2009, 06-16 Study Session MinutesAttendance:
Councilmembers
Rich Munson, Mayor
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember
MINUTES
STUDY SESSION MEETING
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
Spokane Valley City Hall
Spokane Valley, Washington
June 16, 2009
Staff
6:00 p.m.
Dave Mercier, City Manager
Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director
Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner
Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir.
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Greg McCormick, Planning Manager
Steve Worley, Senior Engineer
Lori Barlow, Associate Planner
Inga Note, Traffic Engineer
Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Administrative Analyst
Mary May, Engineering Technician
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Bill Miller, IT Specialist
Chris Bainbridge City Clerk
Mayor Munson opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the study session.
Introduction of New Employees: Community Development Director McClung introduced Mary Swank,
new Office Assistant who previously worked as one of our scanner operators and who replaces Patti
Romero. Council greeted and welcomed Mary.
Mayor Munson said since this is a study session with action items, he invited general public comment; no
comments were offered.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 09 -012 Adopting Subarea Plan — Mike Connelly
It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to approve Ordinance 09 -012 which adopts the
Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. City Attorney Connelly explained that this ordinance
adopts the Plan and changes the zoning for those districts within the Plan. He explained the two technical
changes to the Plan and to the ordinance, one amendment each as shown on his updated handout on page
14 of 15 of the ordinance, and page 1 of 3 of the Plan. Mr. Connelly explained that the new section 2
officially amends the "official zoning map" and the second is to clean up the language concerning
nonconformity as it was Council's intent to have the rules of nonconformity imposed throughout the
entire city; and he mentioned the omission of the line in #6 was overlooked. With regard to the new
section 2 of the ordinance, it was also mentioned that directly prior to that, the #10 should be #11. Mr.
Connelly also explained that the word in #7 of the Plan, "governed" is more precise then the previous
word "regulated." Mr. Connelly also mentioned that two substantive issues for council consideration
include the request from a property owner on the east side to have their property excluded, and the other
issue is the timing of the effectiveness of the ordinance.
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 1 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
First Amendment to the Motion
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to make the technical changes as outlined by Mr.
Connelly on the sheet received Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered.
Council voted unanimously by acclamation to amend as noted.
Second Amendment to the Motion
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to exclude from the subarea plan, the property
owned by Mr. Grafos, also the property next to Mr. Grafos, the music school. There was brief discussion
on the issue of what would or would not be nonconforming, with mention from Mr. Kuhta that if kept
under the Plan, the Grafos property would not be permitted so it would be a legal nonconforming use, and
the music school would be a conforming use; and if excluded from the Plan the Grafos property would be
a conforming use. Mayor Munson invited public comment no comments were offered. Councilmember
Taylor said he feels they should be kept in the Plan as it sets a bad precedence to take particular properties
out of the Plan, thereby making it appear if someone doesn't like a particular use, even though they would
be nonconforming and grandfathered in, they could be removed from the Plan because they asked. Other
councilmembers stated they felt it would not impact the overall plan to have the properties removed, with
Mayor Munson adding that there is no access from the Fred Meyer property onto these two properties
which makes future development difficult. Vote by Acclamation: In favor: Mayor Munson, Deputy Mayor
Denenny, and Councilmembers Schimmels, Gothmann, Dempsey, and Wilhite. Opposed: Councilmember
Taylor. Abstentions: None. Motion to amend passed.
Third Amendment to the Motion
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to implement the Plan October 1, 2009, which
Deputy Mayor Denenny stated, would allow staff time to begin the implementation process properly.
Mayor Munson invited public comment. Dr. Phillip Rudy, 5647 N Fruithill: said he feels the sooner the
better, and compared waiting here to a lag time involved when the County was addressing billboards,
which lag time seemed to allow a proliferation of billboards in the interim. After brief council discussion
on the motion, and attention to a specific date rather than sixty or ninety days, Council voted unanimously
by acclamation to amend as noted.
Editorial Changes Noted:
Councilmember Gothmann said he was surprised to see that Book III was included, and Mr. Connelly
said it contained some development regulations and part of Book III was referenced in Book II, and said it
made sense to adopt as a cohesive unit. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned that Appendix A to Book
III, "Starting Point" page 1 of 5, and other areas where the text references "figures" that the figures and /or
diagrams are missing. Mr. Kuhta said the figures, graphs and diagrams were in the original draft which
was created with a program we don't have, and staff had to take the text out, convert it to Word, and then
will use the figures in the original, so they will all be re- inserted. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned
that the last sentence on page 2 of 5 appears that something got dropped, and there are a few missing
words in paragraph seven of the last page. Mr. Kuhta said he will do some cutting and pasting to make
sure the original text is represented as Council intends. Mr. Kuhta also summarized what is included in
Book III, such as the intended city actions and what the city intends to do to help implement this Plan as
funding becomes available; mention of future street networks, and one or two -way issues, future street
cross - sections, how they look and function; and said that these can change as conditions change and we
will get a better idea when we start to improve the streets; adding that the only segment Council included
in the future to change to a two -say system is between Dishman Mica and University Road; and just to
change the direction of travel, which includes signalization and stripping, is approximately $1.2 million;
and said the full street with new sidewalks increases to a total of about $5.3 million, and a lot of that is
around the City center, but we will consider the cost when we get there.
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 2 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
Fourth Amendment to the Motion: Appendix B
Councilmember Taylor mentioned Appendix B and said while the sustainability indicators are okay, he
has problems with the narrative before it; and said he is uncertain if this particular language is something
to adopt now; that it appears to contain some ideology in the narrative and he suggested omitting or
reducing the narrative. Mr. Kuhta said that this Plan moves the City toward a more sustainable future; and
these were presented in the Plan to measure if we are moving as intended; that it has always been a part of
the plan, that we could make it two sentences at the top, or remove the Appendix and add a sustainability
chapter in the comp plan if that is Council's desire, that it doesn't hurt to leave the indicators there as it
points to a more healthy community. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned that since an appendix is
something attached to a main document, it was moved by Councilmember Gothmann and seconded to
delete this Appendix B, and renumber the following appendix, with the idea of working on it later.
Council discussion was mixed on whether to take it out or leave it in, in whole or in part. Vote by
Acclamation to remove Appendix B and re- number the following appendix: In Favor: Councilmembers
Gothmann, Schimmels, Wilhite, and Dempsey. Opposed: Mayor Munson, Deputy Mayor Denenny, and
Councilmember Taylor. Abstentions: None. Motion to amend passed.
