Agenda 05/26/2016 ScITYokane
Valle
y
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Regular Meeting Agenda
Amended
City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 E. Sprague Ave.
May 26, 2016 6:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 12, 2016 minutes
VI. COMMISSION REPORTS
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
a) Planning Commission Findings: CTA-2016-0001, proposed
amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.85
Marijuana Uses, 19.120.050 Permitted Use Matrix and Appendix A
Definitions
b) Study Session: Comprehensive Plan
c) Study Session: Comprehensive Plan - Water Districts
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers—City Hall,
May 12,2016
Chair Graham called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the
pledge of allegiance. Administrative Assistant Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and
staff were present:
Kevin Anderson Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney
Heather Graham Christina Janssen,Planner
James Johnson Chaz Bates,Economic Development Specialist
Tim Kelley
Mike Phillips
Suzanne Stathos
Joe Stoy Deanna Horton, Secretary of the Commission
Commissioner Stoy moved to accept the May 12, 2016 agenda as presented. The vote was seven in favor,
zero against and the motion passed.
Commissioner Stoy moved to approve the April28, 2016 minutes as presented. The vote was seven in favor,
zero against and the motion passed.
Commissioner Stoy moved to approve the May 3, 2016 minutes as they were presented. Commissioner
Graham She wanted to clarify something which was said at the May 3, 2016 joint meeting. She read a
prepared statement saying she took exception to statement made by the Community and Economic
Development Director John Hohman at the May 3rd Joint Council/Commission meeting. She said during
the opening of the meeting Mr. Hohman made a comment that the Planning Commission had somehow
diverted its attention away from the Comprehensive Plan to focus on the marijuana issue. She said she
would like to remind City staff the Commissioners work at the behest of the staff, as they set the
Commission's agenda. Interruption in the Comprehensive Plan was not because the Commission was so
focused on the marijuana issues nor was it because they wanted to ignore the Comprehensive Plan, as a
matter of fact we spent many meetings addressing several of the items on the Comprehensive Plan,until it
fell off the Commission agenda in June (2015). She said there were several meetings cancelled in the
summer and the fall. When the Commission resumed in 2016,is when the marijuana issues came forward
and the Commission heard nothing more about the Comprehensive Plan until the joint meeting. She stated
she cannot speak for all the Commissioners however as the chairman of this Commission,she felt as if the
integrity of their work had been questioned. She said she felt it was most important to bring this forward
and ask for an apology from City staff. Commissioner Kelley said he did not get that feel from the
statement. He said he felt it was more as if Mr. Hohman was simply explaining the Commission has had
other work as well, such as this marijuana subject, which has taken considerable time. The other
Commissioners said they stood by Commissioner Grahman's statement. The vote on the motion was seven
in favor, zero against, and the motion passed
COMMISSION REPORTS: The Commissioners had no report.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report.
PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no public comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS:
A. Public Hearing— CTA-2016-0001 proposed amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code
(SVMC)19.85 Marijuana Uses,19.120.050 Permitted Use Matrix and Appendix A Definitions
Commissioner Graham opened the public hearing at 6:08 p.m.
Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb gave an overview of the revised proposed amendments to the
SVMC regarding the marijuana regulations. Previously a public hearing had been conducted on
April 14, 2016. At that hearing the Commission was contemplating a complete ban on any new
retail marijuana stores, any new marijuana producers or processors. After the public hearing the
04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5
Commissioners made an informal decision to modify the proposal for consideration. Staff
determined the modifications were substantial enough to warrant another public hearing.
The proposed modified amendments are:
• A definition for a marijuana club or lounge has been added
• A defmition for a marijuana cooperative has been added
• The name of the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board has been updated in the
defmitions
• A defmition for marijuana sales with a medical endorsement has been added
• The definition for marijuana sales has been updated to reflect the medical endorsement
• Marijuana production has been returned to permitted with supplemental conditions status
in the Permitted Use Matrix
• Marijuana processing has been returned to permitted with supplemental conditions status
in the Permitted Use Matrix
• The regulations for 19.85.010, Marijuana production has be added back, with updates to
the language regarding City Hall
• The regulations for 19.85.020, Marijuana processing has be added back, with updates to
the language regarding City Hall
• The regulations for 19.85.030 Marijuana retail sales has been modified to state no new
marijuana retail sales and allow the current retailers to move within the City as long as they
can still conform with the previous standards which were in place
• 19.85.040 are the regulations for marijuana uses which are prohibited including clubs,
lounges and cooperatives,but does not apply to home grows
• 19.85.050 are the regulations for marijuana processing and production in a residential zone,
which is home grow for qualified patients.
Commissioner Graham asked about the City having a restriction for a marijuana business being
near a day care. Mr.Lamb replied the State had its own buffers. City's buffers were in addition to
the State's. When an address is identified,the City does a review for not only the City's but also
the State's buffers as well.
Commissioner Graham closed the public hearing at 6:23 p.m.
Commissioner Stoy moved to approve CTA-2016-0001 as presented.
Commissioner Johnson said he feels continuing with the moratorium on any new retail business is
not going to have the impact the Commission is hoping for. He feels more retail establishments
will open immediately outside the City's borders with that revenue going to another jurisdiction.
In the end will be just as much cannabis inside the City as if we allowed the market factors to
control the business. He did appreciate and support the Commission's evolution on production and
process and said he supports Commissioner Phillips amendment from the last meeting to allow the
current retail outlets to move should they need to,but he would be voting against the amendment
feeling it needed to allow more than the three current retail stores. Commissioner Kelley said he
also would be voting against the amendment, saying not enough is known about how this would
work. He feels the current amount of producers,processors and retailers are sufficient. He would
rather have the City wait five year and see how things have turned out before allowing any more
marijuana businesses. He would not be supporting the amendment for this reasons. The other
Commissioners had no comments. Chair Graham called for the question.
The vote on the motion was five in favor, two against, with Commissioners Johnson and Kelley
dissenting.
B. Study Session: Comprehensive Plan—Economic Development Retail Improvement Report
Economic Development Specialist Chaz Bates gave a presentation on a recently completed economic
development study, this one regarding retail improvement, which will be incorporated into the
Comprehensive Plan. The information in the study is from 2015. This will be used to track retail
growth in the City, this will also provide strategic actions for the City to be able to use in the future.
Staff conducted an inventory with the consultants of the current retail in the City and the consultants
04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5
were surprised at how many big box stores the City already had. This helped them to identify the key
retail anchors, define the retail trade areas, demographics and the retail demand. This report will be
used at a tool to assist in attracting businesses and facilitate growth in the City's retail footprint. This
report assisted in identifying the primary trade area, which is a five minute drive from a major retail
location. This primary trade area is generally the City's boundaries. The secondary trade area is
generally a 10 minute drive from a major retail location,which reached out beyond the City's borders.
