of 2 19.60.080(B)(6) prohibits animal shelters in the CMU 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 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. 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 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 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 Findings and Factors CPA -02-14 — Attachment 2 Page 2 of 2 Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Findings and Factors for CPA -03-14 — SVMC 17.80.140(H): Findings: 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 36.70A RCW (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 does not correct a mapping error. e. 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. 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. c. 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 may 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. f. 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 -03-14 — Attachment 3 Page 1 of 1 Attachment 4 - Planning Commission Findings and Factors for CPAs -04-14 through 10-14 - SVMC 17.80.140(H): Findings: a. 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 Plan is 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 maintains the current land use patterns. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the Plan. Planning Commission Findings and Factors CPA -04-14 through CPA 10-14 (Text Amendments) — Attachment 4 Page 1 of 1 Meeting Date: June 10, 2014 Item: Check all that apply: AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Map amendments CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Department Director Approval ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation Second Reading - Proposed Ordinance No. 14-006 - Official Zoning 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; and First Reading — Proposed Ordinance May 27, 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 CPA -02-14 SCRAPS Mirabeau Park Trailhead Bradley Road Deny 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 the requests on 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. On May 27, 2014 Council voted on a motion to advance Ordinance 14-006 to a second reading. The motion was amended to advance Ordinance 14-006 to a second reading, and to deny amendment CPA - 01 -14. CPA -02-14 has been placed in proposed Ordinance 14-006 for adoption. CPA -01-14 and CPA - 03 -14 are included in the Ordinance stating that both will be denied. At this time, the Council will consider the consolidated proposed zoning map amendments in one ordinance for final adoption at second reading with appropriate findings included. 1 of 2 OPTIONS: Approve Ordinance No. 14-006 with or without amendments; or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 14-006. 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 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; 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 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 Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 2 of 8 DRAFT 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 motions to approve CPA -01-14 and CPA -03-14 failed and are 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. 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. Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 3 of 8 DRAFT 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 findings 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 -01-14 and 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 -01-14 and 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. Council Findings: 1. 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 Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 4 of 8 DRAFT Recreation has stated its preference that the parcel remain Parks/Open Space. Development impacts on this open space area would not serve the public. 2. The proposed amendment is not consistent with GMA Chapter 36.70A, Planning Goal 9 which 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. 3. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. Development has occurred in the surrounding areas as anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan, and allowed by the Zoning Code. 4 The amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the City determined that the proposed amendment would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. However, the area has been identified in the City Priority Habitat Species 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 MUC 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. 7. Development requirements would mitigate significant impacts. However the park and trail would experience increased traffic and noise impacts from new development. Commercial development would not be generally consistent with the surrounding parks, open space and natural area uses. 8. 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 9. The proposed amendment is not consistent with, and may negatively affect, the following chapters of the Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 8 - Natural Environment, Chapter 9 — Parks, Recreation and Arts, and Chapter 11 — Bike and Pedestrian Element. Council Decision: The request is denied. 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 1/4 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: Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 5 of 8 DRAFT 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. 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. Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 6 of 8 DRAFT 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. 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. Ordinance 14-006 Zoning Map Changes Page 7 of 8 DRAFT 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. 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. ATTEST: Mayor, Dean Grafos 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 ATTACHMENT A [-L Zoning Map [t 0Y 0.1 CPA -02-14 Applicant: Nancy Hill, Director, Spokane County Regional Animal Protections Services Parcel #: 35124.0813 Address: 2117 NBradley Avenue Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation from Low Density Residential, LDR to Corridor Mixed Use, CMU; and Subsequent Zoning change from R-3, Single Family Residential to CMU, Corridor Mixed Use. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 2014 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval: ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Centennial Trail Cooperative Agreement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: The Spokane Centennial Trail comprises 37 miles of natural beauty following the historic Spokane River from the Idaho state line to Nine Mile Falls, WA. Designed for use by people of all ages and physical capabilities, the Trail is fully paved, so it is ADA accessible. It is used for commuting to both work and pleasure, and wildlife observation. The trail is marked by sites of historic and archaeological interest. With its metropolitan center section in downtown Spokane, the Centennial Trail branches out to more rural west and east endpoints, reaching into Idaho for a total of 61 miles. It mostly follows the contours of the Spokane River and joins with Lake Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, connecting along the way with the Liberty Lake Trail, Plantes Ferry Link Trail, and Cheney -Fish Lake Trail. There are over two million uses per year on the Trail. In 1979, Spokane County Parks proposed a bicycle/pedestrian pathway along the Spokane River. In 1984, the Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce formed a Parks and Recreation Committee to explore this recreational possibility. In 1986, this group proposed a 10.5 -mile recreational trail in the valley, naming it a Centennial Trail to coincide with Washington State's 100th birthday in 1989. In 1987, the internationally recognized architectural team, Jones & Jones, was selected to develop a master plan for the Centennial Trail. It took a community to build the trail system - fundraisers, volunteers, and local businesses. In 1991, the Friends of the Centennial Trail was created, a nonprofit Washington corporation, dedicated to the ongoing support of the public sector for the development, operation, maintenance, and enhancement of the Spokane Centennial Trail. With the cooperation of the entire community, roughly 30 miles of class 1 trail were completed by 1992. The remaining seven miles consists of class 2 and 3 trail to create a contiguous trail system. The Trail is maintained via a cooperative agreement between the Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission and the City of Spokane, Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley through their respective parks departments with assistance by the Friends of the Centennial Trail. The original cooperative agreement did not involve the City of Spokane Valley since we did not become a City until 2003. However, since 2003, the City of Spokane Valley has been managing and maintaining our portion of the trail just as if we were a signatory on the original cooperative agreement. The City has budgeted resources and included the trail maintenance in our maintenance agreement with our outside contractor. The four Parties have been attempting to update and revise the original agreement for over seven years. Finally, in 2013 all Parties agreed to an ambitious schedule to complete the revised update by years end. One of the critical reasons for this revised update was to include the City of Spokane Valley. The City needed to become an official party to this cooperative agreement since a portion of the Trail is in our City. This new draft agreement not only includes the City of Spokane Valley but it has been updated to reflect current maintenance trends, costs, trail conditions and responsibilities. The draft agreement contains a management plan exhibit and a trail maintenance fund exhibit. From staffs perspective, the draft agreement is consistent in maintaining the role and responsibilities that Spokane Valley has been fulfilling since 2003. In fact several changes have been made to clarify responsibilities and provide our City with a new level of protection. This draft agreement has been reviewed by the legal staffs of the State, Spokane, Spokane County and Spokane Valley. The main addition to the cooperative agreement is the addition of Exhibit 2, the Trail Maintenance Fund. The Parties felt a need to address the continuing maintenance challenges that we all could be facing as the trail continues to age. The Trail Maintenance Fund for the Spokane River Centennial Trail to be jointly administered by the Parties was created for the maintenance of the Spokane River Centennial Trail. This fund is primarily intended to address preventative maintenance needs that Parties cannot cover as part of the routine maintenance specified in the Interagency Cooperative Agreement and to address capital repairs. Each Party will be required to make an annual lump sum payment of $20,000 to the Trail Maintenance Fund by February 1 of each year beginning in 2015. All expenditures from the Trail Maintenance Fund shall be unanimously approved by the Parties prior to disbursement. OPTIONS: 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement or take other action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move that we authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Centennial Trail Cooperative Agreement. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Currently the maintenance of the Centennial Trail is approximately $65,000 annually and is paid from the Parks and Recreation Department budget. This agreement proposes an additional $20,000 lump sum payment annually for the trail maintenance fund. STAFF CONTACT: Michael D. Stone, CPRP. Director of Parks and Recreation ATTACHMENTS: Draft Agreement Spokane River Centennial Trail Interagency Cooperative Agreement n Y' Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission City of Spokane Spokane County City of Spokane Valley Page 1 of 23 THIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered this day of , 2014, by and between SPOKANE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at West 1116 Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington, 99260 ("COUNTY") and the City of Spokane, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 808 West Spokane Fall Boulevard, Spokane Washington 99201 ("CITY"), the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 11707 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 ("SPOKANE VALLEY"), and Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, having offices for the transaction of business at 1111 Israel Road, P.O. Box 42650, Olympia, WA 98504 ("COMMISSION"). Collectively, the COUNTY, CITY, SPOKANE VALLEY and the COMMISSION are referred to as the "PARTIES." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the PARTIES are owners of land within the Spokane River Centennial Trail ("Trail") corridor as described in Section 3 of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Spokane River corridor is ecologically important, has significant potential for interpretive purposes, provides outstanding scenic beauty, tranquil surroundings and valuable historic and prehistoric features, is uniquely held in public ownership for the more than 39 miles of its length, is the common thread that links governments, communities and neighborhoods together, and has, for many thousands of years, been the corridor for commerce in the area and provides significant recreational opportunities; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES desire to provide for the development and operation of a multi- purpose trail system within the intent and authority of RCW 79A.05.030 and RCW 39.34.030 (2); and WHEREAS, the PARTIES agree that the primary development objective should be to preserve the river environment and provide facilities for public access, recreation, education and ecological and historic interpretation; and Page 2 of 23 WHEREAS, the COMMISSION is authorized under RCW 79A.05.030 and RCW 39.34.030 (2) to cooperate with the COUNTY, SPOKANE and SPOKANE VALLEY in accomplishing the program herein referred to and to enter into this Agreement to that end; and WHEREAS, the COMMISSION at its May 19, 1989 meeting authorized the Director or designee to enter into a long-term cooperative agreement with multiple governmental entities for the development and operation of the Spokane River Centennial Trail corridor (Trail); and WHEREAS, the PARTIES agree that the Trail can most advantageously be managed by the Commission with shared operation, maintenance and law enforcement responsibilities; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived, the PARTIES hereby agree as follows: Section 1: Term The term of the Agreement shall be for 20 years commencing on the date last below written. This Agreement may be renewed in 10 -year increments upon expiration of the original 20 -year term by mutual agreement of the parties. The COMMISSION will be given the first right to renew the Agreement before any other party is given the opportunity to manage the Trail under agreement with the COUNTY, SPOKANE and SPOKANE VALLEY. Section 2: Development and Management (a) All development and management of the Trail shall be the responsibility of the COMMISSION, unless otherwise provided herein, and the COMMISSION shall be the lead agency in preparing future development plans. Operation, including maintenance and law enforcement, shall be as set forth in Exhibit 1 - Management Plan ("Management Plan"), which Page 3 of 23 is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Each jurisdiction shall be responsible for all costs related to providing ordinary Trail operation, maintenance and law enforcement activities as outlined in the Management Plan. In the event of a capital repair or project (a project that falls outside of the parameters of ordinary maintenance as outlined within Exhibit 1 - Management Plan and/or exceeds $25,000 to complete), the underlying property owner or lease holder shall assume full responsibility (financially and otherwise) for project completion, barring any other agreements in place that may otherwise supersede. (b) In the event of a capital repair or project impacting the Trail and/or associated buffer lands, the responsible party may elect to petition the other parties for evaluation of opportunities for cooperative funding in accordance with Exhibit 2 — Trail Maintenance Fund ("Maintenance Fund") which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Construction, alteration or repair to the trail that is paid for in part or in whole from the Maintenance Fund will require the unanimous approval of all Parties. Parties will also agree to which entity will be responsible for carrying out the work including planning, permitting, contracting, spending, and the liability associated with such activities. NO such work will begin without the written approval of the plans by all Parties. Written approval can be in letter form or electronically by e- mail. In the event of an emergency requiring immediate action to protect persons or property, the Parties may call a special meeting or communicate by phone or e-mail to approve emergency spending. All construction or reconstruction must comply with applicable state and local laws. In the absence of cooperative funding, the responsibility for capital repairs shall fall to the underlying land owner or lease holder for the section of Trail in need of repair. The Parties shall meet every three years for the life of this Agreement to review the capital funding threshold (currently at $25,000 — which is presently the state threshold for capital funding). Page 4 of 23 Section 3: Coordinating Council A Coordinating Council comprised of one (1) representative of each of the PARTIES, as well as a non-voting representative of the Friends of the Centennial Trail, shall be established to carry out all its responsibilities as outlined in the Management Plan and Maintenance Fund. The Coordinating Council representative from each party to this Agreement shall be as follows: • Washington State Parks: Riverside State Park Manager or Designee • Spokane County: Parks, Recreation & Golf Director or Designee • Spokane- Parks and Recreation Director or Designee • Spokane Valley: Parks and Recreation Director or Designee • Friends of The Centennial Trail (non-voting): Executive Director or Designee Each representative shall have responsibility for disseminating information to other individuals and parties in his/her group and for coordinating matters for the administrative working group. The designated representative shall have the authority to vote on fund spending priorities on behalf of the organization they represent. Section 4: Areas of Jurisdiction i. The COMMISSION is primarily responsible for management of the entire 39 mile length of the Trail and maintenance and law enforcement on or within the Trail corridor and adjacent buffer lands within Riverside State Park from Nine Mile Recreation Area to the TJ Meenach Bridge. The COMMISSION is not precluded, however, from conducting maintenance or law enforcement on the entire Trail corridor and buffer lands to protect safety and recreation on the Trail, including those areas where the COMMISSION is the Page 5 of 23 underlying property owner but another jurisdiction is responsible for management, maintenance and law enforcement per this Agreement. ii. SPOKANE is responsible for the management of adjacent CITY -owned or leased buffer lands and maintenance and law enforcement on or within the Trail corridor located within the existing and future municipal boundaries of SPOKANE from the south end of the TJ Meenach Bridge to Centennial Trail Mile Marker 16 near "Boulder Beach" beyond the eastern municipal boundary of SPOKANE. iii. The COUNTY is responsible for management of adjacent COUNTY -owned or leased buffer lands and maintenance and law enforcement on or within the Trail corridor from Centennial Trail Mile Marker 16 near "Boulder Beach" to the Idaho border minus any portion of the trail corridor and adjacent buffer lands that are located in SPOKANE VALLEY'S municipal boundaries (current and future) — and minus any other portions of the Trail corridor and adjacent buffer lands in this stretch that become located within an existing or future city(s) municipal limits (i.e. annexation, incorporation). iv. SPOKANE VALLEY is responsible for management of adjacent city -owned or leased buffer lands and maintenance and law enforcement on or within the Trail corridor within its municipal boundaries (current and future). Section 5: Rules and Regulations The Trail is to be managed consistent with the provisions of chapter 79A.05 RCW and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder, unless otherwise exempted by the Director or COMMISSION. Page 6 of 23 Section 6: Permits Development and maintenance along the trail corridor shall be done in full possession of all necessary permits and licenses and in accordance with all applicable codes and regulations — including SEPA — and consistent with the overall development plans prepared by the COMMISSION. Obtaining permits will be the responsibility of the initiating party. Section 7: Cooperative Management This Agreement allows management by the COUNTY, SPOKANE and SPOKANE VALLEY of COMMISSION -owned lands; and, by the COMMISSION of COUNTY, SPOKANE, and SPOKANE VALLEY -owned buffer lands within the Trail corridor. Any modifications or uses of this property for other than buffer shall be consistent with Trail development, preservation of the river corridor, and approved by COMMISSION staff prior to use, modification or construction. Use of these lands for recreation, education or river access purposes may be granted by amendment to this Agreement upon approval of the proposed plans for said property by COMMISSION staff and approval of use by the COMMISSION, and in accordance with all applicable Federal, state and local laws. Section 8: Jurisdiction Approval All new facilities and improvements made by the COMMISSION shall be consistent with Trail development, preservation of the river corridor, and approved by the applicable jurisdiction prior to construction. The COMMISSION shall be in possession of all necessary permits and licenses and shall carry out all development, maintenance and operation in accordance with all applicable Federal, state and local laws. Page 7 of 23 Section 9: Hamilton Street Bridge The Hamilton Street pedestrian bridge is located on SPOKANE -owned property. Routine maintenance of this bridge will be the responsibility of SPOKANE. Any repairs relating to the structural integrity of the bridge; and, if necessary, replacement will be the responsibility of SPOKANE. Section 10: Denny-Ashlock Bridge The Denny Ashlock pedestrian bridge is located on both COMMISSION and SPOKANE VALLEY -owned property. Routine maintenance of this bridge will be the responsibility of the party in whose jurisdiction the bridge resides (presently the COUNTY for the northern half of the bridge, and Spokane Valley for the southern half of the bridge). Any repairs relating to the structural integrity of the bridge and, if necessary, replacement will be the responsibility of the COMMISSION. Section 11: Entire Agreement This Agreement grants only permission to allow the COMMISSION to use the COUNTY, SPOKANE and SPOKANE VALLEY -owned property and to allow the COUNTY, SPOKANE and SPOKANE VALLEY to use the COMMISSION -owned property for the purposes and on the terms and conditions herein stated. No legal or equitable title is conveyed hereby. Title to the subject property shall remain with the landowner throughout the term of this Agreement and renewal thereof. Page 8 of 23 Section 12: Indemnification To the extent permitted by law, the COUNTY and/or SPOKANE and/or SPOKANE VALLEY shall defend and hold harmless the COMMISSION and the State of Washington, its officers, agents, employees, successors or assigns against any and all claims suffered or alleged to be suffered on the property, except such claims which arise out of the activities of the COMMISSION, its officers, agents or employees, for which claims the COMMISSION will defend and hold the COUNTY, SPOKANE and/or SPOKANE