Mayor Munson invited public comment:
Phillip Rudy, speaking as Board Chair of the Chamber of Commerce: he extended congratulations for the
amount of time and diligence exhibited and of Council's acceptance of many public comments; that he
realizes this is a living document and a good point of departure. Dr. Rudy then spoke personally,
suggested putting an underpass on Sprague in front of the Pring property, mentioned it should have two -
way all the way to I -90 for economic reasons, and said predetermined streets should be paid for by the
City at the assessed value devoted to the streets and improvement paid by the City; that SARP is a big
project, and for the six miles, Council has the ability to direct where that development begins somewhat,
and added that development will occur first where it makes economic sense.
Sean Lumsden, speaking on behalf of Spokane AutoRow Auto Dealers: said that AutoRow is back on the
radio telling everyone of the great opportunities if people come into Spokane Valley to buy a car; that he
has a couple requests and mentioned the sign code and said that dealers are under pressure from
manufacturers, that they are sent the banners and are charged for them monthly and they are directed to
set up the banners or be fined, which puts them in a tight spot; and he suggested offering some language
options to make dealers feel comfortable, and he mentioned his letter for distribution tonight and said he
would welcome the opportunity to discuss that idea; he said for areas concerning building design that
have been made for the dealers in the gateway commercial area, he suggested that be extended to that
piece of property while it is in the present situation; he said as dealers look to remodel and revitalization,
they are encouraged by the steps Council has taken to enable AutoRow to be a truly unique place; and
said that Appleway, Mazda, and Volkswagen are out of the gateway commercial property technically, but
they have been a very active member in auto row, and he asked that the Gateway Commercial District not
be extended but gerrymandered to reflect the dealerships which have also had a very large part in
AutoRow..
Nancy Nishimura E 15103 Valley Way. said she opposes the adoption of the couplet, that we need to
remember that the Sprague street is a commercial district; said she has been on the sign committee, she
tried to keep up, she has a business; she said the down zoning of the current businesses takes away the
value of the property and turns part of it into residential; she said that this plans for something that we
don't own, the city of Spokane Valley does not own Appleway yet; and said she objects to changing lives
so much for something that is just a "maybe." She said she doesn't feel she is being listened to; said there
was just recently something about having a healthy business district, but if the City is cutting off their life
blood, re- structuring the property, down zoning it and grandfathering them in but making them
nonconforming, that makes her uncomfortable and is not healthy; and makes her feel like she isn't part of
this community and makes her question if Council doesn't care if she's part of the community; that
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 3 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
restructuring the current businesses up to the sidewalk is impractical; unless the City started with a blank
canvas, that is not economically feasible; she asked about snow removal, and said the only area in town
that has the buildings up to the street had a terrible time this winter at Pines and Sprague, with snow
removal; that businesses that fail would be easy for developers to snatch up, tear down and start over; and
she asked if that is really making them feel part of the community when she feels there's vultures waiting
in the wings; she mentioned Woodburn, Oregon which has a retail district similar to Sprague; but they
have miles of hanging baskets on the streets which unifies the city, and said it would be a easy way to
change the look to the city without a huge expenditure; and she said she will try to get pictures and send
them to council. She also asked how does Council expect to pay for this plan or be a healthy business
climate when most of the businesses would be negatively effected; if the businesses went out of business
because they had to make all these arrangements for the streets every 200 feet, most of the homeowners
are not here tonight, but they are clueless and don't know what's going on; and she asked if the
homeowners are aware they'd be stuck with the bill to pay for this plan if a lot of the businesses fail
because of the loss of tax revenues; and again said the sign code is too restrictive; and she asked what
about the people who are on the streets north and south, they don't have any way to have signs for their
businesses, and that the planning director told her that is an off - premise sign and is not allowed; and she
asked what are we going to do about that, but she said that was never addressed, so there are people who
are being left out and are trying to pay tax dollars and Council should listen to them; and said she likes to
have her portable reader board that Marina Sukup said would be okay as long as it was chained to a stake
in the ground; which seemed interesting.
Dick Behm, 9405 E Sprague, member of the Spokane Valley Business Association: said they have been
involved in battles and planning with Sprague Avenue for sixteen years; that Sprague Avenue went to
one -way, property values dropped 30 -40 %; business values dropped 30 %; and the previous speaker spoke
of possible damages; and if they only knew what the people west of University went through for the last
seven or eight years in lost business and lost values of property; if the City doesn't collect taxes from the
business people, they'd have to go to the residential community; however, he said they have been
working on this and they support the plan and support returning to two -way; and he said he would expect
an immediate increase to 20 -30% for businesses on Sprague that are presently located on the one -way;
said that the last thirty years his business has been a non - conforming business and they have been
grandfathered in as it was established in 1932; so they have been there for the last 77 years in that
location; and with the new plan, the restaurant becomes nonconforming; and being nonconforming for the
last thirty years hasn't bothered him at all because they maintain the same business; and now that the
restaurant will be nonconforming, he doesn't intend to close it so that doesn't bother him; and he said he
feels we will work out these problems as we go along; that people can look to the city and talk to the staff
and work those things out; that the Valley Business Association is not happy with the sign code but said
he feels they can work through it; and said he believes each member of Council is interested in working
with the business community to solve those problems; and he thanked Council.
Council discussion and comments included mention by Councilmember Gothmann that the City of
Spokane also bans off - premise signs and that we have had outstanding consultation from the business
community which includes the Chamber of Commerce, AutoRow, and the Spokane Valley Business
Association; and most of the businesses are saying to get it done. Councilmember Dempsey said she
hasn't liked the plan from the beginning, primarily because she knew of two of the places that the
consultant talked about when he gave examples of his work, that he was a mesmerizing speaker, but she
knew the two cities he mentioned and she didn't like them at all; she said Council has worked hard to try
to make the rough spots in the plan more palatable to those who objected, that there have been many
changes, and she is pleased the changes were made as she feels it will be of benefit to the city, that she is
almost to the point where she could vote for it, but not quite, and she appreciates the work done by staff,
with kudos to Scott Kuhta. Councilmember Taylor said he is excited to see this come to a close and sees
all this as a focal point for this community, that heart and identity have been lacking from the beginning.