The demographics of the trade area for the City had a wide range of incomes. Mr. Bates stated that
relatively speaking the City has a more households earning between$30,000 and$75,000 than the City
of Spokane. There were higher pockets of income north and south of the City but these people were
driving through the City to shop. The City has almost 36%of our households spending more than 30%
of their income on housing costs, which reduces the amount of income for discretionary purchases.
Commissioner Johnson asked about the demographics of these statistic. Mr.Bates said he did not have
that information with him this evening,however this information was coming from the 2015 American
Community Survey data.
The greatest number of retail establishments are food services and drinking at 19%, small to mid-size
retailers at 13% and motor vehicle/part dealers at 12%. Big box stores only account for 2% of the
market,but have a large influence on the retail sales. While the food services account for 19% of the
market, they are limited service, not sit down restaurants. The largest spending category was motor
vehicle sales and parts,which is followed by general sales which is the big box stores. This is 66% of
all the retail sales in the City. The City captures more than 100%of the spending power in most retails
categories in the primary trade area. The categories where the City captures less than 100% are
accommodations,food and beverage stores,performing arts, and spectator sports.
The key themes which came from this study are
• Regional draw for shoppers throughout • Spokane Valley Mall is a major retail
the region draw
• Few neighborhood retailers • Few full-service restaurants
• Retail is anchored by big box • Higher incomes outside City to the north
and south
• Big box stores represent significant • Area of retail are underperforming or
portion of sales underutilized
Six retail improvement goals came from the report, along with possible supportive actions:
• Leverage regional and local assets to drive local commerce
o Identify potential projects that could spur tourism and prioritize city investments
o Consider implementation of a `night out' program
o Consider implementation of a `Taste of Spokane Valley' or `restaurant week' event
• Support and expand existing retail centers
o Offer financial incentives for voluntary physical improvements
o Match businesses to available space
o Intensity recruitment efforts
o Provide flexibility for allowed uses and development types
• Support catalytic,transformative,or innovative retail projects
o Encourage high quality retail and supportive uses at Mirabeau Point
o Participate in subarea planning process for the City Hall area
o Market analysis for a farmer's market
• Craft policy to support good retail in the right places
o Rezone commercial corridors
o Expand and/or create neighborhood commercial overlay zone
o Permit `local production' uses
• Plan and build infrastructure to support retail development
o Identify capital improvements to existing retail centers
o Invest in appearance of key gateways in Spokane Valley
04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5
o Use Appleway Trail to spur retail development on nearby retail development on nearby
parcels
• Strengthen Spokane Valley's image as a retail destination
o Promote retail segments
o Promote Spokane Valley's priorities and marketing in regional marketing efforts
o Publicize retailers and events
Mr.Bates stated the next steps are to integrate this information into the Comprehensive Plan and amend
the development regulations to support these suggestions. Explore retail connections to the Appleway
Trail. Develop marketing materials which support our retail trade, coordinate with our regional
partners,develop a list of retail vacancies,and coordinate with developers to fulfill economic priorities.
Commissioner Anderson asked for clarification on a part of the report which said `critical mass of
business verses limited mix,' which is in Exhibit 4. Mr.Bates said there is usually a tipping point when
it comes to retail. Commissioner Anderson asked of there was a list of the things the City was missing
in its retail, naming specific stores. Mr. Bates stated this was not this consultant's expertise.
Information that specific would come from a retail recruiter.
Commissioner Anderson said one of the sporting events missing from the list was a volleyball
tournament every year,which usually is 12,000 rooms per year. Commissioner Stoy commented on a
large soccer tournament which also happens every year at Plante's Ferry Park.
Commissioner Johnson wondered how the Planning Commission would be able to impact these goals.
Mr. Bates and Ms. Janssen explained the information would assist in creating policy in the
Comprehensive Plan which would guide the staff in the work they do.
Commissioner Johnson also said he felt there should be more social media interface in order to reach
out to the younger people in the community.
The subject of a mixed use development in the City of Spokane had been mentioned and Commissioner
Anderson has shared he did not feel the City should be `hanging its hat' on this however Commissioner
Johnson said he felt a development of this type would be something which should be worked into the
plan.
Commissioner Stathos said the joint meeting had conflicting points in it. For example there was
question of water conservation but in also then beautification of the City with trees and grass which
require watering. She said the exercise was eye opening in the fact it seemed to want certain things,in
certain areas but not the same in all areas. Mr. Bates stated Mr. Basinger would be returning to the
Commission to share the results of the workshop which was held May 3,2016. He said this report did
not deal with conservation. She said she would like to see some of these things addressed, hiring a
specialist,but she was waiting to find out where the money would come from other than raising taxes.
Commissioner Anderson said from a Planning Commission position and the Comprehensive Plan the
only thing the Planning Commission could do to assist retail sales tax improvement would be to let
zoning restrictions or zoning changes where more businesses could locate. He said a City can't make
retail sales happen. He said the City could facilitate it by not restricting business. He said return on
investment (ROI) was mentioned in the report several times, but what did we spent to get it,the City
did not invest a penny to get it. He did not know what else the City could do other than change the
zoning structure,or cut back on our restrictions to allow more businesses. Mr.Bates said the return on
investment was referring to hiring a marketing firm to help us develop a marketing program and making
sure if we are going to invest in capital improvement it would generate a return on that investment.
Commissioner Anderson commented the report discussed investment in infrastructure. Commissioner
Johnson asked how much of an impact the Planning Commission would have on the development of
infrastructure. Ms. Janssen said the Comprehensive Plan is a road map to staff's work, it guides the
programs which are implemented. If implementing infrastructure was a goal & policy in the
Comprehensive Plan then staff would work to towards programs or decisions which supported those
goals and policies. Commissioner Kelley said he felt it was more like a big picture, broad brush so
when changes came forward the Commission would know why things would be a certain way.
04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5
GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order.
ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:05 p.m. The vote on the
motion was unanimous in favor,motion passed.