VALLEY harmless. Section 13: Signs The COMMISSION shall erect and maintain a sign(s) identifying the COUNTY, SPOKANE and SPOKANE VALLEY as cooperating agencies. Any development authorized in accordance with Section 8 herein shall be signed by the applicable jurisdiction identifying the COMMISSION as a cooperating agency. The COMMISSION will be the primary focal point and contact for signing. Section 14: Termination This Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual written consent of all PARTIES hereto. Section 15: Modification The provisions of this Agreement may be modified at any time by the mutual consent of all PARTIES hereto. Page 9 of 23 Section 16: Assignment of Rights No rights under this Agreement may be assigned without the prior written consent of the other parties. This does not preclude third -party agreements which are in compliance with the Management Plan. Section 17: Tree Removal Any tree removal shall be in accordance with landowner rules and regulations. Section 18: Non -Compliance The Trail and adjoining buffer lands are to be used by the COMMISSION for public Trail corridor purposes. Except as otherwise provided for herein, this Agreement may be terminated by any party in the event of non-compliance by any other party with the terms and conditions hereof, providing that the terminating party allow the non -complying party no less that ninety (90) days written notice of violation in which to correct any situation which is not in compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If correction is not made to the satisfaction of the terminating party within the ninety (90) days, this Agreement will automatically terminate without further notice. Section 19: Removal of Improvements Unless otherwise agreed, upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, all improvements placed on property under this Agreement shall be disposed of in compliance with applicable provisions of the Revised Code of Washington. Page 10 of 23 Section 20: Discover Pass SPOKANE, SPOKANE VALLEY, and the COUNTY have agreed to contribute towards the operation, care and maintenance of portions of the Trail and associated buffer lands as outlined herein. In recognition of this investment, the COMMISSION agrees NOT to impose any parking or visitor fees (i.e. Discover Pass) for ordinary visitation and use of those trailheads and other areas commonly used for parking along portions of the Trail corridor and buffer lands for which SPOKANE, SPOKANE VALLEY, and the COUNTY have maintenance responsibility. Section 21: Trail Realignments and Connections (a) Trail realignments which may be completed to address safety hazards, to separate the trail from stretches of roadway, to eliminate gaps, or to otherwise perfect the Trail shall become part of this Agreement and the Party whose geographic area includes the new trail element(s) shall assume jurisdictional responsibility for the new trail element(s) unless otherwise determined by the Parties through modification of the Agreement. (b) Future connections to the Trail such as neighborhood access points, local commuter trails, or regional trail connections (e.g. Fish Lake Trail) are a stated goal in the adopted Spokane County Regional Trails Plan. Trail connections shall be encouraged to be completed, but any trails which have been connected to the Centennial Trail shall not become part of this Agreement nor extend maintenance responsibilities by the Parties under this Agreement, unless otherwise determined by the Parties through modification of the Agreement. Section 22: Entities No new entities are created by this Agreement. Page 11 of 23 Section 23: Agreement to be Filed The PARTIES shall record this Agreement with the Spokane County Auditor. Section 24: Personal/Real Property/No Joint Board There shall be no common ownership of any real or personal property under the terms of this Agreement. Each party to this Agreement shall separately own its real and personal property. The Coordinating Council referenced in Section 3 will administer the provisions of this Agreement, as well as the Management Plan and Trail Maintenance Fund. Page 12 of 23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Interagency Cooperative Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. NOTE: There will be a separate signature page for each entity signing the agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ATTEST: day of , 2014. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AL FRENCH, CHAIR TODD MIELKE, VICE -CHAIR Daniela Erickson SHELLY O'QUINN, COMMISSIONER Clerk of the Board Page 13 of 23 i IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Interagency Cooperative Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. NOTE: There will be a separate signature page for each entity signing the agreement. DATED: WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Approved as to form: By: Name: Senior Assistant Attorney General r 4 By: DIRECTOR Page 14 of 23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Interagency Cooperative Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. NOTE: There will be a separate signature page for each entity signing the agreement. DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE Attest: City Clerk By: MAYOR Approved as to form: By: Assistant City Attorney Page 15 of 23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Interagency Cooperative Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. NOTE: There will be a separate signature page for each entity signing the agreement. DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Attest: By: MIKE JACKSON, CITY MANAGER Approved as to form: By: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Office of the City Attorney Page 16 of 23 Exhibit 1 Management Plan A - PURPOSE The purpose of this Management Plan ("Plan") is to establish minimum standards for the management, maintenance and law enforcement along the Spokane River Centennial Trail ("Trail"). B - PARTIES INVOLVED This Plan is part of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement entered into by the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission ("COMMISSION"), the City of Spokane ("SPOKANE"), Spokane County ("COUNTY") and the City of Spokane Valley ("SPOKANE VALLEY"). C - GENERAL MANAGEMENT 1. Overall management of the entire 39 -mile length of the Trail will be done by the COMMISSION through the Riverside State Park Manager's office. 2. All special activities along the Trail corridor will be coordinated through Riverside State Park via Special Recreation Event permits. Special activities on the Trail within other jurisdictions will be coordinated by the COMMISSION, who will notify the parks administrative staff and the law enforcement department for the affected jurisdiction. 3. The COMMISSION may collect Special Activity Permit fees and may require an insurance binder with a minimum coverage of $1 million for parties of 20 or more people, or a damage deposit or a bond. 4. Centennial Trail Use, Approved Activities and Prohibited Activities shall be established by the Coordinating Council subject to applicable laws and shall be kept on record with the COMMISSION. 5. The Trail facility will be open to the public on existing COMMISSION posted hours. 6. Each agency is responsible for obtaining fire protection for their jurisdiction. Page 17 of 23 D- GENERAL MAINTENANCE STANDARDS 1. Each agency will be responsible for general maintenance in their respective areas of the Trail as set forth in "Section 4: Areas of Jurisdiction" of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement. 2. Corrective action necessary to protect the public will be taken as soon as possible following report of damage to the jurisdiction responsible. Temporary emergency Trail closure will be imposed, if necessary, until hazardous condition is corrected (i.e. fire, flood, washout, leaning trees). Signs showing appropriate detour routes shall be placed accordingly, and notification given to the Riverside State Park Manager's office. Permanent repair or replacement, where not possible due to weather or other circumstance, will be accomplished subject to the limitations set forth in "Section 2: Development and Management" of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement. 3. Subject to the limitations set forth in "Section 2: Development and Management" of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement, each jurisdiction will be responsible for routine asphalt maintenance of the Trail as deemed necessary by the jurisdiction providing the maintenance. Routine maintenance shall include patching potholes, cutting out and/or patching large cracks or heaved pavement, sealing smaller cracks in asphalt with tar and trail shoulder repairs. Shoulder repairs include placing asphalt on trail edges where old asphalt is cracking and breaking away and placing gravel along the shoulders where erosion has occurred. Seal coating of the Trail shall be considered a capital repair. Maintenance Fund money may be used for routine asphalt repairs with the mutual agreement of all parties if included within the 6 -year trail capital improvement plan as outlined in Exhibit 2 — Trail Maintenance Fund. 4. COMMISSION, SPOKANE, SPOKANE VALLEY and COUNTY will strive to use the same standardized amenities and replacement amenities, including but not limited to signs, benches, picnic tables, bollards, mile markers and bulletin boards as determined by the Coordinating Council. The Coordinating Council will develop and may periodically update a list of options for these standardized amenities. Each agency shall bear the cost of repair and replacement of amenities as necessary, subject to the limitations set forth in "Section 3: Development and Management" of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement. 5. No amenity, other than replacement of existing amenities, shall be placed along the Trail corridor without the approval of the jurisdiction responsible for maintenance of that particular stretch of trail corridor. Page 18 of 23 6. A comprehensive record of maintenance will be kept by Riverside State Park. SPOKANE, SPOKANE VALLEY and the COUNTY agree to provide a summary of maintenance performed on the trail for the calendar year by January 31St of the following year. E- SPECIFIC MAINTENANCE ITEMS Following is a listing of specific maintenance items with comments as needed: 1. Amenities — interpretive and informational signs, benches, picnic tables, bollards, water fountains, trash receptacles, mile markers, hitching posts, rest stations and bulletin boards. 2. Bridges 3. Fencing 4. Guardrail 5. Handrail 6. Litter Control — litter will be picked up as needed to ensure that the trail and adjacent buffer areas are kept clean. 7. Mile Markers — both posts and large mile numbers painted on asphalt will be maintained. 8. Signs — an inventory of replacement signs may be requested. 9. Snow Plowing — no snow plowing will be required on the Trail. Trail head parking lots may be plowed, depending upon user demand and resource availability by the jurisdiction responsible. 10. Sweeping — entire Trail length will be swept or blown off as needed to ensure that the trail surface is safe for use by bicycles, skates, skate boards and other non -motorized trail uses. 11. Trail heads including facilities, parking lot and entry road — inspected and cleaned as needed to ensure that these areas are clean and safe. 12. Vandalism — the parties shall notify local enforcement and strive to inform the Commission of incidents of vandalism. 13. Weed Control — in compliance with Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board requirements, a control program along the Trail will be Page 19 of 23 developed and accomplished, the cost borne by the individual jurisdictions within parameters of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement. 14. Trail shoulders will be mowed or sterilized as needed and overhanging vegetation cut back for a minimum of two feet on each side of the trail. Vegetation will be cut back to maintain line -of -sight necessary for safety on curves. F- LAW ENFORCEMENT 1. Primary responsibility for law enforcement/patrol in the Trail corridor is as follows: in SPOKANE, with the Spokane City Police; in SPOKANE VALLEY, with the Spokane Valley Police; in the COUNTY, with the COUNTY Parks Ranger and/or the Spokane County Sheriff; and, within Riverside State Park, with the State Parks Rangers. 