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 4 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
Councilmember Schimmels said he believes the plan has some good merit, but still feels it is very
presumptuous of us to move east of University as we don't the property as far as Appleway is concerned,
and he would prefer to do this incrementally, and said he doesn't intend to derail the plan, but will not
support it. Mayor Munson said we can't live in the past or we end up re- living the past, and looking at
what has occurred to Sprague for the past eight years or longer, that is not a past he wants to see in the
future; he doesn't want to see property values go down and doesn't want to see Sprague deteriorate as that
is not his vision for the future of this City; and he said he feels the citizens expect Council to be bold and
provide for a future we can all be proud of that the financing of this plan will take place over many years,
and implementing this and paying for this will be difficult, and things will change and that is what this is
all about; and can we manage the change so we can have some hope that the City of Spokane Valley will
be a better place to live tomorrow then it is today; and on into the future with each year getting better;
said he realizes the plan will change, and added that if Appleway is not resolved by the first of December,
he said he will personally make a motion to revisit the plan and consider removing it and all the
accompanying zoning from the Plan, and to investigate alternatives to Appleway Boulevard.
Vote by Acclamation on the final amended motion to approve ordinance 09 -012 which adopts the
Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan, to make the technical changes as outlined by Mr.
Connelly on the sheet received, to exclude from the subarea plan the property owned by Mr. Grafos also
the property next to Mr. Grafos, the music school; to implement the plan October 1, 2009, and to delete
appendix B and renumber the following appendix: In Favor: Mayor Munson, Deputy Mayor Denenny,
and Councilmembers Taylor, Gothmann and Wilhite. Opposed: Councilmembers Dempsey and
Schimmels. Abstentions: None. Motion passed.
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 09 -013 Amending Comp Plan Map — Mike Connelly
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to approve Ordinance 09 -013 amending the
Comprehensive Plan Map. City Attorney Connelly explained that this is the companion ordinance to the
subarea plan just voted on, and amends the map to be in conformance and consistent with the plan, and
said there have been no technical amendments. Mayor Munson invited public comment. Philip Rudy,
5647 Fruithill, said if the Sprague underpass occurred, it could tie together the University City area with
the twelve acres north of it which are bounded by Herald, Main, Belfour and Sprague; and by doing that
you would have twelve acres that could have a very good ambiance where you could put the City Hall,
perhaps the library, keep the open space or use the twelve acres for a park, and it would allow for a 1250
foot length of road running from Main to Appleway, which is a north/south direction; and said if he
recalls, the Consultant said a 1200 foot street is an ideal street for a city center. Mayor Munson said
Council will consider these ideas. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor Mayor Munson, Deputy Mayor
Denenny, and Councilmembers Taylor, Gothmann, Wilhite and Schimmels. Opposed: Councilmember
Dempsey. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
3. Proposed Resolution 09 -008 Appleway Boulevard — Mike Connelly
It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to adopt Resolution 09 -008. City Attorney
Connelly said that this topic has been under discussion for several years; the extension has been an
integral part of planning and future corridor expansion; that issues like traffic impact, concurrency, and
rapid transit; that we have been unsuccessful in negotiations with Spokane County and seem to get
circular in proposals; the intent is to stop the circular negotiations and sit down and try to resolve what all
parties feel are goals of City, the County, and STA (Spokane Transit Authority); and said this proposed
formal procedure would require all parties to discuss common objectives and come to resolution; adding
it would also require the identification of specific staff members to the negotiation party. Mayor Munson
asked if there are any pre- conditions, and Mr. Connelly confirmed there are none and said the mediation
is not binding; and in response to Councilmember Dempsey's question is STA obligated to respond
positively, Mr. Connelly added that this is an action by this Council and requests the County and STA to
address the same issue, but their actions are up to them. Mayor Munson said three weeks ago he gave the
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 " Page 5 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
Board of County Commissioners and the STA Board a copy of the draft resolution, explaining it would be
up for Council's consideration within the next few weeks; and he also e- mailed the draft to them last
week explaining Council would be discussing it, and would welcome their comments. Mayor Munson
then invited public comment; no comments were offered. Deputy Mayor Denenny stated that this is the
formalization of a process to get the movement going and get staff involved, and he hopes to begin finally
moving beyond self - absorbency for all parties concerned, and discuss the need of the community. Vote
by Acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
3a — added item:
Mayor Munson said we have a special announcement, and he recognized Councilmember Taylor.
Councilmember Taylor read the following letter:
"Dear Mayor and City Council: It is with both sadness and enthusiasm that I inform you of my pending
departure from the City Council due to my appointment to the position of City administrator for the City of
Connell, Washington. The past six and a half years have been among life's most memorable, and my work
with the great City of Spokane Valley has truly been the highlight of my professional career. I would like to
thank the citizens for entrusting me with this honor and responsibility, and I wish the Council, city staff, and
the entire community the best in the years to come. My resignation from the Spokane Valley City Council
will take effect at 11:59 p.m. on June 30, 2009. God bless you all and keep moving our city forward.
Sincerely, Stephen A. Taylor, Councilmember, Position 2."
Councilmember Taylor mentioned he would have some final closing comments at the June 30 meeting.
Each councilmember commented on the upcoming change, extended their congratulations, stated that
Councilmember Taylor would be missed, that they enjoyed working with him, including his good- natured
disagreement at times; and said they recognize this is a positive professional progression for him. Mayor
Munson said information will be supplied to Councilmembers soon explaining the law and a
recommended path.
Mayor Munson called for a recess at 7:35 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:46 p.m.
4. Proposed Resolution 09 -009 Adopting 2010 — 2015 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) —
Steve Worley
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to approve Resolution 09 -009 adopting the 2010 —
2015 Six Year TIP as presented. Engineer Worley explained that as we do annually, this is a look at the
projects for the next six years; and said there were no changes as a result of the public hearing. Mayor
Munson asked about item six, the "Broadway Avenue Safety Project, Pines (SR -27) to Park" and asked
what the cost would be if only the ADA improvements were done, and whether we would still be able to
receive some of the federal grant money. Mr. Worley said most likely not; that TIP is state - funded rather
than federally funded; and the main part of the project is the safety improvement of re stripping; that the
ADA and sidewalk are typically required for any project TIB does, the re- striping is the main part. Mayor
Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Mayor Munson said he is not convinced we
will achieve what we want by changing the stripping, and therefore moved, seconded by Councilmember
Dempsey, to amend the motion to strike #6 from the TIP. Councilmember Gothmann voiced his objection
and said he feels such a motion is premature when we haven't heard the data yet, and suggested council
have that discussion now. As a result, Mayor Munson and the seconder withdrew their motion; and
Councilmember Wilhite and the seconder withdrew their motion; and Council proceeded to discuss
agenda item #10, the "Broadway Avenue Safety Project."