Chair Heather Graham Date signed
Secretary Deanna Horton
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Action
Meeting Date: May 26, 2016
Item: Check all that apply: n consent n old business ® new business
n public hearing n information n admin.report n pending legislation
FILE NUMBER: CTA-2016-0001
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Findings and Recommendation—Comprehensive Marijuana Regulations—
CTA-2016-0001
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:
City initiated a code text amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC)chapter 19.85,SVMC
19.120.050, and Appendix A to add definitions regarding marijuana uses,prohibit all new marijuana retail
uses, cooperatives, and clubs from any zones within the City,to allow existing retail uses to locate within
existing zones and subject to existing buffering requirements, and to provide additional regulations for
production and processing of home-grown marijuana by qualified patients and designated providers for
personal use in residential zones.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.106; RCW 69.50 (codifying Initiative 502); RCW
69.51A; SVMC 17.80.150 and 19.30.040; SVMC 19.85; SVMC 19.120.050
PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: City Council has adopted regulations as set forth in SVMC 19.120.050
and SVMC 19.85 for the zoning and buffering of recreational marijuana. On December 9, 2014, City
Council adopted a moratorium on unlicensed marijuana uses (primarily medical marijuana). On October
6, 2015, City Council adopted a moratorium on marijuana uses licensed by the Washington Liquor and
Cannabis Board("WSLCB"). On May 12,2016 Planning Commission held a public hearing and approved
a modified proposal for recommendation to City Council.
BACKGROUND: CTA-2016-0001 is a City-initiated code text amendment proposal as required pursuant
to two moratoriums the City has enacted with regard to marijuana uses. The Planning Commission has
spent several meetings developing the proposed amendments in response to State Legislative amendments
that occurred in 2015. On May 12, 2016, the Planning Commission voted 5-2 to approve proposed
amendments and to recommend those proposed amendments to City Council.
The draft amendments approved by Planning Commission will amend chapter 19.85 SVMC, SVMC
19.120.050, and Appendix A by (1) adding definitions for medical marijuana endorsed retail stores,
marijuana cooperatives,and marijuana clubs,(2)prohibiting any new licensed marijuana retail stores from
all zones, (3) allowing existing licensed marijuana retail stores to locate within the existing designated
zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements, (4)prohibiting marijuana cooperatives from all
zones, (5) prohibiting marijuana clubs or lounges from all zones, (6) requiring any home-growing by
qualified patients as allowed by state law to be conducted only in single family residential zones in
permanent structures that are opaque and not visible by neighbors or from the public rights-of-way, and to
clarify that renters may be required,as may be authorized by federal,state,and local laws,to give notice to
landlords of their intention to grow marijuana plants in a rental dwelling.
APPROVAL CRITERIA: SVMC Section 17.80.150(F)provides approval criteria for text amendments
to the SVMC. The criterion stipulates that the proposed amendment(s) must be consistent with the
applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and bear a substantial relation to the public health,safety,
welfare,and protection of the environment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Planning Commission Findings and
Recommendations for CTA-2016-0001 to City Council.
STAFF CONTACT:
Christina Janssen—Planner
Jenny Nickerson—Senior Plans Examiner
Erik Lamb—Deputy City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS:
Findings and Recommendations for CTA-2016-0001
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CTA-2016-0001
May 26,2016
The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission's decision to recommend approval.
Background:
1. Spokane Valley development regulations were adopted in September 2007 and became effective on
October 28,2007.
2. CTA-2016-0001 is a city initiated text amendment proposing the amend chapter 19.85 Spokane Valley
Municipal Code(SVMC), 19.120.050,and Appendix A by(1)adding definitions for medical marijuana
endorsed retail stores, marijuana cooperatives, and marijuana clubs, (2) prohibiting any new licensed
marijuana retail stores from all zones, (3) allowing existing licensed marijuana retail stores to locate
within the existing designated zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements,(4)prohibiting
marijuana cooperatives from all zones, (5)prohibiting marijuana clubs or lounges from all zones, (6)
requiring any home-growing by qualified patients as allowed by state law to be conducted only in single
family residential zones in permanent structures that are opaque and not visible by neighbors or from
the public rights-of-way, and to clarify that renters may be required, as may be authorized by federal,
state, and local laws,to give notice to landlords of their intention to grow marijuana plants in a rental
dwelling.
3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing and conducted deliberations on May 12, 2016. The
Planning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend approval to City Council.
Planning Commission Findings:
1. Compliance with SVMC 17.80.150F Approval Criteria
a. The proposed city initiated code text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of
the Comprehensive Plan.
Finding(s):
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.
Land Use Goal LUP-10.2: Encourage a diverse array of industries to locate in Spokane Valley.
Economic Goal EDG-7: Maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility,consistency,
predictability and clear direction.
Economic Policy 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.
Economic Policy EDP-7.2: Review development regulations periodically to ensure clarity,
consistency and predictability.
Planning Commission Findings and Recommendations CTA-2016-0001 Page 1 of 2
Neighborhood Policy NP-2.1: 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.
b. The proposed City-initiated amendment bears a substantial relation to public health,safety,welfare,
and protection of the environment.
Finding(s):
The proposed amendment will allow compliance with state law and allow existing state-
licensed recreational and medical marijuana businesses to continue to operate within the
Spokane Valley while separating such uses from identified sensitive uses and the City's
existing and future residential uses. Further the amendment will limit additional adverse
impacts from new marijuana uses on other existing commercial uses. Finally, the proposed
amendment will protect the residential character of residential neighborhoods.
2. Conclusion(s):
a. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan and the
approval criteria contained in SVMC 17.80.150(F).
b. The Growth Management Act stipulates that the comprehensive land use plan and development
regulations shall be subject to continuing review and evaluation by the City.
Recommendations:
The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends City Council adopt the proposed city-
initiated code text amendments to chapter 19.85 SVMC, SVMC 19.120.050,and Appendix A.
Approved this 26th day of May, 2016
Heather Graham, Chairman
ATTEST
Deanna Horton,Planning Commission Secretary
Planning Commission Findings and Recommendations CTA-2016-0001 Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Action
Meeting Date: May 26, 2016
File Number:
Item: Check all that apply: Study Session ❑old business ❑ new business
❑ Public Hearing
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Comprehensive Plan Summary
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:A presentation on the City's process to review and update the adopted
Comprehensive Plan.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:None
BACKGROUND: In accordance with the Growth Management Act,the City is required to review and
update if necessary its comprehensive plan.The City initiated this review in the fall of 2014.After a robust
public process, a community vision report was issued in the spring of 2015. Following the vision report,
the City conducted an audit of its comprehensive plan identifying missing requirements created from
changes in state law since the plan's adoption in 2006. The City then analyzed present land use and
available capacity, recent trends, which included housing, office development, demographics, and
transportation,culminating in the development of existing conditions reports.
Running parallel to the comprehensive plan update process are a number of economic development
initiatives, including a retail improvement strategy and a tourism improvement strategy. The goals,
policies, and strategies of these studies fit nicely within the context of the comprehensive plan update,
especially regarding community priorities and the existing conditions reports.