2. The COMMISSION will assist within the city and County jurisdictions in normal park patrol and enforcement along the Trail. 3. Upon request of the COMMISSION, SPOKANE, SPOKANE VALLEY or the COUNTY will respond as backup during any law enforcement situation beyond park rule violations. 4. SPOKANE, SPOKANE VALLEY and the COUNTY will provide documentation of all law enforcement activities related to the Trail on a yearly basis to the Riverside State Park office. 5. Law enforcement violations attributable to the Trail are specified through WAC (Washington Administrative Code), RCW (Revised Code of Washington) or SMC (Spokane Municipal Code) and include fines if convicted. Page 20 of 23 Management Plan Attachment "A" Maps Maps shall be developed cooperatively by the parties, periodically updated as needed due to municipal annexation, trail development/re-routes or other reasons, and kept on file with the Coordinating Council. 'IN . 1 ' Page 21 of 23 Exhibit 2 Trail Maintenance Fund A MAINTENANCE FUND FOR THE SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL SHALL BE CREATED. STATEMENT OF MUTUAL INTEREST AND BENEFIT WHEREAS, the Parties desire to work together to create a Trail Maintenance Fund in order to preserve the recreational values of the Centennial Trail and to bring additional recreation and economic value to the area; and WHEREAS, the Centennial Trail is a valued regional resource linking communities from Coeur D'Alene, Idaho to Nine Mile Falls; and WHEREAS, the Trail Maintenance Fund shall become a component of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement to cooperatively manage and maintain the Trail; and WHEREAS, the Interagency Cooperative Agreement spells out the obligations of the parties related to routine maintenance and law enforcement; and WHEREAS, the Trail is over 20 years old and the maintenance obligations are increasing as the Trail ages; and WHEREAS, the Trail is in need of capital repairs to maintain current trail usage; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived, the Parties hereby agree to create a Trail Maintenance Fund for the Spokane River Centennial Trail to be jointly administered by the Parties for the maintenance of the Spokane River Centennial Trail. This fund is primarily intended to address preventative maintenance needs that Parties cannot cover as part of the routine maintenance specified in the Interagency Cooperative Agreement and to address capital repairs. I. PARTIES In addition to the Parties to the Interagency Cooperative Agreement, a representative of the Friends of the Centennial Trail (FCT) shall be invited to participate in a non-voting capacity when the Parties meet to carry out the responsibilities of the Trail Maintenance Fund outlined herein. FCT is a non-profit corporation under the laws of the state of Washington, has pledged to contribute to the Trail Maintenance Fund as resources allow, and has consistently supported the construction and maintenance of the Trail. II. RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALL PARTIES All Parties to the Interagency Cooperative Agreement shall: 1) Meet not less than twice a year to coordinate the management, operation, and maintenance activities for the Trail. Page 22 of 23 2) Discuss upcoming anticipated expenses and maintenance needs. 3) Develop a six (6) year trail capital improvement plan for utilization of the Trail Maintenance Fund taking into account capital needs not covered under the terms of the Interagency Cooperative Agreement, Exhibit 1 - Management Plan. 4) Annually review, update and approve the six (6) year trail capital improvement plan. 5) Make an annual lump sum payment in the amount of $20,000 to the Trail Maintenance Fund by February 1st each year the Interagency Cooperative Agreement is in place, beginning in 2015. 6) All expenditures from the Trail Maintenance Fund shall be unanimously approved by the Parties prior to disbursement. This may occur through unanimous approval by the Parties of the annual review, update and approval of the six (6) year trail capital improvement plan or on a case-by-case basis. 7) Inspect the trail within their area of jurisdiction annually to determine maintenance needs in order to bring these issues to the semi-annual meetings for prioritization and/or funding. 8) Send a representative to each meeting with the authority to vote on spending priorities. III. SPOKANE COUNTY SHALL: 1) Establish a Trail Maintenance Fund for the collection and disbursement of monies contributed by the Parties as outlined herein in Section II, subsection 5. 2) Be responsible for bookkeeping and the disbursement of funds approved by the parties from the Trail Maintenance Fund. 3) Prepare an Annual Report of the accounting of revenues and expenditures of the Trail Maintenance Fund. Page 23 of 23 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 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: Administrative report — Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board GOVERNING LEGISLATION: chapter 17.10 RCW PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative Report April 22, 2014. BACKGROUND: On April 22, 2014, staff provided the Council with information regarding the assessment charged by Spokane County for noxious weed control in the region, as well as general background on what the Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board (Weed Board) does. The information on the assessment included how the assessment was calculated prior to 2014, how it was being calculated for 2014, and a change being proposed by the Weed Board for 2015 and beyond that would spread the cost more equitably between property owners throughout Spokane County. The RCA from April 22, 2014 is attached in the event Council wants to review it again. (Attachment 1) Staff attended a public hearing by the Weed Board on May 21, 2014 and provided testimony in support of changing the assessment to make it apply equitably across all real property owners in Spokane County. (Attachment 2) Spokane, Cheney and Liberty Lake sent letters in objecting to the new proposed assessment formula. Liberty Lake would like, on behalf of its citizens, to opt out of receiving any services or being assessed the annual amount because they assert they already provide this service to their residents. Spokane and Cheney appeared to want to keep the assessment as it currently is because of the percentage increase it would represent for their citizens, and because they question whether their residents would receive services of equal value to what would be paid. (Attachments 3, 4, and 5) The Weed Board voted to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that Spokane County Code be amended to change the assessment formula as proposed (see Attachment 2 for formula). It is unclear when the BoCC will consider the proposed amendment. Council requested that staff provide additional information on several items. Staff sent a letter requesting additional information to the Weed Board. Based on that, the following information is provided for your consideration: 1. In 2013, there were 11,948 weed sites identified Countywide. (Attachment 6) A map showing the numbers, types and locations of the weeds is on the magnetic board; 2. Of those, 1,104 were in Spokane Valley, or 9.24% of the total Countywide; (from compiled information) 3. Spokane Valley has 30,362 parcels, which is 15.93% of the 190,564 parcels in County; (Attachment 7) 4. Under the proposed new assessment formula, the amount charged to unincorporated areas (generally rural) would be close to 39%, which closely corresponds to the number of weed violations in those areas, 40%. Conversely, roughly 61 % of the funds and 60% of the weed violations are from incorporated areas; (information provided by Dave Mundt, Weed Coordinator) OPTIONS: Discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: 1. PowerPoint for June 10, 2014 2. RCA and PowerPoint from April 22, 2014; 3. Notice of public hearing from Weed Board regarding proposed change to Spokane County Code for new assessment formula; 4. Letter from Liberty Lake regarding new proposed assessment formula; 5. Letter from City of Spokane regarding new proposed assessment formula; 6. Letter from Cheney regarding new proposed assessment formula; 7. Totals for 2013 Field Season; and 8. GIS parcel count. 1 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT - SPOKANE COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD UPDATE Cary Driskell — City Attorney June 10, 2014 Legal authority RCW 17.10 - provides for formation of county weed authority. Spokane County Code 1.14 —local implementation establishing Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board (the Board). Five member Board from various areas of the County, none from within Spokane Valley. Appointed by the County Commissioners pursuant to RCW 17.10.050: "Each activated county noxious weed control board consists of five voting members appointed by the county legislative authority. In appointing the voting members, the county legislative authority shall divide the county into five geographical areas that best represent the county interests and appoint a voting member from each geographical area. At least four of the voting members shall be engaged in the primary production of agricultural products...." Board funding options - RCW 17.10.240 ❑ Provide funding from the county general fund. r Impose a special assessment along with the yearly property tax. Spokane County has utilized the special assessment since the 1980's. Assessment formula - current Mid -80's adopted mixed formula: Depending on soil type for rural property, either $.06 or $.12 per acre; or Applied minimum charge of $3.00 per parcel. Only applied to property outside incorporated areas. Property owners inside towns not charged. Spokane Valley residents in 2014 charged - $95,000. The Board has contracts with several cities, but not all, amounts expressed are annual: Spokane - $6,000 Cheney - $600 Deer Park - $600 Airway Heights - $600 Effect of incorporation Upon incorporation, the residents of Spokane Valley should not have been assessed the charge under the express language of SCC 1.14. Since 2003, the Board has collected around $90,000 -$95,000 per year from our residents, approximately 15 times more in raw dollars than Spokane pays. The amount increases each year due to there being more parcels added to the tax rolls. Assessment formula - proposed Staff met with the Board February 26, 2014 to urge consideration of an equitable assessment formula for 2015 and beyond. The Board was receptive, and agreed to look at it early this year so it could be considered for adoption by the Board of County Commissioners well ahead of budget adoption for the Weed Board. Assessment formula - proposed On April 16, 2014, the Board proposed keeping the per acre charge, reducing the minimum per parcel charge from $3.00 to $2.00, and making it uniformly applicable on every parcel in the County, whether in an incorporated area or not. On May 21, 2014, the Board conducted a public hearing on new proposed assessment formula. ❑ COSV staff testified in support of equitable assessment. City of Liberty Lake sent letter requesting being removed from the assessment and receipt of services, asserting they already provide these services. The cities of Cheney and Spokane objected to the increase due to how large it was compared to what their citizens have had to pay in the past, and because they questioned whether the services received are worth that cost for an urban area. This raises several questions for Council consideration: Are the proposed rates equitable? Is it appropriate to charge urban areas the same proportionate share that agricultural areas are charged? Noxious weed control would seem to benefit agricultural areas to a much greater degree than urban areas for financial reasons. Board - recommendation Board passed a motion to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the assessment formula be changed in the Spokane County Code 1.14 as proposed. It is unclear when the BoCC will take this up, but would likely include at least one work session with the Noxious Weed Control Board prior to its consideration. Additional information A map showing the number, location, and types of violations throughout Spokane County is on the board for your review. ❑ In 2013, there were 11,948 weed sites identified countywide. ❑ Of those 1,104 were in Spokane Valley. 