10. Broadway Avenue Safety Project — Inga Note /Steve Worley
Mr. Worley explained what the project entails, followed by Ms. Note's explanation of the analysis of the
changes. Mr. Worley said that this project is to create a safer Broadway from Park to Pines; he said this is
not a grind and overlay; and he showed some of the areas lacking the ADA improvements. Ms. Note
shared some of the results of the previous projects, including slides showing the safety benefits of three
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 6 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
lanes, and updated charts of traffic volumes and accident statistics before and after the three -lane
conversion. Mayor Munson said if the re- stripping won't achieve what we want it to, then it is not causing
a big difference and why spend the money; adding that he hasn't seen any evidence that the $187,000 is
well spent; but feels the ADA improvements are necessary and would like to find some way to do that.
Deputy Mayor Denenny mentioned that previously people had commented changing to three lanes would
make it more difficult moving in and out of driveways, but the data shows just the opposite. Mr. Worley
mentioned that since we received information on this grant, there isn't time to evaluate that area further
and we have to decide whether or not to move forward; that some of the statistics may have been affected
by the last two very harsh winters, and the I -90 construction may have increased the collision rates.
Council /staff discussion continued with mention by Mayor Munson that he feels there is an intersection
problem on Broadway rather than a lane problem; and Councilmember Schimmels stating that if we
condemn a three -lane road we would also have to condemn 32 " 16 Mission and more; that this is a
safety issue; and in moving from Park to Pines there are six schools with cross - traffic, that crossing a
three lane road is far less dangerous than trying to cross four lanes.
Mr. Worley said that staff recommends moving forward with this safety project to try to reduce some of
the collisions. Attorney Connelly added that when making a decision about traffic safety, Council needs
to give a substantial degree to the experts as to what is safe and what isn't because if he needs to defend
the City against an action if someone gets hurt, it is best if that action was done relying on those qualified
to make the decision deemed to be most safe. Councilmember Dempsey mentioned that four lanes is a
safety issue and she avoids Broadway east of Pines as it is not an easy road to travel; that bike lanes don't
make it easier to travel and since she's been living on Sergeant Road, it appears the bikes lanes are not
used very much and feels we could get better safety results from intersections by having left -turns instead
of through the re- stripping and taking away a lane in each direction; and she mentioned there is no access
for the handicapped. Ms. Note said an option on the intersections is they could separate the directions of
travel fairly easily and it would operate like Broadway and Evergreen before being converted to the three
lanes, and would be the least expensive; or could widen the area at the intersection and make it five lanes
and put in a turn. Deputy Mayor Denenny mentioned how much he and his wife feel the bike lanes are
wonderful, and even aid with the children walking to school as sometimes they would walk in the curb,
and having a bike lane would prevent them from walking right next to traffic. Mayor Munson said he sees
no evidence of improvement, that there is not enough data, and we are running low on REET funds (real
estate excise tax); that there are other places to spend the money; and regarding school safety, he feels
what we are doing currently is working as there have been no accidents with kids being hit; and in
looking closer at the effective use of funding, said the only benefit he can see is that from the ADA
improvements. Council then moved back to agenda item #4.
Back to Item #4: Proposed Resolution 09 -009 adopting the 2010 -2015 six -year TIP
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to approve Resolution 09 -009 adopting the 2010-
2015 six year TIP as presented. It was then moved by Mayor Munson and seconded, to remove item #6
from the TIP. Councilmembers discussed the issue including a mention from Councilmember Gothmann
that the data shows accident reductions and since ADA is required; he prefers to keep it; Councilmember
Dempsey said she feels we could find someplace to put that funding besides re- stripping; Councilmember
Schimmels said it is a positive project; and we get our money's worth, and it makes for calmer driving;
Councilmember Taylor mentioned that he drives that section often, voted against it originally but believes
the change is positive and safer for pedestrians and kids. Vote by Acclamation on the amended motion to
remove #6: In Favor: Mayor Munson and Councilmember Dempsey; Opposed: Deputy Mayor Denenny
and Councilmembers Schimmels, Gothmann, Taylor and Wilhite. Abstentions. None. Motion to amend
failed. Mayor Munson invited public comment on the original motion to approve Resolution 09 -009
adopting the 2010 -2015 TIP as presented. Mary Lloyd, 11216 E 13 said she had a couple issues with
ADA; she likes ADA improvements; likes the idea of dropping the speed limit; and questioned if
widening the easement and widening the sidewalk would mean having to buy right -of -way; she said that
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 7 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
Broadway scares her because of the curb type two inlets due to stormwater and suggested that needs to be
improved; and she questioned what this would do to the level of service; she said she understands traffic
well and feels the schools do a wonderful job of slowing down traffic in those areas; and asked Council to
think about how changes change traffic, as it generally makes more people impatient. Vote by
Acclamation on the motion to approve Resolution 09 -009 adopting the 2010-2015 TIP as presented: In
Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
5. Park Road Reconstruction #2, Broadway to Indiana Design Phase — Steve Worley
It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to authorize the City Manager or designee to
execute the consultant agreement with CH2M Hill in the amount of $318,443.44 for the Park Road
Reconstruction #2 Project — Broadway to Indiana. Engineer Worley explained the design phase of the
project as per his June 16, 2009 Request for Council Action Form, that we received a federal grant
covering 86.5% of the cost for the design improvements, up to $304,500; and that CH2M Hill was chosen
through an RFQ (request for qualifications) process last February. Mayor Munson invited public
comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None.
Abstentions: none. Motion carried.
6. Energy Grant Submittal — Mary May
Mayor Munson thanked Avista representatives for their patience in getting to this agenda item. It was
moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to concur with the proposed projects to include the
EECBG grant application and authorize a letter of assurances as part of the application. Ms. May
explained that as presented at the June 2 council meeting, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
appropriates funding for the Department of Energy to issue formula -based grants under the Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program, and that we are eligible for a non - competitive grant of
$823,400 to spend on energy conservation planning on projects that result in energy savings; and
mentioned that the grant application must be submitted by June 25, 2009 and must include documentation
identifying an approved entity to file the application and assuring conformance with the Davis -Bacon Act
regarding fair wages; and said funding is expected to occur in the fall of 2009; with projects implemented
and completed within thirty -six months. Mayor Munson invited public comment.
Bruce Folsom, Avista, 1411 East Mission Spokane, said he is the Energy Efficiency Director, and that he
and Regional Business Director Nancy Holmes have been examining programs and said they are looking
at changes almost weekly when it comes to economic stimulus; that if the City partners with them on
home energy audits and corresponding loan funds to get installations done, Avista would match it dollar
for dollar; he said that Spokane County took them up on their offer of $120,000 to use as a match; that
they have not yet had conversations with Modern and Vera but could if council is interested; said he
worked with staff in last few weeks and appreciates the discussions; and much like being the home town
utility, they would like to run some in -home energy programs; and said he is optimist in doing a match
with the City of Spokane; and would like to work with the City of Spokane Valley as well.