The comprehensive plan update includes substantial revisions to create a user friendly,easy to read,action
oriented plan. The goals,policies, and actions are driven by the data from existing conditions reports and
economic development studies. Over the coming months, refined goals, policies, and strategies will be
presented and reviewed by City Council, Planning Commission, and staff,which will ultimately result in
an updated comprehensive plan that reflects community priorities and meets state requirements.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion
STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator
Attachments: None
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Action
Meeting Date: May 26, 2016
File Number:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑X Study Session ❑old business ❑ new business
❑ Public Hearing
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Comprehensive Plan Update specific to water rights and water districts.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70.A(Growth Management)
BACKGROUND: As part of the City's Comprehensive Plan Update, staff reviewed the City's
inventory of water supply services. This presentation reviews pertinent water district data and includes
district size (population and acreage),water consumption,water rights and land capacity.
Staff has prepared a power point presentation which covers all the water districts and how they relate to
each other. Also provided is a supplemental informational packet that has a one-page breakdown for each
water district.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion
STAFF CONTACT: Henry Allen,Development Engineer
Adam Jackson,Assistant Engineer
Attachments: PowerPoint Presentation
Supplemental Packet: 1-page district breakdown sheets for each district.
Spokane
Informational Review :
Water Purveyors of
Spokane Valley
May 26, 2016
COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Sitiokane
The Water Districts ( 16 Total )
• Carnhope Irrigation District #7 • Model Irrigation District #18
• City of Spokane Water Service • Modern Electric Water Company
• Consolidated Irrigation District #19 • Orchard Avenue Irrigation District #6
• East Spokane Water District #1 • Pinecroft Mobile Home Park
• Holiday Trailer Court • Spokane Business & Industrial Park
• Hutchinson Irrigation District #16 • Spokane County Water District #3 (WSA 1 & 2)
• Irvin Water District #6 • Trentwood Irrigation District #3
• Kaiser Aluminum - Trentwood • Vera Water & Power
u
Spokane Valley - P'
Trentwood i_rir
- Water Districts Map I.D. #3
...... City of Millwood Spokane
Kaiser Business &
Orchard Alum. Industrial
Holiday Trailer Court I.D. #6 Irvin W.D.#6 Park
la-Ne
Pinecrofti
7....c
"--.1111111111
,SCW D
M.H. Park Consolidated
ity of Spokane #3 11111 I.D. #19
Water Service Modern Electric Water Co
WSA 1
Carnhope I.D. #7 Hutchinson TT
I.D. #16 1
Vera Water& Power
mi Model
P I.D. #18
City of Spokane
Water Service 1 WD# _
WSA 2
1 Note:
East Spokane 8 of the 16 districts that serve
W.D. #1 SCWD Spokane Valley are fully
#3
WSA 2 contained within the city limits.
SCWD
#3
Spokane Valley City Limits WSA
2 iltr‘t_i J
, ......---"N„.._
Sp"'Okane
Residential Service Population .0000Valley
City of Spokane Water Service 227,505 Orchard Avenue I.D. #6 2,983
Vera Water & Power 24,962 Hutchinson I.D #16 2,180
Consolidated I.D. #19 22,315 Carnhope I.D. #7 1,750
Modern Electric Water Company 18,560 Pinecroft Mobile Home Park 248
Spokane County W.D. #3 17,095 Holiday Trailer Court 12
(WSA #1 & #2)
Model I.D. #18 6,067 Kaiser Aluminum - Trentwood 0
Trentwood I.D. #3 4,188 Spokane Business & Ind. Park 0
Irvin W.D. #6 4,084 TOTALS (Incl. City of Spokane) 335,999
East Spokane W.D. #1 4,050 TOTALS (Excl. City of Spokane) 108,494
2015 OFM COSV Population Est.: 93,340
CITY'one
Area Within City ( By LimitsAcres )
Area In Total % In City Acres In Total % In City
Water District Name Service Water District Name
City Limits Area Limits City Limits Acres Limits
Consolidated I.D. #19 4,132 12,433 33% East Spokane W.D. #1 602 1,443 42%
Vera W & P 3,949 10,586 37% Orchard Ave. I.D. #6 555 563 99%
SCWD #3 (WSA 1 & 2) 3,641 6,056 60% Kaiser Aluminum 491 491 100%
Modern EWCo. 3,309 3,309 100% Hutchinson I.D. #16 371 371 100%
Trentwood I.D. #3 1,263 1,978 64% Carnhope I.D. #7 277 277 100%
Model I.D. #18 1,011 1,050 96% Pinecroft MH Park 15 15 100%
City of Spokane 960 48,220 2% Holiday Trailer Ct. 5 5 100%
Irvin W.D. #6 949 949 100% Totals (Incl. Spokane) 22,154 88,370 25%
Spokane B & I Park 625 625 100% Totals (Excl. Spokane) 21,194 40,150 53%
Zoning Designations Map -14 _/— e 4—I
by Water District Trentwood
I.D. #3 IP
City of Millwood .--'
- Spokane
'Pr �— Kaiser Business &
"' Orchard Alum. Industrial
Irvin W.D.#6
40 ' Park
* .„..ay .
City of Spokane Pinecroft Consolidated
SCWD M.H. Park
Water Service A I.D. #1
#3 Modern Electric Water Co
WSA 1
Carnhope I.D. #7—
Hutchinson h1i6son __1— 1
I.0 Vera Water:Power
Model
I.D. #18
City of Spokane
Water Service 1— S�WD#
WSA2 rj
Legend
City of Spokane Valley Note:
East Spokane n water Districts 8 of the 16 districts that serve
W.D. #1 Industrial SD
Spokane Valley are fully
Residential WSA 2 I contained within the city limits.