190,564 parcels in the County, of which 30,362 are in Spokane Valley, or 15.93%. ❑ Under new assessment formula, rural and urban areas would have close correlation between number of weeds and amount of revenue generated according to Dave Mundt, Weed Coordinator. Questions? Please direct any questions or comments to staff. Meeting Date: Attachment 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action April 22, 2014 Department Director Approval: El Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report— Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 17.10 RCW PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board (the Board) was established in 1970 to carry out the mandates of chapter 17.10 RCW, which required that all counties in Washington have a program to combat noxious weeds. The Board consists of five citizens, and meets monthly at the Spokane County Extension building near the Fairgrounds. The Board's website states that they focus on education, notification, technical assistance, and control of noxious weeds through voluntary compliance and enforcement. Approximately 25% of inspections arise from citizen complaints, with the balance coming from seasonal workers doing inspections around the urban and rural areas of the County. State law provides two options for funding a weed board under RCW 17.10.240. First, a county may fund it through the general fund. Second, a county may levy an assessment against real property based on classifications of property, which can either be based on acreage, or a minimum flat fee for smaller lots. The amount of the fee depends upon the budget proposed by the Board, which is ultimately approved by the County Commissioners. Prior to the incorporation of Spokane Valley and Liberty Lake, the Spokane County Code (SCC) stated that assessments would be applied against four separate classes of property, including "all platted parcels outside of incorporated cities or towns," with an assessment of $3.00 per year. This included the areas which became the two new cities. After incorporation, this designation continued unchanged until December, 2013. Despite that, Spokane County continued to assess and collect $3.00 from each parcel in Spokane Valley and Liberty Lake, as well as in the unincorporated portion of the County. The amount collected from residents of Spokane Valley was approximately $95,000 for 2013, and would be slightly less than that each year back to 2003 (the number of parcels increases each year). Residents of Liberty Lake paid approximately $9,400 for 2013, and a similarly smaller amount back to 2001. Additionally, the Board had contracts with the City of Spokane for $6,000 per year, Cheney for $600 per year, Airway Heights for $600 per year, and Deer Park for $600 per year for the Board to provide noxious weed services. They did not have contracts with any of the other jurisdictions such as Millwood, Latah, Rockford, Medical Lake, Fairfield, etc, but it appears they were provided services. None of the residents in any of the municipal jurisdictions pay any amount for this service on their property tax, except Spokane Valley and Liberty Lake. In mid -2013, Spokane County determined that it was erroneously charging residents of the two cities without legal authority. The Board of County Commissioners amended the Code in December, 2013 to state that the residents of Liberty Lake and Spokane Valley would continue to be charged $3 per parcel, which would allow the County to continue to collect approximately $95,000 from our residents, and $9,400 from the residents of Liberty Lake for noxious weed control. No other municipalities were identified whereby their residents would pay the assessment with their property taxes. Staff for Spokane Valley attended the monthly meeting of the Board on February 26, 2014 and requested that the Board and County adopt a more equitable assessment schedule so that our residents pay a proportionate amount of the costs. Currently for example, Spokane Valley pays more than 15 times what Spokane pays. The Board was receptive to this idea, and has proposed by letter dated March 28, 2014 that they change the assessment schedule so that every developed parcel would either pay a per acre fee based on type of soil and size, or charge a minimum $2 per parcel. Liberty Lake asked that they be taken out of the service area entirely, stating that they provide these same services already. The annual budget for the Board in 2003 was $355,300. In 2014, it is $425,525, with a beginning fund balance of $137,000. The fund balance is sized to account for cash flow issues relating to receipt of revenues twice a year with property tax payments. In a story reported in the Spokesman -Review on March 14, 2014, it stated that this would increase revenuesfrom assessments by 16% from $374,000 to $434,000, which would equate to an increase in the total budget from 2014 of $425,525, to 2015 of $485,000. The additional money would reportedly be used for technology improvements to help the eight seasonal weed inspectors keep track of problems, and to increase the number of inspections occurring in the urban areas since that is now where the majority of noxious weeds are found. Dave Mundt, Weed Board Coordinator, has asked if the City would like to make any further comment on this matter, so staff is seeking input from the Council. A public hearing on this proposal is anticipated to be held May 21, 2014, which staff will attend. Following that, the Board will make a recommendation to the County Commissioners, who would then accept, reject, or modify the proposal. If the County Commissioners accept it, it would require a change to SCC 1.14, which would result in the uniform assessment schedule for all property owners in Spokane County for 2015 and beyond. OPTIONS: Provide staff with questions or comments. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: As appropriate. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint presentation 1 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT - SPOKANE COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD Legal authority RCW 17.10 - provides for formation of county weed authority ❑ Spokane County Code 1.14 —local implementation establishing Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board (the Board) Board composition E Five member Board from various areas of the County, none from within Spokane Valley. �! Appointed by the County Commissioners. Board funding options - RCW 17.10.240 n Provide funding. from the county general fund. ❑ Impose a special assessment along with the yearly property tax. Spokane County has utilized the special assessment since the 1980's. Effect of incorporation ❑ Upon incorporation, the residents of Spokane Valley should not have been assessed the charge under the express language of SCC 1.14. ❑ Since 2003, the Board has collected around $90,000 -$95,000 per year from our residents, approximately 15 times more in raw dollars than Spokane pays. The amount increases each year due to there being more parcels added to the tax rolls. Assessment formula - current ❑ Mid -80's adopted mixed formula: ❑ Depending on soil type for rural property, either $.06 or $.1 2 per acre; or ❑ Applied minimum charge of $3.00 per parcel. ❑ Only applied to property outside incorporated areas. ❑ Property owners inside towns not charged. ❑ Spokane Valley residents in 2014 charged - $95,000 ❑ The Board has contracts with several cities, but not all, amounts expressed are annual: ❑ Spokane - $6,000 ❑ Cheney - $600 ❑ Deer Park - $600 ❑ Airway Heights - $600 Change in late 201 3 ❑ Spokane County became aware of lack of authority for charging Spokane Valley and Liberty Lake residents in 2013; changed SCC 1.14 to expressly authorize assessing residents in those two cities only the $3.00 per year. ❑ Staff from both cities at that time requested an equitable assessment system, but were told that budgets had been set already for 2014. Assessment formula - proposed ❑ Staff met with the Board February 26, 2014 to urge consideration of an equitable assessment formula for 2015 and beyond. ❑ The Board was receptive, and agreed to look at it early this year so it could be considered for adoption by the Board of County Commissioners well ahead of budget adoption for the Weed Board. Assessment formula - proposed ❑ On April 16, 2014, the Board proposed keeping the per acre charge, reducing the minimum per parcel charge from $3.00 to $2.00, and making it uniformly applicable on every parcel in the County, whether in an incorporated area or not. 10 Board — Annual Budget ❑ 2014 operating budget is $425,525. ❑ If new formula adopted, it would increase annual assessment revenue by approximately $60,000, raising 2015 budget to $485,000, or 16%. ❑ Dave Mundt, Spokane County Noxious Weed Coordinator, states that the increased revenue would be used for two purposes: technology upgrades that would allow the inspectors to essentially do what our Code Compliance Officers do in the field; focus more investigative time in urban areas where there are higher numbers and concentrations of noxious weeds. Next steps r_i Public hearing by the Board on May 21 to take testimony, then deliberate on proposed assessment formula change and uniform application throughout the County. ❑ Make recommendation to County Commissioners. ❑ Public hearing and consideration of change to SCC 1.14 by County Commissioners, anticipated to be in mid -summer, 2014. Questions? ❑ Please direct any questions or comments to staff. Attachment 2 NO. .20(`-1 -on' BEFORE THE SPOKANE COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD IN THE MATTER OF MODIFYING SPOKANE COUNTY CODE SECTION 1.14.030 ADOPTED UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 2013-1197 REGARDING THE CLASSIFICATION OF LAND AND LEVEL OF ASSESSMENT FOR EACH CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL ASSESSMENTS AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board ("SCNWCB"), pursuant to the provisions of RCW 17.10.240, that a public hearing will be held on: Wednesday, May 21, 2014, at 6:00 P.M. (or as soon as possible thereafter) at 222 North Havana Street, Room C City of Spokane Valley, Washington 99202 BACKGROUND Pursuant to the provisions of RCW 17.10.040, Spokane County has created the SCNWCB. The SCNWCB is governed by five (5) voting members appointed by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington. The purpose of the SCNWCB is to limit economic loss and adverse effects to Spokane County's agricultural, natural and human resources due to the presence and spread of noxious weeds. Each activated noxious weed control board shall annually submit a budget to the county legislative authority for the operation of their weed program for the ensuing fiscal year. The funds necessary for the operation of the county's weed program come from an annual assessment based on the classification of land and a level of assessment for each classification. Based upon a recommendation of the SCNWCB, the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, on December 17, 2013, passed Resolution No. 13-1197 ("Resolution"). That Resolution amended Spokane County Code Section 1.14.030 and adopted a revised classification of land and level of assessment for each classification commencing in calendar year 2014. Subsequent to the adoption of Resolution No. 13-1197, the Board of County Commissioners requested the SCNWCB revisit the classification of land methodology and level of Page 1 of 4 assessment for each classification set forth in the Resolution to ensure that it is equitable, fair and just. PURPOSE OF