Ms. May said that the $823,000 is the city's formula grant; that all the projects defined fit within the
parameters, and Avista's program fits; and the idea is we could take a piece of that and put it toward a
program that Avista would manage that would allow residential and small business owners to obtain
energy audits; help identify where some improvements could happen and perhaps make the
improvements. Mr. Mercier asked how much is proposed as part of the partnership from Avista, and Ms.
May said at this point, there is nothing identified. Mr. Mercier reminded Council that grant materials
must by filed by June 25 and there is no other council meeting between now and then; and should an
amount be identified, staff would have to subtract an equal amount from one of the other areas, as shown
previously. Mr. Folsom said they are looking at as many programs as possible to out - compete western
Washington; that the problem is a lack of time.
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 8 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny, seconded and unanimously passed to extend the meeting for
thirty minutes.
Discussion continued regarding Avista's input, and Ms. McClung mentioned she feels the energy chapter
for the comp plan is important and lays the foundation for future funding opportunities; and perhaps we
could ask Mr. Worley if it is possible for other funding opportunities that could pay for ITS (intelligent
transportation system) which is nearly half the allocation. Mr. Worley explained that this was Public
Works Director Kersten's higher priority project; but the problem is typically one can't match federal
money with federal money, so we would have to find money somewhere place else. Mr. Folsom said at a
10% match with their non - federal money, it would involve about 300 to 400 homes; that they are ready to
apply for a grant as well, and regarding the question if what if they don't get the award, Mr. Folsom said
he assumes it would revert back to the City, but said he didn't have a specific answer. Other ideas were
to split the project into two phases and reduce the amount to ITS by $80,000; that REET funds have
dwindled several hundred thousand per month which would be the main source of match in applying for
leverage grants; that we will likely have insufficient funding for all TIP programs in 2010; that bike and
pedestrian plans or other infrastructure projects would have an immediate impact on traffic congestion
relief; and mention that the Avista program will not help all the citizens as much as ITS programs. It was
ultimately moved by Councilmember Gothmann and seconded, and unanimously agreed to amend the
motion to take money from the energy efficiency chapter in the amount of $88, 000 and put that on the
Avista grant. Mayor Munson invited further public comment; and no comments were offered. Vote by
Acclamation on the final vote to concur with the proposed projects to include the EECBG grant
application and authorize a letter of assurances as part of the application and to take money from the
energy efficiency chapter in the amount of $88, 000 and put that on the Avista grant: In Favor:
Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
7. Justice Assistance Grant 2009 — Morgan Koudelka
It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to authorize the City Manager or designee to sign
the Memorandum of Understanding approving the joint application for the 2009 Edward Byrne Memorial
Justice Assistance Grant. Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained that Spokane Valley has
been allocated $50,367 as part of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JG) Program;
that the funds are designed to support all components of the criminal justice system; and Spokane County
has typically used this funding for the Sheriff's Office; and said this is the first year we have had five
years of qualified data to allow us an allocation; and that this does not require any matching funds. Mayor
Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor:
Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
Mayor Munson again opened the floor for general public comments; no comments were offered. It was
moved by Councilmember Dempsey, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting another
fifteen minutes.
REGULAR STUDY SESSION ITEMS;
8. Surplus Items — Ken Thompson
Finance Director Thompson explained that surplusing items is a new exercise for us; that some of the
items include obsolete equipment and furniture, old computers, monitors, and office partitions, and even a
three - legged piano and a city vehicle; and that we need to proceed as per code; which is to first offer the
items to other departments. He mentioned that this is just for background information now, and next time
he will have a resolution along with a list of the surplus items for approval.
9. Discovery Playground Bid Process — Mike Stone and Worley
Parks and Recreation Director Stone said that he and Engineer Worley have been working closely on this
project; that bids were opened and all bids received were close to each other, but all were approximately
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09 Page 9 of 10
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
47% higher than the consultant's estimate; and it was determined that the Consultant's construction
estimate did not include prevailing wages as the Consultant's home state does not require that; and that
difference would have accounted for about $272,000, which is about half the deficit. Mr. Stone said there
is not a lot of this type of specialty work done in this local area; none of the contractors who bid attended
the pre -bid meeting; and the consultant received no calls from bidders but did from some of the subs. Mr.
Stone said to re- design the project would defeat the purpose of the project; and he asked for consensus
that staff go back and research some additional available funding options, and bring back the proposal at
the June 30 meeting; with the intent of not discarding the bids; but examining ways to secure the
additional funding to award the bid.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny, seconded and unanimously passed to extend the meeting for an
additional ten minutes.
Mr. Stone said that the apparent low bidder is very excited about this project and is geared up and feels
they can complete the project in about three months, which is about half the anticipated time. Mr. Worley
said this would be a lump sum bid, that change orders are negotiated; that once the bid is awarded, staff
could work with the contractor to see about the possibility of reducing some of the elements. Mr. Mercier
said that staff will come back to council June 30 and make the proposal for council's consideration;
another option is that we have set aside $400,000 in the original construction fund for CenterPlace, which
was set aside for major repairs; that we have subsequently adopted a finance policy and we are funding
the depreciation of our buildings as well, so that would be another consideration. There was council
consensus to bring this back to the June 30 meeting for motion consideration.
10. Broadway Avenue Safety Project — Inga Note /Steve Worley
No further action needed; see item #4 above.
11. Advance Agenda — Mayor Munson: mentioned the opening of the three swimming pools, and
reminded everyone about this Saturday's retreat.
12. Council External Committee Reports — Councilmembers n/a
13. Council Check -in — Mayor Munson: n/a
14. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier: n/a
15. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Land Acquisition, Pending Litigation
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to adjourn into executive session for
approximately 45 minutes to discuss pending litigation, land acquisition, and the performance review of a
public employee; and that no action is anticipated thereafter. Council adjourned into executive session at
9:42 p.m. At approximately 10:42 p.m. Mayor Munson declared Council out of executive session. It was
then moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 10:43 p.m.
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Meeting Minutes: 6 -16 -09
Approved by Council: 06 -30 -09
Page 10 of 10
Bruce Folsom
Director, Energy Efficiency
Telephone 509.495.8706
Cellular 509.990.8428
Facsimile 509.777.5296
bruce.folsom@avistacorp.com
/11111,__ IS
1411 East Mission Ave
PO Box 3727 MSC - 15
Spokane WA 99220 -3727
www.avistautilities.com
June 16, 2009
Mayor Richard M. Munson
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E. Sprague Ave., Ste. 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Dear Mayor and City Council:
It is with both sadness and enthusiasm that I inform you of my pending departure from
the City Council due to my appointment to the position of City Administrator for the City
of Connell, Washington. The past six and a half years have been among life's most
memorable, and my work with the great City of Spokane Valley has truly been the
highlight of my professional career. I would like to thank the citizens for entrusting me
with this honor and responsibility, and I wish the Council, city staff, and the entire
community the best in the years to come.