mil Commercial
Parklopenspace SCWD
7 waterbody #3
WSA 2 A
Water District Zoning Designations Within City Limits (By Acres)
Residential Industrial Commercial Parks/Open Space
Carnhope Irrigation District#7 184 58
53
City of Spokane 621 39
Consolidated Irrigation District#19 1942
East Spokane Water District#1 351 89 6
Holiday Trailer Court 9
i7
Hutchinson Irrigation District#16 264 37
I
Irvin Water District#6 323 22 1.7 90
31
Kaiser Trentwood 40
Model Irrigation District#18 1018 3
Modern Electric Water Company 1773 34
35
Orchard Avenue Irrigation District#6 425 7 24
Spokane County Water District#3 I 12382 1D
Spokane Industrial Park 9
Trentwood Irrigation District#3 830
Vera Irrigation District#15 3028 W 520 9
" " I " I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ' I " " " I I I I I I
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 3000 3250 3500 3750 4000
Acres
CI I I OF
Monthly Residential Water Rate Comparison S.0.0pokane
Valley
Assumes 1 residence consumes 25,000 gallons per month
City of Spokane (Service to COSV) $58.65 Modern Electric Water Company $22.80
East Spokane W.D. #1 $43.75 Vera Water & Power $20.13
Carnhope I.D. #7 $35.33 Irvin W.D. #6 $18.19
Orchard Avenue I.D. #6 $35.29 Median
$27.00
Trentwood I.D. #3 $29.28 Average
$30.51
Spokane County W.D. #3
(WSA #1 & #2) $27.01
Hutchinson I.D #16 $27.00 Holiday Trailer Court No Charge
Model I.D. #18 $25.68 Kaiser Aluminum - Trentwood No Charge
Consolidated I.D. #19 $23.00 Spokane BIP and Pinecroft MH Park are not available.
CITY'one
Annual Water Right Capacity
2014 Water Water % Water 2014 Water Water % Water
Water District Name Pumped Right Right Water District Name Pumped Right Right
(Ac-Ft) (Ac-Ft) Used (Ac-Ft) (Ac-Ft) Used
Vera W & P 10,466 10,446 100% City of Spokane 65,077 147,570 44%
SCWD #3 (WSA 1 & 2) 5,469 6,456 85% Trentwood I.D. #3 1,552 5,420 29%
Irvin W.D. #6 1,391 1,768 79% Modern EWCo. 6,301 29,061 22%
Consolidated I.D. #19 13,892 22,410 62% Totals (Incl. Spokane) 110,302 235,303 47%
East Spokane W.D. #1 872 1,536 57% Totals (Excl. Spokane) 45,225 87,733 52%
Model I.D. #18 2,202 4,115 54%
Hutchinson I.D. #16 1,086 2,210 49% Spokane B & I Park - 7,582 -
Orchard Ave. I.D. #6 1,479 3,161 47% Kaiser Aluminum - 22,644 -
Carnhope I.D. #7 515 1,150 45% Holiday Trailer Ct. and Pinecroft MH Park are not available.
City Land Cvs . Water Right s • SOolia' ne
Residential ZoningDesignations Only Valley .
LQA Capacity % Land % Water LQA Capacity % Land % Water
Water District for New Capacity Right Water District for New Capacity Right
Connections Used Used Connections Used Used
Vera W & P 1,400 87% 100% Carnhope I.D. #7 45 92% 45%
SCWD #3 654 91% 85% City of Spokane 12 N/A 44%
Irvin W.D. #6 306 87% 79% Trentwood I.D. #3 466 75% 29%
Consolidated I.D. #19 1,650 83% 62% Modern EWCo. 1,073 87% 22%
East Spokane W.D. #1 166 91% 57% TOTALS 6,012 88% 52%*
Model I.D. #18 112 96% 54% (*Ex. W.R. Capacity % excludes City of Spokane)
Hutchinson I.D. #16 88 90% 49% DOH does not allow SBIP, Kaiser, Holiday nor Pinecroft
Orchard Ave. I.D. #6 40 97% 47% to add any new connections; they are excluded.
Sp'
ou
QUESTIONS ?
Sf pokane
rnl�op,� Irri ��i�r�iValle .
DOA Water System ID: 11250 Inaugural Year: 1921
DOH Residential Service Population: 1,750 Water System Plan Year: 2008
Service Area Size fin A�cresj DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 277 Single Family: 383
Total Service Area: 277 Multi-Family: 68
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100% Commercial/Industrial: 35
DOH Total Service Connections: 486
'Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft) 515
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 1,150
% of Water Right Consumed by District: 45%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 802 (taken from Water System Plan)
'Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COSV Limits I
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane county(LCIA))
Ex. Number of R-and MF- Connections: 451 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 45 (assume full build-out per ex. zoning)
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 496 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth (ppl): 112
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 91% (based on LCA ratio for DUs to ppl)
'System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Distribution System Leakage (DSL) is high. Ongoing 2 well pump stations, 0 reservoirs,7 miles of
replacement/upgrading of all service meters (on 10-yr water lines
cycles) and in-need areas of the distribution system.
Replace 2-port hydrants with 3-port hydrants.
Monthly Cost for 25,0{)0 Gallons of Water 35.33 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 43 6%a
Rate Schedule Type: Declining block rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
�S:I 1 tid•go°°Nium„.
City of Spokane poKane
Water Service 40000Valley
DOH Water System ID: 83100K Inaugural Year: 1883
DOH Residential Service Population: 227,505 Water System Plan Year. 2013
Service Area Size (in Acres) I DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 960 Single Family (602 within COSV); 70,078
Total Service Area: 4822C Multi-Family: 4,267
Percentage of Area in City limits: 2% Commercial/Industrial: 10,906
DON Total Service Connections: 85,251
frotal Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2013
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 65,077
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 147,570
% of Water Right Consumed by District: 44%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 359 (taken from Water System Plan)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within CO5V Limits
(Data per Land nuantiry Anoiysis Methodology for Spokane County (LQ,4,)
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 602 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 12
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 614 Capacity for Addt'i Pup. Growth (put): 31
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 98% (based on LOA ratio for DUs to ppl)
ISystem Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Aging infrastructure and demand growth creates the 7 well stations, 14 wells, 27 well pumps, 25
need to rehabilitate/replace wells, pump houses, and booster pump stations, 72 booster pumps,
reservoirs. New growth requires new reservoirs and 34 reservoirs, and >1,000 miles of water lines_
pump houses to serve new areas. Also, aging water lines
conintually need replaced.
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 58.65 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 18.5%
Rate Schedule Type: Inclining block rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
p•o°1\%••.4.6
anCs D
onsolidated Irrigation
District #19 Valley
10220&
DOH Water System ID: 10221 Inaugural Year; 1966
DOH Residential Service Population: 22,315 Water System Plan Year: 2009
Service Area Size (in Acres) DOH Service Connections:
.
Area within City limits: 4,132 Single Family; 7,921
Total Service Area: 12,433 Multi-Family: 1,468
Percentage of Area in City limits; 33% Commercial/Industrial: 220
DOH Total Service Connections: 9,609
(Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 13,892
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 22,410
% of Water Right Consumed by District: 62%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit {gal/day) 1,449 (taken from Water System Plan)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COW Limits
(Data per Land Quantity Anoiysis Methodology for Spokane County (LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MI-Connections: 9,389 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 1,650
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 11,039 Capacity for Addt'I Pop. Growth (ppl): 3,965
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 85% (based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
ISystem Infrastructure Details
-
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components —
"North"'system is not treated for disinfection.Some 34 wells at 11 well sites, 8 pressure zones, 15
reservoirs may not be able to meet future demand. Ongoing reservoirs, 3 booster stations, and 168 miles
upsizing of mainlines req"d. New pressure zones to improve of wa#er mains.
system, Rehab wells and provide backup power for
emergency/redundancy.