PUBLIC HEARING The purpose of the above scheduled public hearing will be for SCNWCB to consider public testimony and take action on: (1) gathering information to serve as a basis for a revised classification, (2) classifying the land into suitable classifications, and (3) developing and forwarding to the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington a proposed level of assessment for each class which seems just. The proposed classification and proposed assessment being considered would modify Spokane County Code Section 1.14.030 as adopted under Resolution No. 13-1197 and provide as follows: ******************************** 1.14.030 - Classification —Assessment. (a) In accordance with RCW 17.10.240, all land in Spokane County shall be classified as follows: (1) Class l: All assessor parcel accounts within Spokane County (i) with land that is classified as soil Class I, soil Class II, soil Class III, or soil Class IV in the most current designation made by USDA Soil Conservation Service and State of Washington Depai tment of Natural Resources data, or (ii) that derive special benefit from Spokane County Noxious Weed Board services. (2) Class 2: All assessor parcel accounts within Spokane County with land that is classified as soil Class V, soil Class VI, soil Class VII, or soil Class VIII in the most current designation made by USDA Soil Conservation Service and State of Washington Department of Natural Resources data. (3) Class 3: All assessor parcel accounts within Spokane County (i) held by Federal, State or Local Governments; (ii) utilized as Public Rights -of -Way; (iii) used as cemeteries or by Water and/or Sewer Districts; (iv) which are listed in the assessor tax roll as subservient for taxation to another account; or (v) which derive no special benefit from Spokane County Noxious Weed Board services. (b) Weed control is of special benefit primarily to Class 1 and Class 2 land within the Spokane County. As such, the above classes of land shall be assessed as follows: Page 2 of 4 Land Classification Assessment Level (1) Class I $.12 per acre. A minimum billing $2.00 will be assessed for each parcel account maintained by the Spokane County Assessor's Office. * (2) Class II $.06 per acre. A minimum billing of $2.00 will be assessed for each parcel account maintained by the Spokane County Assessor's Office.* (3) Class III Zero assessed. * Provided, if a parcel account maintained by the Spokane County Assessor's Office contains multiple classes of soil as designated by the USDA Soil Conservation Service and Department of Natural Resources data, each soil class shall be separately assessed. The assessment for each soil class shall be added and if the total assessment is less than $2.00, the parcel account shall be assessed a $2.00 assessment. If the total assessment for the parcel account is greater than $2.00 the parcel account shall be assessed in the total amount for each soil classification. For example, if a parcel account contains 10.2 acres of which 10 acres is in soil Class II and .2 acres are in soil Class V, soil Class II would be assessed at $.12 per acre for a total of $1.20 and soil Class V would be assessed at $.06 per acre for a total of $.012. If each soil class were assessed the minimum assessment, the total assessment of the parcel account would be $4.00. However, since the individual soil class assessments added together equal $1.21, which is less than $2.00, the total assessment of the parcel account would be $2.00, not $4.00. *********************** Any person may appear at the date, time and place set forth hereinabove and present testimony in favor of or in opposition to the proposed modification to Spokane County Code Section 1.14.030 to read as set forth above. The SCNWCB has concluded that the proposed modification is exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act and the Spokane County Environmental Ordinance pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(15)(b) and (20). To ensure that everyone attending the public hearing has an opportunity to speak, testimony may be limited to three (3) minutes per speaker. The SCNWCB reserves the right to adjust the time frame allotted to speakers as well as hearing procedures during the public hearing. Any person desiring additional information on the proposed modification may contact Dave Mundt, SCNWCB Coordinator, at 222 North Havana Street, City of Spokane Valley, Washington 99202 / (509) 477-5777. All meetings and hearings will be conducted in facilities which are accessible to disabled individuals. For more particular information with respect to the accessibility of the hearing location contact SCNWCB Coordinator at the above address and phone number. Page 3 of 4 DATED this 8h day of nk, 2014. SPOKANE COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD Paul Puhek, Chairperson Page 4 of 4 509 755 6713 City of Liberty Lake May 19, 2014 David J. Mundt, Coordinator Noxious Weed Control Board 222 N. Havana Spokane, Washington 99202 Dear David, 02:34:03 p.m. 05-20-2014 1 /2 CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE Office of- the .tla.yor Attachment 3 This letter is in response to the Notice of Public Hearing regarding the classification of land and assessment for Weed Control services. I believe that we all understand that Spokane County plays an important role in overseeing a regional program that identifies and manages noxious weed control. However, In order for a program to be responsive, efficient and result in the best use of tax payers monies, programs need to revisit their policies and adjust programs so that there is continuous improvement. Additional dollars does not necessarily result in improved outcomes when policies and practices aren't adjusted to improve performance. In the proposed reclassification there is no mention of policy updates or program enhancements. For this reason, Liberty Lake is strongly recommending that the weed board seriously consider factoring in existing practices within a community. One size does not fit all. When taxpayers are already funding weed control measures that are more progressive and result in better outcomes than those provided by the weed board, it does not make sense for those citizens to pay twice. In urban areas, focus for the board must be on policy not implementation. Cities may have abundant resources already dedicated and available to implement policy within their boundaries with a greater efficiency and effectiveness for money spent. Should a City choose to find It easier to utilize your services of implementation or more convenient, then the dollars raised in that jurisdiction can be returned to you. This type of service model currently exists in the Aquifer Protection Fund, State Gas Tax, Liquor Taxes, etc. As those dollars are collected from tax payers and redirected to the cities; cities can aggregate with other resources to achieve more. 22710 E. Country Vista Dr., Liberty Lake, Washington 99019 Phone: 509.755.6700 Fax: 509.755.67.13 509 755 6713 City of Liberty Lake 02:34:34 p.m. 05-20-2014 2 /2 Therefore, our first recommendation is that the Noxious Weed Board focuses on policy and goals, provide educational tools, and allow jurisdictions to be reimbursed the Weed Tax Assessment (minus small administrative costs) to those Cities who are better equipped to manage their own program. Finally, we anticipate the above changes will provide Spokane County the best outcome in noxious weed control, thus the intent of the State of Washington RCW 17.10 can be achieved in both agricultural areas and urban areas. Respectively Steve Peterson, Mayor City of Liberty Lake 22710 L. Country Vista Dr., Liberty Lake, Washington 99019 Phone: 509.755.6700 Fax: 509.755.6713 Mayor David A. Condon April 16, 2014 Mr. Paul Puhek, Chairman Noxious Weed Control Board 222 N. Havana Spokane, WA 99202 Dear Mr. Puhek, Attachment 4 Please accept this letter as comment upon the Board's proposed change to the current Noxious Weed Control Program. After weighing various aspects of this issue, and discussing their implications to the City of Spokane, we have arrived at a definitive position. A per -parcel Noxious Weed Control fee would increase the burden on tax payers from $6,000 to more than $160,000 per year. Considering the low number of and relatively small financial cost from in -city abatements during 2013, this enormous cost -increase is not justified. Furthermore, dense areas with many parcels that have been developed do not necessarily generate as high of a need for noxious weed services as less dense, less developed areas in the County. Therefore, developed urban neighborhoods have the potential to subsidize services for undeveloped areas county -wide. Placing this burden on City taxpayers would not be in our best interests. Always, our main concern in the face of any change is how it will affect our residents. This two dollar per - parcel charge on each of the 82,000 parcels in City limits represents too extreme of an increase from the seven cents per -parcel they currently pay. Though we do support controlling noxious weeds and improving the environment, we seek these goals in the most efficient way possible. The proposed change would burden landowners disproportionately to the service received, and for this reason the City does not support the Board's current plan. What we suggest is a conversation with the Board and the County to evaluate opportunities that better support this regional service while focusing on existent enforcement resources. Please contact our office at your earliest convenience so we can schedule this meeting. Thank you for reaching out with this matter and we look forward to your reply. Theresa M. Sanders City Administrator CC: Spokane County Commissioners Spokane City Council The City of Choice 808 W Spokane Falls Blvd. • Spokane, Washington 99201-3335 Phone: 509.625.6250 FAX: 509.625.6563 Attachment 5 31IPE k hene OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TOMTRULOVE,MAYOR April 25, 2014 Paul Puhek, Chairman Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board 222 N. Havana Spokane, WA 99202 Dear Mr. Puhek: I am writing in response to your letter of March 28 regarding the proposed countywide noxious weed assessment being placed on all parcels in Spokane County. I am sorry that I was unable to attend your board meeting on April 16`h. Please allow me to comment on the proposed change in the method of assessment for the Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board. We in Cheney firmly believe that you should reconsider your proposal and develop a more equitable scheme. Currently Cheney pays you $600 per year. We currently have 2,567 parcels and approximately 2,800 acres within our city limits. The new assessment amount would be approximately $5,134 or about $L83 per acre, well over a 700% increase. Our current $600 rate is only $0.23 per parcel or $0.21 per acre. Within the city we have code enforcement where we spend time to make sure weeds are controlled. Most parcels in Cheney are homes or parks where weeds are controlled. It would appear that much of your work in Cheney involves the BNSF railroad, not homeowners or the city itself, who should not be expected to subsidize BNSF. So, the question arises as to what benefit we or our parcel owners would receive from the huge cost increase and what the cost per contact would actually be. We are reluctant to have our property owners pay dearly for a service they do not use or benefits they do not receive, or for a service they are already getting from the City. We consulted our city attorney about this issue. He pointed out that an "assessment" is a charge that relates to delivery of a benefit. The statute relied upon by the Noxious Weed Control Board provides that "in lieu of a tax" an assessment may be levied against land [RCW 17.10.240(1)(a)]. The assessment may be per acre or a flat rate per parcel, "provided that if no benefits are found to accrue to a class of land, a zero assessment may be levied." 