My resignation from the Spokane Valley City Council will take effect at 11:59pm on
June 30, 2009.
God bless you all and keep moving our city forward.
Sinc ely,
Step en A. Taylor,
Councilmember, Posit on 2
SD
Councilmember Stephen A. Taylor
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E. Sprague Ave., Ste. 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
autoroiq
AUTO DEALER MEMBER
June 16, 2009
To: Spokane Valley City Council
From: AutoRow Dealers
Dear City Council,
I am writing this letter on behalf of all the AutoRow dealers:
Paul Jaremko Marti Hollenback Denny Waltermire
Jaremko Nissan Dishman Dodge Hallmark Hyundai
Von Jones Gus Johnson
Appleway Group Gus Johnson Ford
As we look over this version of the Sprague- Appleway Revitalization Plan we have the
following requests:
1. Each dealer is mandated and charged by their franchises to hang occasional signs or
banners during national sale events. There must be some provision in the sign code to allow
for these times.
We would ask language to be modified to read either of the following ways:
Banners will be allowed in the Gateway Commercial Avenue district (including Appleway
Audi/VW, Subaru Mazda) for two weeks per month with a yearly permit.
Or
In the Gateway Commercial Avenue district (including Appleway Audi/VW, Subaru Mazda),
Special Event signage can include banners for 14 days per month if proof of requirement can
be produced from corporate franchisee of local dealership.
2. Gateway Commercial Avenue districts standards need to also include Appleway
Audi/VW, Subaru and Mazda property. The Mazda / Subaru building will need to be remodeled
soon and should be afforded the same standards as the rest of the Gateway district.
Thank you,
Gus Johnson
President, AutoRow
7P7 f t:r °73r 5':_4.02.7 SS El
6- z3f 17)/hgCGL.
DATE
MEETING TYPE (i.e.
city council, planning
commission, etc)
LOCATION
TOPIC
12/16/2008
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
12/30/2008
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
1/6/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
1/12/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
1/13/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
1/26/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
2/3/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
2/24/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
3/3/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
3/24/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
4/28/2009
City Council Public
Hearing
CenterPlace
Public Hearing
5/5/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
SARP Discussion
5/19/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
5/26/2009
City Council
Council Chambers
Deliberations
DRAFT
t
7. The adoption of the Subarea Plan and amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map have been
provided to the Community Trade and Economic Development Department pursuant to RCW
36.70A.106 on January 23, 2008.
8. The amendment to the Uniform Development Code adopting the Subarea Plan is made pursuant
to and consistent with the provisions of RCW 36.70A.040 to implement the provisions of the
Comprehensive Plan.
9. The City of Spokane Valley has complied with the requirements of RCW 43.21C, specifically by
using the integrated SEPA process pursuant to SEPA rules, (WAC 197 -11 -210, 220, 228, 230,
232 and 235). The documents and dates of issuance are as follows:
a. Adopted existing environmental document (Draft and Final EIS prepared for Spokane Valley
Comp Plan), signed January 18, 2008.
b. Issued Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact State (DSEIS) on January 18, 2008.
c. Issued Addendum to the DSEIS on May 20, 2008, to incorporate updated transportation
analysis.
d. Issued Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) on June 19, 2008.
10. As part of its review and deliberations, adoption of the Subarea Plan and amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan Map, the City Council has reviewed the documents filed for record, which
are on file with the City Clerk.
-1'0. The adoption of this amendment to the Uniform Development Code adopting the Subarea Plan is
necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and the environment.
Section 2: Amendment to the Uniform Development Code SVMC 19.20.020 Official Zoning Map. The
Official Zoning Map within the Subarea Plan is hereby amended as set forth in Section 2.1, Figure 2.1
District Zone Map of the Spokane Valley Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan.
Section 23: Amendment to the Uniform Development Code SVMC Chapter 19.110. The Uniform
Development Code, specifically SVMC Chapter 19.110 is hereby amended as follows:
Ordinance 09 -012 Page 14 of 15
■
2.0. ORIENTATION
Book II contains the Development Regulations that govern all future private development actions in the Spokane
Valley - Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan Area (Plan Area). These standards and guidelines will be
used to evaluate private development projects or improvement plans proposed for properties within the Plan Area.
The Development Regulations are presented in the following seven sections:
> 2.0 Orientation,
➢ 2.1. District Zones Regulations,
D 2.2 Site Development Regulations,
D 2.3. Street and Open Space Regulations,
2.0.1. Applicability
1) City Center District Zone. These regulations shall apply to:
a. New construction.
b. Additions greater than 20% of the building floor &ea.
c. Exterior Improvements ( "facelifts ") costing+ ore than 20% of the assessed or'appraised value of
the building and land. Such exterior regulat�i�ons shall co 1 form to the architectural regulations
contained in Section 2.5. r
2) All Other District Zones. These regulations shall apply to:
a. New construction.
b. Exterior Improvements ( "facelifts) :ti ng more than 20%41.1 t he assessed or appraised value of
the building and land. Such extern r imp shall conform to the architectural regulations
contained in Section 2.5.
3) New Construction. New construction is de+fd as an entt� ly new structure or the reconstruction,
remodel, rehabilitation or expansion of a building costing more +than 50% of the assessed or appraised value
of the existing stria and land. N
4) Existing Buil and Completed Applications. Nothing contained in this section shall require any
change to an existing buiilding,`or structure for which a building permit has been previously issued or
applied for in the Community' nity' Develop_ne t E+ epArtment, and the application is deemed complete prior to
of this Subarea Plan.
thec -tiwe;
Ownership/TenaitChanges. Changes in property ownership or tenants of existing uses shall
kewise require no change in any efil building or structure.
City Council Draft Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan
April 28, 2008 with changes from 5 -19 -09
D 2.4 Parking Regulations,
> 2.5 Architectural Regulations, and
D 2.6 Signage Regulations.
6) Limitations on Required Improvements. Where improvements and additions are made to existing
buildings forrenovation or enlargements apply only to net new floor area.
additions toexisting buu sings that incrctse non conformities are not permitted. If regulations to be applied
to net new floor area are not specified in this Subarea Plan, then the Community Development
Director/Designee shall determine which regulations shall apply.
7) Non - conforming uses and structures shall be rcaulated l overned b S • okane Valle Munici • al Code
SVMC Title 19.20.060, i II` 'ii' ,i l s 1;: it °'i. i I;
l l l?i1 , :y I .,
;a . ili ill. III I I Id
l;'`., G; .I ) C)IIJ. 1Ull Ifl I I t I ;L',I, iuI ■ t ;, ■ illy IJI1 ll :a
8) Development regulations established in this Plan are specified as either Standards or Guidelines.
Standards address those aspects of development that are essential to achieve the goals of the Subarea Plan.
They include specifications for site development and building design, such as permitted land uses, building
height and setbacks. Conformance with standards is mandatory. Such provisions are indicated by use of
the words "shall ", "must ", or "is /is not permitted."
Book II Development Regulations Page 1 of 3
C:\Documents and Settinms \skuhta\Desktop \SARP COUNCIL Draft - 2.0 ORIENTATION 5- 19- 09.docP:\Conmmity
2.0 ORIENTATION 5 19 09.doc
'1 w
Broadway Avenue
Park to Pines & Pines to Sullivan
June 16th, 2009
I nga Note
Steve Worley
TIB Grant Status
• TIB supports this safety improvement
project.
• $746,280 allocated in November 2006
• Due to declining state gas tax revenues,
TIB projects not moving forward risk losing
grant funds.
Project Elements
• Restriping from 4 -lanes to 3- lanes.
• New bike lanes.
• Creates ADA accessible sidewalks and
ramps.
• Improved safety at school crossings by
removing 4 -lane road.
• Approx. 30% ($280,000) is sidewalk /ADA
work
30000
25000
20000
1—
0 15000
10000
5000 -
01
Capacity of 3-Lanes
Successful "Road Diets" in Washington
1
Lake Fourth Plain N. 45th Montana St. 120th Ave. Broadway
Washington Blvd. (Seattle) (Bellevue) NE
Blvd. (Vancouver) (Bellevue)
(Kirkland)
10
Local 3 -Lane Examples
30,000
25,000
20,000
Q 15 , 000
10,000
5,000
0
Local 3 -Lane Examples
1•0
32nd Grand 29th Alberta Country
(Valley) (Spokane) (Spokane) (Spokane) Homes
(County)
Barker Broadway
(Valley)
Safety Benefits of 3 -Lane
• Left Turn collisions
- Improves field of vision
• Rear -End collisions
- Left turns from TWLTL
• Driveway collisions
- from /into TWLTL
- Bike lane improves field of vision
• 3 Right -Angle collisions
- Fewer lanes to cross
• Collision severity
- Lower speeds
WA Examples
Fourth Plain Blvd.
- Collisions 52%
Seattle
(16 corridors)
- Collisions
34%
12
14000
12000
10000
F.. 8000
Q
6000
4000
2000
0
Traffic Volumes
Broadway Volumes
Pines to Sullivan
Counts
El 7/30/2001
❑ 7/16/2001
El 7/16/2001
El 4/29/2002
El 7/29/2003
E 7/29/2003
❑ 8/31/2004
LI 8/31/2004
F17/14/2004
❑ 4/19/2006
• 10/11/2006
• 11/2/2006
• 4/18/2007
• 5/24/2007
• 3/19/2008
• 3/20/2008
• 3/27/2008
• 3/27/2008
• 5/11/2009
Legend
4 -lane
1 -90
construction
3 -lane
Overall Collision Comparison
4 -lane
3 -lane
Total Collisions Analyzed
69
35
Time Period
Mar 2003 — May 2006
Feb 2007 — October 2008 (excluding 3
weeks in July)
Avg Collisions / Month
1.77
1.72
Severity
66% PDO 134% Injury
66% PDO / 34% Injury
Snow /Slush /Ice related
2 collisions (3 %)
5 collisions (14 %)
Collision Types
Fixed Object — 1 (.03) 1%
Rear End — 12 (.31) 17%
Angle — 16 (.41) 23%
Driveway — 13 (.33) 19%
Bicycle 1 (.03) 1%
Left-turn — 21 (.54) 30%
Sideswipe — 3 (.07) 6%
Other — 2 (.05) 3%
Fixed Object — 4 (.19) 11%
Rear End — 13 (.64) 37%
Angle — 8 (.39) 22%
Driveway — 2 (.10) 6%
Bicycle 2 (.10) 6%
Left-turn — 3 (.15) 9%
Sideswipe — 3 (.15) 9%
Other — 0 (.0) 0%
Collision anomalies
1 sleeping driver
1 tire blow out
1 heart attack
1 passed out driver
2 bicycles on sidewalk
1 chased after assault
1 hot cigarette ashes from another vehicle
Overall Collision Comparison
Broadway /Evergreen
Before and After Collisions
• Increase in rear -end collisions
• May partially be due to revised signal coordination
• • ,;
• • •
` t ` •
• • ` • 1
ALEN
` _.�. ......;,
• .I `
(2
=1
4 -Lane
3 -Lane
Total
4
7
Collisions
/ Month
0.10
0.34
Broadway /Evergreen
Before and After Collisions
• Increase in rear -end collisions
• May partially be due to revised signal coordination
• • ,;
• • •
` t ` •
• • ` • 1
ALEN
` _.�. ......;,
• .I `
(2
=1
Broadway /McDonald
Before and After Collisions
• Significant reduction in left-turn collisions
Total
Collisions
/ Month
4 -Lane
16
0.41
3 -Lane
2
0.10
MIIMMIMEKM ' mmomm.
NMILIMMOMM 1111 «!!e � l�1�!!s
!!Ruaam ■■ !
■!!!!!! MEMME!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!E!!!!!!!!■
lRER•YR!! M1�!!E1 .
■ p �....
■MERM alii ! ■ll �:�
■!M!!!!!!■
NM maaaritImummimmumm
• lair liilll ■!!!!!!!!!!■
■!!!Sl1 a!!!!!!!!!!R•
!!■ MU NCAUMEMErOMMMEE
■M■ MUM laMENNIO ■!!!
16
Driveways
Before and After Collisions
Significant reduction in driveway collisions
Total
Collisions
/ Month
- Lane
13
0.33
3 -Lane
z
0.1
Er i ...rs...■
o uu.....
C II1 M M . E...
m mums mom mmlommumma
OMMCMMESMENMaximmill§ ■•« ■.'UU 1N '#we! na
MEIMMTITiliallimilmilalliMM MM
E mmen' .�__�s..C. :a.ML1 ■L1I
MEMENIMMOMMEMMMIUMMINSUMMMO
U fE ■ ■■ ua■ MI i�M. �
■1U .EN.M it
iM■ ■ ■
Citizen Comments
- "Similar comments to above apply to the bike
lanes in the existing Sprague /Appleway
couplet, and on Broadway. Existing bike lanes
created on these roads are a step forward & 1
thank you for that."
- "I live on Broadway near Felts, which seems to
be more residential than the area east of
Bates. I would think 3 lanes would be safer for
small children in the neighborhood, and would
really cut down on the hot- rodding."
19
Citizen Comments
- "Even though speed limit along Broadway is
posted the same in most areas, the added lane
of traffic seems to lend itself to speeders,
have noticed a dramatic difference in the
average speeds vehicles travel when
comparing the traffic from Pines to Sullivan Rd
as compared to the traffic speeds between
Pines and Park Rd."
Fire and Police Comments
20
• Fire - Neutral, overall road width is major
factor in response time.
• Police - Prefer 4 lane. Think volumes are
too high west of Pines for conversion.
Staff Recommendation
• Move forward with Safety Project
• Option - Conduct a survey
- get comments from residents and regular
drivers of Broadway
- mail route along Broadway from Pines to
Sullivan
- Come back to Council post - survey with results
and recommendation on pursuing the project.
Draft Survey
BROADWAY Ave. from
PINES Rd. to SULLIVAN Rd.
Please share your thoughts about the restriping of Broadway Ave. since
the Summer of 2006 (a reminder about this project is on hack).
Overall, do you believe the results have been....
0 Positive 0 Neutral 1 Don't know 0 Negative
Do you believe the three-lane striping is safer?
0 Yes 0 Neutral / Don know
0 No
Do you live on Broadway Ave. from
Pines Rd. to Sullivan Rd.?
0 Yes 0 No
Additional comments
Thank you for your time. Please detach along the dotted line and drop this
pre-addressed. postage paid postcard in the mail by Friday. April 10th.
Your response will help us determine if the rest of Broadway Ave_ (Pines
Rd. to Park Rd.) should be similarly restriped.
23
• Mail routes would reach 5,440 residents.
Survey Mailing Route
1
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: June 16, 2009 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Justice Assistance Grant 2009
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A
BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley has been allocated $50,367 as part of the
Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program for the 2009 annual award.
These funds are designed to support all components of the criminal justice system. Spokane
County has typically used this funding for the Sheriffs Office and Prosecutor's Office and has
agreed to follow that model for the year 2009 but will open up future funding to all areas of the
criminal justice system. Spokane Valley staff has followed the County's lead and have relied on
recommendations of the Sheriff's Office to identify proposed projects to be funded with the
grant. The City of Spokane will submit the joint allocation. The identified expenditures are as
follows:
$24,300 Twenty (20) Air Cards to allow the transmission of encrypted data to patrol vehicles
$10,000 Contribution to Regional Virtualization Server
$12,500 Contribution toward Deputy Prosecutor Position for auto theft cases.
$ 2,000 Chairs for Officers at SV Precinct Building
$ 1,567 Ammunition
OPTIONS: Authorize application for the JAG grant. Request amendments to the application.
Deny authorization to submit grant.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Authorize the City Manager or designee to sign the
Memorandum of Understanding approving the joint application for the 2009 Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $50, 367 in grants funds, no match required.
STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst
ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum of Understanding (distributed separately)
1
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SPOKANE, WA, CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA, AND COUNTY OF
SPOKANE, WA
2009 BYRNE JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM AWARD
THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is between the City of Spokane, a
municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of
business at 808 West Spokane Falls Boulevard, Spokane, Washington 99201, the City
of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices
for the transaction of business at 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane
Valley, Washington 99206, and Spokane County, a political subdivision of the State of
Washington having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway
Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, jointly referred to as the PARTIES.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the PARTIES are making a joint application for an Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program hereinafter referred to as the
"GRANT;" and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES are required in conjunction with the Grant application
process to sign a Memorandum of Understanding indicating who will serve as the
applicant / fiscal agent for the Grant as well as to allocate among themselves the
GRANT funds; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the GRANT, the PARTIES are
desirous of reducing to writing their understanding as to who will serve as the applicant /
fiscal agent for the GRANT as well as the allocation of the GRANT funds among the
PARTIES; -- Now, Therefore,
The PARTIES agree as follows:
SECTION NO. 1: DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT /FISCAL AGENT
The PARTIES hereby agree that the City of Spokane shall be the designated applicant /
fiscal agent in conjunction with the GRANT.
SECTION NO. 2: ALLOCATION OF GRANT MONEYS
The PARTIES' agree that the GRANT amount of Two Hundred Ninety -Seven Thousand
Three Hundred and Sixty -Nine Dollars ($297,369.00) shall be split among the PARTIES
as follows:
City of Spokane
City of Spokane Valley
Spokane County
SECTION NO. 4: LIABILITY FOR CLAIMS
$199,876.00
$50,367.00
$47,126.00
SECTION NO. 3: USE OF GRANT FUNDS BY THE PARTIES
The City of Spokane agrees to use the $199,876 for Law Enforcement Programs,
Prosecution and Court Programs until September 30, 2013. City of Spokane Valley
agrees to use the $50,367 for Law Enforcement Programs, Prosecution and Court
Programs until September 30, 2013. Spokane County agrees to use the $47,126 for Law
Enforcement Programs, Prosecution, and Court Programs until September 30, 2013.
Each party to this Memorandum of Understanding will be responsible for its own actions
in providing services under this Memorandum and shall not be liable for any civil liability
that may arise from the furnishing of the services by the any other party.
SECTION NO. 5: THIRD PARTY RIGHTS
The PARTIES to this Memorandum of Understanding do not intend for any third party to
obtain a right by virtue of this Memorandum. This Memorandum of Understanding shall
not create any rights in any party not a signatory hereto.
SECTION NO. 6: ENTIRE UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding contains the entire understanding of the PARTIES.
No representations, promises, or agreements not expressed herein have been made to
induce any party to sign this Memorandum.
SECTION NO. 7: INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
Upon award of the GRANT, the PARTIES shall enter into an Interlocal Agreement setting
forth the final terms and conditions of the GRANT allocation and management.
2
Dated: CITY OF SPOKANE
By:
Mary Verner, Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form:
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Dated: COUNTY OF SPOKANE, WASHINGTON
By:
By:
3
Marshall Farnell, Chief Executive Officer
Approved as to form:
Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Dated: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
City Manager Designee
Attest: Approved as to form:
City Clerk . Deputy City Attorney