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 23.00 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 15,9%
Rate Schedule Type: Deci,, (Summer) & Incl. (Winter) (value is a 3-yr running average)
son OF
East Spokane po ne
Water District #1
DOH Water System ID: 216506 Inaugural Year: 1917
DOH Residential Service Population: 4,050 Water System Plan Year: 2007
Service Area Size (in Acres) I 'DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 602 Single Family: 1,175
Total Service Area: 1,443 Multi-Family: 381
Percentage of Area in City limits: 42% Commercial/Industrial: 102
DOH Total Service Connections: 1,659
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below; 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 872 Notes-Water pumped excludes 42 ac-ft purchased
from SCWD#3 via intertie. 1,536 ac-ft includes 500 ac-
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 1:535 ft of water taken from MEWca via ir}tcrtie agreement.
% of Water Right Consumed by District: 57%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (galfday} 560 (taken from Water System Plan)
Land Capacity Based on Existing K- and NU- Zoning Designations Witi�iin C SV Limits
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(LOA))
Ex. Number of R-and MF- Connections: 1,557
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 166 (1 dwelling unit (DU) - 1 connection)
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 1,723 Capacity for Addt'I Pop. Growth (ppl}: 340
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 90% (based on LOA ratio for DUs to ppl)
System infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Storage capacity isa limiting factor in order to meet growth 7 wells with 9 pumps, 5 pressure zones with 4.
demands. Booster pump upgrades, along with a new interne booster stations, 3 reservoirs. Length of
with Modern, is proposed to help alleviate pumping demand mainlines not avaiable.
on the system and its water rights.Also, ongoing mainline
replacement is required,
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Galions of Water 43.75 Distribution Systems Leakage-DSL: 24.2%
Rate Schedule Type: Flat Overage rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
I I'1 t]F
o ne
Holiday Trailer Court .1000
Valley
DOH Water System ID: 33679H Inaugural Year: 1970
DOFI Residential Service Population: 12 Water System Plan Year:
IService Area Size (in Acres) I 'DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 5 Single Family: 7
Total Service Area: 5 Multi-Family: -
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100 Commercial/Industrial: -
DOFI Total Service Connections: 7
'Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: - DDH DOES NOT REQUIRE FILES TO BE Oh!-FILE
Total Water Pumped by District {ac-ft): - FOR WATER SYSTEMS THAT DO NOT PLAN ON
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment {ac-ft): - GROWING. CONSUMPTION DATA IS NOT
% of Water Right Consumed by District' AVAILABLE.
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) - (no Water System Plan, no data on file)
and Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COSV Limits.
{Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 7 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units:
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 7 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth (ppl). 0
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 100% (based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
System infrastructure Details
System Notes: Existing System Components
This is a residential well from 1960s or 1970s that has been 1 well only (unmetered)
split to provide service to 6 mobile homes in addition to the
original house.The owner of the welt does not charge the
residents any consumption charge. There is no available
consumption or allottrnetment data.
Monthly Cost for 25,O00 Gallons of Water No Charge Distribution System Leakage-DR: N/A
Rate Schedule Type: N/A (value is a 3-yr running average)
Hutchinson
Irrigation Spokane
( 11
District #16 .0000'Valley
DOH Water System ID: 35100) Inaugural Year: 1909
DOH Residential Service Population: 2480 Water System Plan Year: 2009
!Service Area Size (in Acres} ID+OH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 371 Single Family: 763
Total Service Area: 371 Multi-Family: 109
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100% Commercial/Industrial: 17
DOH Total Service Connections: 889
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 1,086 —
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 2,210
%of Water Right Consumed by District: 49%
1 Equivalent Residential lJnit (gal,lday) 754 (taken from Water System Plan)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COSV Limits
(Data per Lona' Quon tity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 872 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 88
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 960 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth (pp!): 219
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 91% (based on WA ratio for Mtn ppl)
!System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial improvements Existing System Components
Portions of distribution system are old and undersized and 2 wells with 4 well pumps, 1 reservoir, and
need replaced. Ongoing service meter replacement(on 10- 12 miles of water mains,.
year cycles).These improvements should help with system
loss (leakage).
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water S 27.00 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 45.8%
Rate Schedule Type: Flat Overage rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
sin ii,,,. .000"414%.....
pokane
Irvin Water District #6
Valley -
DOH Water System ID: 3605D Inaugural Year: 1927
DOH Residential Service Population: 4,084 Water System Plan Year: 2015
Service Area Size (in Acres) IDOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 949 Single Family: 824
Total Service Area: 949 Multi-Family: 1,038
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100% Commercial/Industrial: 164
_ DOH Total Service Connections: 2,026
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 1,391
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 1,765
%of Water Right Consumed by District: 79%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 449 (taken from Water System Plan)
land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COW Limits I
(Data per Land Quantity Analysts Methodology for Spvkone County(LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 1,862 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 306
e
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 2,168 Capacity for Addt`i Pop. Growth (ppl): 515
Ex. Connections as of Maximum Capacity: 86 {based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
ISystem infrastructure Details
System Deficiendes/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Ongoing maintenance of system facilities. Long term upgrades 4 well pump stations and 2 reservoirs with
and expansion to the distribution system is required for 23 miles of water lines.
growth.A new office building and/or storage building is long
term goal.
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 18.19 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 9.8%
Rate Schedule Type: Flat Overage rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
!I �
Kaiser Aluminum 0
-
ane
Tr�er�t�roVa11ey .
0011 Water System ID: 3745013 Inaugural Year:
DOH Non-Residential Service Pop.: 804 Water System Plan Year:
iservice Area Size (in Acres) I 'DOH Service Connections J
Area within City limits: 491 Single Family:
Total Service Area: 491 Multi-Family:
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100% Commercial/Industrial: 5
DOH Total Service Connections: 5
ITotal Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2015 DOH DOES NOT REQUIRE FILES TO BE ON-
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 6,539 HAND FOR WATER SYSTEMS THAT DO NOT
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 22,644 PLAN ON GROWING.
% of Water R6ght Consumed by District: 29%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (galfday) - (no residential uses exist in this district)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within CO�SV Limits
(Data per L0 d Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(LOA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: - (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacityfor Additional Dwelling Units: -
Max. Number of R-and MF- Connections: - Capacity for Addt'I Pop. Growth (ppl): 0
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: - (based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
IT/stern-Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Ongoing repair and rehabilitation of pumas and water lines. 2 active wells (and 1 inactive well) serving
2,100 LF of water lines.
NOTE:
Water rights are divided for two uses:324 ac-ft
for domestic use and 22,320 ac-ft for industrial
use.
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water No Charge Distribution System Leakage-DSL: N/A
Rate Schedule Type: N/A (value is e 3-yr running average)
Model Irrigation District•���ri anec�
#18 Valley
DOH Water System ID: 55550D Inaugural Year: 1910
DOH Residential Service Population: 6,067 Water System Plan Year; 2011
IService Area Size (in Acres) J OH Service Connections;
Area within City limits: 1,011 Single Family: 2,286
Total Service Area: 1,050 Multi-Family: 240
Percentage of Area in City limits: 96% Commercial/Industrial: 6
DCH Total Service connections: 2,532
Total Water Pumped vs- Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft)! 2,202
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 4,115
% of Water Right Consumed by District: 54'%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 631 (taken from Water System Plan)
'Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MZoning Designations Within COSV Limits 1
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County (LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 2,526 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 112
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 2,638 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth {ppl): 251
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 96% (based on LCiA ratio for UIJs to ppl)
'System Infrastructure Details
System Defidencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
8 miles of system piping to be replaced over the next 20 6 wells with 1 booster pump station, 2
years: budgeted 4100,000 on mainline replacement reservoirs and 36 miles of water lines.
annually. Reservoir capacity is below DOH standard:
automatic emergency intertie is available and additional
pump capacity is available to meet high flow demands.
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 25.68 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 4.3%®
Rate Schedule Type: Inclining block rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
0E, 40011°.11%Iskiftwiti
s ,n
Modern Electric Water poicane
Company Vai1ey
DOH Water System ID: 556008 Inaugural Year: 1905
DOH Residential Service Population: 18,560 Water System Plan Year: 2013
'Service Area Size (in Acres) 1OH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 3,309 Single Family: 4,087
Total Service Area: 3,30 Multi-Family: 3,351
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100% Commercial/Industrial: 824
DOH Total Service Connections: 8,262
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2015
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft) 6,301
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 29,061
of Water Right Consumed by District: 22i%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 531 (taken from Water System Plan)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COW Limits 1
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 7,438 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 1,073
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 8,511 Capacity for Addt'I Pop. Growth fppi): 2,324
Ex. Connections as of Maximum Capacity: 87% (based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
;System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Replace 1 well, rehabilitate 1 well, improve various sections 11 wells at 8 difffierent well sites, 2 pressure
of the distribution system to meet fire and peak demand reducing valves for the 2 pressure zones, 3
flows. Ongoing meter and distribution network reservoirs, and 10C miles of water lines_
repair/replacement is also required.
Monthly Cost for 25,x00 Gallons of Water $ 22.80 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 8.036
Rate Schedule Type: Flat Overage rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
SUN
Orchard Avenue pokane
Irrigation District #6
Va11ey
DOH Water System ID: 64000 F Inaugural Year: 1920s
DOH Residential Service Population: 2,983 Water System Plan Year: 2015
`Service Area Size (in Acres) IDOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 555 Single Family: 1,237
Total Service Area: 563 Multi-Family: 18
Percentage of Area in City limits: 99% Commercial/Industrial: 4
DOR Total Service Connections: 1,259
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 1r479
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 3,161
to of Water Right Consumed by District: 47%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 483 {taken from Water System Plan)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within CO5V Limits
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and ME- Connections: 1,255 (1 dwelling unit (IDU) = 1 connection}
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 40
Max. Number of R-and MF- Connections: 1,295 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth (ppl): 100
Ex. Connections as% of Maximum Capacity: 97% (based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
The system operates with little redundancy due to only 2 2 wells with 5 well pumps that serve 1
wells and no storage tanks. 25%of the distribution system pressure zone. There are 0 reservoirs and
has leak-issues and consists of cast-iron pipe that needs roughly 21 miles of water lines.
replaced.About 200 service meters need removed from
basements and replaced at propertly lines.
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 35,29 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 13.4%
Rate Schedule Type: Flat Overage rate (value is a 3-yr running average)
SIö1
Pinecroft Mobile Park Va11ey
DOM Water System ID: 67623 F Inaugural Year: 1970
DOH Residential Service Pop.: 248 Water System Plan Year: N/A
h9rvice Area Size (in Acres) 1 !DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 15 Single Family: 139
Total Service Area: 15 Multi-Family: -
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100% Commercial/Industrial: -
_ DOH Total Service Connections: 139
'Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: - DOH DOES NOT REQUIRE FILES TO BE ON-FILE
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): - FOR WATER SYSTEMS THAT DO NOT PLAN ON
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): GROWING. CONSUMPTION DATA IS NOT
% of Water Right Consumed by District: _ AVAILABLE_
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) - (no Water System Plan, no data on file)
'Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and IVIF- Zoning Designations Within CO5V Limits
(Data per Land QrrntFty Analysis Methodology for Spokane County (LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 139 {1 dwelling unit (DUI = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units:
Max Number of R- and MF- Connections: 139 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth (ppl): 0
Ex. Connections as% of Maximums Capacity: 100% (based on LCA ratio for DLIs to ppl'
System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ - Distribution System Leakage-DSL: -
Rate Schedule Type: (value is a 3-yr running average}
: IIS c*
Soo.
Spokane Business andKane
Industrial Park 400001FValley
DOH Water System ID: 83027K Inaugural Year: 1942
DOH Non-Residential Service Pop.: 3,500 Water System Plan Year: 1989
Service Area Size (in Acres) [ OH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 625 Single Family:
Total Service Area: 525 Multi-Family:
Percentage of Area in City limits: 100% Commercial/industrial: 252
DOH Total Service Connections: 252
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: - DOH DOES NOT REQUIRE FILES TO BE ON-
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): - HAND FOR WATER SYSTEMS THAT DO NOT
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 7,582 PLAN ON GROWING. CONSUMPTION DATA
% of Water Right Consumed by District: ISI NOT AVAILABLE.
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) - (no Water System Plan, no data on file)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COSY Limits
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County (LQA))
Ex, Number of R- and MF- Connections: - (1 dwelling unit (DU). = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: -
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: - Capacity forAddt'l Pop. Growth (pp!): 0
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: - {based on LCCA.ratio for DUs to ppl}
'System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Per 1989 WSP on file at DOH::
4 wells, 2 reservoirs and 1,1, miles of water
lines,
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water - Distribution System Leakage-DSL: -
Rate Schedule Type: (valuei5 a 3-yr running average)
.
( Irt' cit . _ _ __
---- N
Spokane County Water pmane
District #3 (WSA 1 + 2) 4,0010Valley .
93350
DOH Water System ID: 93351 Inaugural Year: 1986
DOH Residential Service Population: 17,095 Water System Plan year: 2011
Service Area Size Iin Acres) DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 3,641 Single Family: 4,852
Total Service Area: 6,056 Multi-Family: 1,986
Percentage of Area in City limits: 60% Commercial/industrial: 318
DOH Total Service Connections: 7,156
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 5,469 (Water pumped excludes 42 ac-ft sold to
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 6,456 ESWD #1 via intertie -this is rare,)
of Water Right Consumed by District: 85%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 611 (taken as weighted average of WSA 1 +2)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and Mil=- Zoning Designations Within CO5V Limits
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(LQA))
Ex, Number of R- and MF- Connections: 6,838 (1 dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
i
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 664
Max. Number of li- and ME- Connections: 7,492 Capacity for Acidt'l Pop. Growth (ppl): 1,491
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 91% (based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Ongoing transmission line replacement, providing an intertie 8 active wells (4 unactive wells also owned
between Water Service Areas 1 and 2, upgrade WSA#1 well by district) with 6 pump stations and 16
pump, replace WSA 142 reservoir and booster pump.Ta pumps, 6 reservoirs and roughly 200 miles of
accommodate growth, 2 new reservoirs and 3 new booster water lines system wide.
stations are required.
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 27.01 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 9.8%
Rate Schedule Type: Inclining block rate W5A#1: 14.4% WSA#2: 73
Trentwood Irrigation
` Okossr-----"N„
F
District #3 .00.001F Valley
DOH Water System ID: 89250 C Inaugural Year: 1918
DOH Residential Service Population: 4,188 Water System Plan Year: 2009
f Service Area Size (in Acres) 1DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 1,263 Single Family: 1,460
Total Service Area: 1,978 Multi-Family: 267
Percentage of Area in City limits: 64% Commercial/Industrial: 162
DOH Total Service Connections. 118$9
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 1,552
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 5,420
% of Water Right Consumed by District: 29%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 421
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COSI! Limits
(Data per Land Quantity An&ysrs Methodology for Spokane County(LQA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 1,727 (i dwelling unit (DU) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 466
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 2,193 Capacity for Addt'l Pop_ Growth (ppl): 1461
Ex. Connections as of Maximum Capacity: 79% (based on LOA ratio for DUs to ppl)
'System Infrastructure Details
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Notreatrnent is provided at the well soures, .and ongoing 4 well pump stations, 3 booster stations, 3
system mainline replacement is required. pressure zones, 4 reservoirs, 2 emergency
back up wells, and 35 miles of water lines.
Monthly Cost for 25,00U Gallons of Water $ 29.28 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 13.8°
Rate Schedule Type: Flat Overage rate (value is approx. & based on 4 year values]
-0.1 .,
s1is'
ns
ValleyVera1Va�k+er Power iii000
DOH Water System ID: 914505 Inaugural Year: 1908
DOH Residential Service Population: 24,962 Water System Plan Year: 2015
'Service Area Size (in Acres) DOH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 3,949 Single Family; 7,121
Total Service Area: 10,586 Multi-Family: 2,874
Percentage of Area in City limits: 37% Cornmercialflndustrial: 408
DOH Total Service Connections: 10,403
Total Water Pumped vs. Water Rights Allotment
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: 2014
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 10,45E
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 10,446
% of Water Right Consumed by District: 100%
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 711 (taken as weighted average of WSA 1 + 2)
gland Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COSV Limits
(Data per Land Quantity Anofysi5 Methodology for Spokane County (WA))
Ex. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 9,995 (1 dwelling unit (DLJ) = 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 1,400
Max. Number of R- and MF-Connections: 11,395 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth (ppl): 3,328
Ex. Connections as% of Maximum Capacity: 88° (based on LOA ratio for DUs to ppl)
System Infrastructure Details I
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Various areas of main line need upsized. An overflow 9 wells with 6 booster stations and 5
collection & piping sytem project for the 4 MG reservoir is reservoirs, along with 145 miles of water
proposed. lines.
Monthly Cost far 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 20.13 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 12.2%
Rate Schedule Type: Declining Block rate (value is a 3-yr running average!
sin 401.11.1\seas...
All Wier Districts po e
Serving pokane Valle
Valley .
DOH Water System ID: - Inaugural Year:
Residential Service Pop, (Excl. Spokane): 108,494 Water System Plan Year: -
Service Area Size (Acres, Excl. City of Spokane DDH Service Connections:
Area within City limits: 21,194 Single Family (Incl. 602 Spokane): 32,858
Total Service Area: 40,150 Multi-Family: 11,800
Percentage of Area in City limits: 53% Commercial/Industrial: 2,517
DOH Total Service Connections: 47,175
Total WaterPumped vs. Water Rights Allotment 1
Calendar Year for Pumped Volume Below: -
Total Water Pumped by District (ac-ft): 45,225 Total Water Pumped vs.Water Rights Allotment-
DOE Annual Water Right Allotment (ac-ft): 87,733 Excludes:
% of Water Right Consumed by All Districts: 521 COS,S3IP, Kaiser, Pinecroft., & Holiday
1 Equivalent Residential Unit (gal/day) 870 lwe-ighted average of reporting district-excludes COS,
Kaiser, S . Pinecroft, HoIiday)
Land Capacity Based on Existing R- and MF- Zoning Designations Within COSY Limits
(Data per Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County(WA))
Ex, Number of R- and MF- Connections: 44,658 (1 dwelling unit (DU) 1 connection)
Capacity for Additional Dwelling Units: 6,012
Max. Number of R- and MF- Connections: 50,670 Capacity for Addt'l Pop. Growth (del): 13,937
Ex. Connections as % of Maximum Capacity: 881 (based on LQA ratio for DUs to ppl)
System Infrastructure Details - -
System Deficiencies/Captial Improvements Existing System Components
Monthly Cost for 25,000 Gallons of Water $ 30.51 Distribution System Leakage-DSL: 13.5%
(Average Monthly Cost For reporting districts-excludes Kaiser,SKIP, (Weighted Average DSL of reporting districts-excludes
Pirweuroft, Holiday( COS, Kaiser,SBIP, Pinecroft, Holiday)