609 SECOND STREET • CHENEY, WA 99004 • PHONE 509 498-9200 • FAX 509 498-9206 • WWW.C[TYOFCHENEY.ORG HOME OF EASTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Spokane County Noxious Weed Control Board April 25, 2014 Page Two We are quite uncertain that there are measurable "benefits" accruing to each parcel. There are probably a class of lots/parcels that will not receive any benefits because they are unlikely to have noxious weeds growing either because of their nature or because of City code enforcement. Those parcels should be identified and not assessed. We need to have information showing how the assessment benefits properties in our urban area. The Board should consider only assessing lots likely to have noxious weeds or specially assess those that contain identified and uncontrolled weeds. In any event, shifting the cost to urban parcel holders such that the total cost rises from $600 to $5,134 is an unacceptably high jump. Assessing $2 per parcel per year seems easy and cheap. However, it is neither equitable nor related to the level of the problem. It appears to shift cost from rural to urban areas. It is unacceptable, and we respectfully request that you reconsider your methodology and develop a new proposal for distributing the costs. Thank you for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, Tom Trulove Mayor Attachment 6 TOTALS FOR 2013 FIELD SEASON TOTAL WEED SITES IDENTIFIED 11,948 # OF FIRST NOTICES 3,250 # OF SECOND NOTICES 593 # OF ENFORCEMENT WARNINGS 302 # OF ENFORCEMENTS WEED BOARD CONTROLLED INVESTIGATION REQUESTS PERSONAL CONTACTS TOTAL WEBSITE HITS 4,782 parcels 118 230 parcels 51 115 parcels 172.5 acres 234 645 13,934 TOTAL MILES & REIMBURSEMENT 37,763 $ 21,336.17 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS: 35.8 ac $ 3,578.70 (Control on City, County, State and Railroad right-of-ways and control of Class A Weeds paid for by the Weed Board) 7 Attachment 7 Parcel Count From City Name GIS Percentage of overall Parcel From GIS Airway Heights 1896 0.9949% Cheney 2198 1.1534% Deer Park 1896 0.9949% Liberty Lake 3058 1.6047% Medical Lake 1622 0.8512% Millwood 804 0.4219% Spokane 73725 38.6878% Spokane Valley 30362 15.9327% Fairfield 319 0.1674% Latah 145 0.0761% Rockford 373 0.1957% Spangle 192 0.1008% Waverly 129 0.0677% County Parcels 73845 38.7508% Total Count 190564 100.0000% DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of June 5, 2014; 11:00 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 17, 2014: Budget Workshop, 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. [due Mon, June 9] Spokane Valley City Council Chambers (No 6 p.m.evening meeting) June 24, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, June 16] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Browns Park Master Plan - Mike Stone (20 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Proposed Resolution Amending 2014 TIP — Steve Worley (10 minutes) 4. Proposed Resolution Adopting 2015-2020 Six Year TIP — Steve Worley (15 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement — E.Guth (10 minutes) 6. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Sprague Resurfacing, Vista to Herald — E.Guth (10 minutes) 7. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Stn Ave Reconstruct; McKinnon to Fancher —E. Guth (10 minutes) 8. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointment of Planning Commissioner — Mayor Grafos (10 minutes) 9. Admin Report: Highway Safety Improvement Program — Sean Messner (10 minutes) 10. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 11. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: 105 minutes] July 1, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [due Mon, June 23] (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] July 8, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Motion Consideration: Browns Park Master Plan — Mike Stone 3. Motion Consideration: Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant — Sean Messner 4. Admin Report: North South Corridor Project — Keith Metcalf, Eric Guth 5. Admin Report: Marijuana Regulations — Erik Lamb 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda [due Mon, June 30] (5 minutes) (20 minutes) (10 minutes) (30 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) 7. Info Only: Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Call for Projects [*estimated meeting: 90 minutes] July 15, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. TIB Call for Projects — Steve Worley 2. Advance Agenda [*estimated July 22, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, Marijuana Regulations — Erik Lamb 3. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Appleway Trail, University to Pines — E. Guth 4. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Mansfield Ave Connection — E. Guth 5. Motion Consideration: TIB Call for Projects List — Steve Worley 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 7. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated [due Mon, July 7] (20 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: minutes] [due Mon, July 14] (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 55 minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 6/5/2014 1:35:28 PM Page 1 of 4 July 29, 2014 no meeting August 5, 2014 No Meeting - National Night Out August 12, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance, Marijuana Regulations — Erik Lamb 3. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Argonne Corridor Upgrade — Eric Guth 4. Admin Report: Estimated Revenues and Expenditures 2015 budget — Mark Calhoun 5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda August 19, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [due Mon, Aug 4] (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (10 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 50 minutes] [due Mon, Aug 11] (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] August 26, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2015 Budget — Mark Calhoun 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes, motion to set 9/23 Budget hearing) 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [due Mon, Aug 18] (15 minutes) (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*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. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Community Development Block Grant Proposed Projects — Comm Dev 3. Admin Report: City Manager presentation of 2015 Preliminary Budget 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda September 16, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [*estimated [*estimated September 23, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CDBG Proposed Projects — Comm Dev 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2015 Budget — Mark Calhoun 3. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 4. First Reading Proposed Property Tax Ordinance — Mark Calhoun 5. Motion Consideration: CDBG Proposed Projects — Comm Dev. 6. Motion Consideration: Outside Agency Allocations for 2015 — Mark Calhoun 7. Admin Report: Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment — Mark Calhoun 8. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 9. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated [due Tues, Sept 2] (5 minutes) (20 minutes) (30 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 60 minutes] [due Mon, Sept 8] (5 minutes) meeting: minutes] [due Mon, Sept 15] (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 95 minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 6/5/2014 1:35:28 PM Page 2 of 4 September 30, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [*estimated October 7, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda October 14, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment — Mark Calhoun 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Property Tax Ordinance — Mark Calhoun 4. First Reading Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment — Mark Calhoun 5. First Reading Proposed 2015 Budget Ordinance — Mark Calhoun 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda [*estimated October 21, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda October 28, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed 2014 Budget Amendment — Mark Calhoun 3. Second Reading Proposed 2015 Budget Ordinance — Mark Calhoun 4. Admin Report: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Recommendations — M.Calhoun 5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 6. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [*estimated November 4, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Admin Report: 2015 Fee Resolution —Mark Calhoun 2. Advance Agenda November 11, 2014 — no meeting — Veteran's Day November 18, 2014, Formal meeting 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Proposed Resolution Amending Fee Resolution for 2015 — Mark Calhoun 3. Advance Agenda November 25, 2014 — no meeting — Thanksgiving week December 2, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda December 9, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Allocations for 2015 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda December 16, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda December 23, 2014 no meeting [due Mon, Sept 22] (5 minutes) meeting: minutes] [due Mon, Sept 29] (5 minutes) [due Mon, Oct 6] (15 minutes) (5 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 55 minutes] [due Mon, Oct 13] (5 minutes) [due Mon, Oct 20] (5 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 50 minutes] [due Mon, Oct 27] (15 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Mon, Nov 10] (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Mon, Nov 24] (5 minutes) [due Mon, Dec 1] (5 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Mon, Dec 8] (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 6/5/2014 1:35:28 PM Page 3 of 4 December 30, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda 2. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports 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] SEPA/NEPA Process — Eric Guth Stormwater Swales, care of Street Vacation/Connectivity Process Tourism Promotion Agency (TPA) Truck Parking in Residential Areas Urban Agriculture (animals, bees, etc.) *time for public or Council comments not included [due Mon, Dec 22] [*estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 6/5/2014 1:35:28 PM Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 2014 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval: El ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 8th Ave Reconstruction — McKinnon Rd to Fancher Rd (#0196) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 3.35.10 — Contract Authority PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: (1) March 5, 2013; Info memo with an update on preservation projects, including the 8th Avenue between McKinnon and Fancher; (2) October 8, 2013; Public Hearing on the 2014 Budget, which included the 8th Ave Reconstruction Project, (3) October 22, 2013; Adoption of the 2014 Budget, which included the 8th Ave Reconstruction Project. BACKGROUND: Council approved the Pavement Management Plan Update for 2011 which included a list of recommended street preservation projects. Eighth Ave between McKinnon and Fancher was included on the list. Under the Pavement Management Plan, the project was expected to be a grind and inlay like other City preservation projects, however the pavement condition has further deteriorated since the 2011 update, and the project was later revised to a reconstruction project. Council approved the 2014 Budget which includes $300,000 for the 8th Ave Reconstruction project. The project was advertised on June 6, 2014, and bids are scheduled to be opened on June 20, 2014. After opening bids and tabulating the results, staff will present the results at the June 24, 2014 Council meeting for award of the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. OPTIONS: Information only. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information only. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The project is included in the 2014 City Budget for $300,000. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E., Senior Capital Projects Engineer, Eric Guth, P.E., Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: None CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 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: Highway Safety Program Call for Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) issued a 2014 Call for Projects for allocation of Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds for safety projects. The federal funds may be used for preliminary engineering and design, purchasing of right-of-way, and construction of city safety improvement projects. Funds will be available in December of 2014. Projects require a local match of 10%. Projects advertised for construction by September 20, 2017 are eligible for 100% funding for construction (no local match required for eligible federal expenditures). Approximately $37 million in federal funds are available for the use of spot location and systematic improvements. Of these funds, $25 million will be allocated to spot location improvements, which include intersection, midblock, or corridor improvements. There is no maximum grant amount per agency for this category. The remaining $12 million will be allocated to systematic improvements, which include widespread, risk-based projects that cover wide areas (or citywide) throughout the city. The maximum grant amount per agency for this category has been established at $1 million. Agencies may apply for an unlimited number of projects, however a maximum of three (3) from each agency will be funded. Staff has begun evaluating the proposed HSIP grant criteria and has identified a draft list of projects to review with Council. Information used to develop this draft list of projects includes: • The 2009-2013 crash data obtained from WSDOT • Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) criteria established within the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) • Visual observations and being proactive to enhance safety citywide Spot Location Projects: The proposed projects identified below are developed based on the review of the 2009 through 2013 crash data in which safety improvements can result in a reduction of crash types and the severity of crashes. • Intersection of Sullivan Road at Sprague Avenue (intersection improvements) • Intersection of Mission Avenue at State Route 27 (intersection improvements) • McDonald Road — Mission Avenue to 16th Avenue (corridor improvements) • Sullivan Road Safety Study — Mission Avenue to Sprague Avenue (corridor study) Systematic Projects: The proposed projects identified below are developed based on guidelines for improvements established by the FHWA as directed in the MUTCD. • Accessible Pedestrian Signals — Citywide traffic signal upgrades • Reflective signal backplates — Citywide traffic signal enhancements at high volume intersections OPTIONS: Info Only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Info Only BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Project costs are currently being developed in more detail for each project. The City's match on federally funded safety projects is 10% of the total project cost. Projects advertised for construction by September 20, 2017 are eligible for 100% funding for construction (no local match required for eligible federal expenditures). STAFF CONTACT: Sean Messner, PE — Senior Traffic Engineer Eric Guth, PE — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: WSDOT 2014 City Safety Program Grant Application 2014 City Safety Program AlInk Grant Application WZ Washington State Department of Transportation Local Programs Division Instructions: Please fill out this grant application completely. Applications that are not complete will not be considered. Applications can be filled out by hand and attachments can be hand drawn. Applications are due by 11:59 p.m. on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 by email to H&LPGrants@wsdot.wa.gov. Please refer to City Safety Program in the subject line of your email. If you have questions about this program, please contact: • Region Local Programs Engineer: See http:/lwww.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/regional.htm for contact information. • Susan Bowe, P.E., Traffic Services Manager, susan.bowe@wsdot.wa.gov, 360-705-7380. Date: Type of project: ❑ Spot location (projects at intersections, midblock locations, or on corridors) (Spot Location Subprogram) ❑ Systematic (low cost, widespread, risk-based projects in the city or over wide areas of the city) (Systematic Subprogram) Project title: Does the project currently have federal funding? Federal aid project number (if assigned): Name of city: WSDOT Region assigned to the city: See http:/lwww.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/regional.htm for more information. ❑ Northwest ❑ Olympic ❑ Southwest ❑ North Central ❑ South Central ❑ Eastern Name of contact person(s) for questions about this grant application: Title: Phone: Email: Mailing address: Legislative district(s): Congressional district: Brief project description: Provide a one to four sentence narrative that summarizes the project work. This is the type of description that could appear in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) entry for the project. Do not include quantities. Example: Improve traffic signal phasing and visibility of traffic signal heads. WSDOT concurrence if the project is on a state route. Projects on state routes must have been coordinated through the appropriate WSDOT regional office. Attach a letter or email that indicates concurrence with this application. Contact the Region Local Programs Engineer to request concurrence. Page 1 of 4 Project location and detailed description of work: Describe in detail the specific improvements to be made and the location(s) where the improvements will be made. Use the format below. See examples. Include specific street and intersection names, including all known versions of the name (example: Pear St./ Main St. & 4th Ave.). If a project is at a location that was recently annexed from a county, include the county road number(s) and milepost(s) (example: Road 70070 MP 7.07). For projects on state routes, include the state route number(s) and milepost(s) (example: SR 700 MP 70.70). To identify state route mileposts, see http:/lwww.wsdot.wa.qov/mapsdata/roadway/pdf/HwyLog2013Statewide.pdf or http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/mapsdata/tools/srweb.htm. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Also attach a vicinity map(s) that identifies the location of all improvements. Example 1: This example is for a fictitious spot location project titled Peninsula Rd. and Ocean Beach Dr. Intersection Safety. Improvement/countermeasure #1 Install a left turn lane. 1. Peninsula Rd. & Ocean Beach Dr. (north and south legs) Example 2: This example is for a fictitious systematic project titled Orchard District Traffic Signal Improvements. Improvement/countermeasure #1 Install flashing yellow arrow signal operation. 1. Apple St. & 1st Ave. (northbound and southbound) 2. Pear St./Main St. & 4th Ave. (northbound and southbound) 3. Quince St./SR 700 MP 70.24 & 1st Ave. (northbound) 4. (list continues) Improvement/countermeasure #2 Install yellow retroreflective tape on traffic signal backplates. 1. Apple St. & 1st Ave. 2. (list continues for Apple St.) 3. Apple St. & 10th Ave. 4. Pear St./Main St. & 1st Ave. 5. (list continues for Pear St./Main St.) 6. Pear St./Main St. & 10th Ave. 7. (list continues) Improvement/countermeasure #1 Description: 1. Location 1 2. Location 2 3. etc. Improvement/countermeasure #2 Description: 1. Location 1 2. Location 2 3. etc. Improvement/countermeasure #3 Description: 1. Location 1 2. Location 2 3. etc. Page 2 of 4 Street and pedestrian and bicycle facility characteristics: Complete the following questions. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Describe the existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities at the project location. Identify the roadway width, sidewalk width, number and configuration of lanes and bicycle lanes, speed limit, and the estimated average daily traffic (ADT) volume. Do the existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities meet your city's current design standards and Americans with Disabilities Act standards? What pedestrian and bicycle facilities does this project address? For pedestrian and bicycle facilities not addressed by this project, what would it cost to bring those facilities up to current standards? Crashes (crash types) addressed: The project must address at least one fatal or serious injury crash or crash type from 2008-2012 (calendar years) found in WSDOT's collision database. A benefit/cost process will be used to score grant applications. Provide a description of the fatal and/or serious injury crashes or the fatal and/or serious injury crash types being addressed by the proposed improvements/countermeasures. Refer to the actual collision report numbers if you feel that this would be helpful. Attach additional sheets if necessary. To request collision data for your project, complete a 2014 City Safety Program Request for Collision Data form at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/mapsdata/collision/pdf/2014_CitySafetyProgram_CollisionDataRequest.pdf. If a project is at a location that was recently annexed from a county, include the county road number(s) and milepost(s). The form can be returned by mail, fax, or email to: Collision Data & Analysis Branch, Washington State Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 47381, Olympia, WA 98504-47381, fax: 360-570-2449, email: collisionanalysis@wsdot.wa.gov. For questions about ordering data, please contact 360-570-2454 or collisionanalysis@wsdot.wa.gov. Once the data is received, please direct all questions to your agency's Region Local Program Engineer or Susan Bowe (Susan.Bowe@wsdot.wa.gov, 360-705-7380). Page 3 of 4 Project cost and Grant Request: Projects require a 10 percent local match. Projects that are advertised for construction by September 30, 2017 are eligible for 100% funding for construction (no local match required for eligible federal expenditures). Projects must be fully funded between this grant and other funding sources, if applicable. Include a detailed cost estimate with this application. The estimate must clearly show totals for all project phases (preliminary engineering, right-of-way, construction), as applicable. The cost estimate for construction must be determined assuming that the project will be built by contract and follow the Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) manual. Phase Total cost Amount funded from previous Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds Match (Amount funded from other sources) Amount requested from this grant (2014 City Safety Program) Preliminary Engineering Right -of -Way Construction Total Identify the source of matching funds utilized for this project: Estimated milestones from the project schedule: Provide the estimated month and year for each milestone below. The milestones need to be determined assuming that the project will be built by contract, not by local agency or a partner agency's forces. Project selections will be made in December 2014. Project added to the local agency's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): Project added to the regional TIP: Project inclusion in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP): Project definition (Project Prospectus and Local Agency Agreement signed/Begin PE): National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) kickoff: Environmental documents approved: Right of way start: Right of way certified: Geometric/30% design complete: General plan/60% design complete: Advertisement date: Contract award date: Open to traffic (operationally complete) date: Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 10, 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: EXECUTIVE SESSION: Potential Litigation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I move that Council adjourn into executive session for approximately thirty minutes to discuss potential litigation, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session." BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: