2020, 02-18 Study Session MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Study Session Format
Tuesday, February 18, 2020
Mayor Wick called the meeting to order at 6 pm.
Ben Wick, Mayor Mark Calhoun City Manager
Brandi Peetz, Deputy Mayor John Hohman, Deputy City Manager
Pam Haley, Councilmember Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Tim Hattenburg, Councilmember Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney
Rod Higgins, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks &Rec Director
Linda Thompson, Councilmember Bill Helbig, City Engineer
Arne Woodard, Councilmember Mark Werner, Police Chief
Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Gloria Mantz, Engineering Manager
Adam Jackson, Planning/Grants Engineer
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. Mayor Wick
announced that Council will hold an executive session at the end of tonight's meeting, and that it is not
necessary to amend the agenda.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz, seconded and unanimously agreed to
approve the agenda.
PROCLAMATION: National Career and Technical Education Month
Mayor Wick read the National Career and Technical Education Month proclamation, which was accepted
with thanks from members of DECA (Distributive Education Clubs of America).
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Second Reading Ordinance 20-001 CTA-2019-0003 Re Signage Regulations—Lori Barlow
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to
approve Ordinance 20-001 amending SVMC 22.110.080. Building Official Nickerson, standing in for Ms.
Barlow, explained that the purpose of this amendment is to include the allowance of wall signs in the
aesthetic corridors. Mayor Wick invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:
in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried.
2. Second Reading Ordinance 20-002 Enabling Ordinance Re Collection of Sales&Use Tax—Cary Driskell
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to
approve Ordinance 20-002 relating to refunding sales and use tax from the Washington State Department
of Revenue to the City.for qualifying affordable and supportive housing purposes. City Attorney Driskell
briefly explained the purpose of this ordinance and of the .0073%rebated sales tax;that the funds could not
be used to fund construction or operation of a homeless shelter, but could be used for longer term low
income affordable and supportive housing. Mayor Wick invited public comment. Ms. Barb Howard,
Spokane Valley: spoke about our City not getting credit for the money we have given to help with the
homeless. There were no other public comments. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed:
none. Motion carried.
Council Meeting Minutes:02-18-2020 Page 1 of 7
Approved by Council:03-10-2020
3. Motion Consideration: City Safety Program Grant Opportunity—Adam Jackson
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to authorize the City Manager or designee to apply for
the City Safety Program grant,for the six projects identified above. Those six projects include: (1)improve
intersection at Sprague Avenue and Barker Road; (2) install retroreflective signal backplates at 22 existing
signalized intersections; (3) install retroreflective post strips on 1,350 arterial/collector sign posts; (4)
Bowdish Road from 12th to 16tt,for curb, gutter and sidewalk; (5) 8t''Avenue from Thierman Road to Park
Road for curb, gutter, and sidewalk; and (6) 8th Avenue from Progress Road to Sullivan Road for curb,
gutter and sidewalk. After Mr. Jackson gave an explanation of the potential grant opportunity and
accompanying projects, Mayor Wick invited public comments. No comments were offered. Vote by
acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried.
4. Motion Consideration: Acceptance of Arts Council Sculptures—Mike Stone
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to authorize the City Manager to accept, on behalf of
the City, three sculptures donated by the Spokane Valley Arts Council: Huckleberry Daze by Jerry
McKellar, Rock Star by Bob Wilfong, and Indomitable Spirit by Jerry McKellar. After Parks and Recreation
Director Stone gave an explanation of the pieces, he noted that this topic will be included on the March 10
Council agenda for discussion on potential locations for the sculptures. Councilmember Thompson asked
how much it would cost to maintain or place the sculptures, and Mr. Stone replied that it would depend on
where each sculpture is located as things to take into consideration include utilities, lighting, and
landscaping. Mayor Wick invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: in
favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried.
5. Mayoral Appointments: Planning Commission—Mayor Wick
Mayor Wick said we had a lot of great applicants,and he had previously re-opened the process to help those
apply who didn't get a chance to do so during the first opportunity; and said he interviewed all eleven
applicants. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to confirm the Mayor's nominations to the
Planning Commission as,follows: Mr. Fred Beaulac and Ms. Sherri Robinson each,for a three-year term
beginning January 1, 2020 and ending December 31, 2022; and Mr. Matthew Walton for a one-year term
beginning January 1, 2020 and ending December 31, 2020. Mayor Wick invited public comment; no
comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried.
6. Mayoral Appointments: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee—Mayor Wick
Mayor Wick said there were four applicants for the two positions,and he interviewed all applicants. It was
moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to confirm the Mayoral appointments to the Lodging Tax
Advisory Committee of Colleen Heinselman, representing a member authorized to collect the tax; and of
Greg Repetti representing a member involved in activities authorized to be funded by the tax, each
appointment's term beginning immediately upon appointment and expiring December 31, 2021. Mayor
Wick invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous.
Opposed: none. Motion carried.
7. Mayoral Appointment: Spokane Housing Authority—Mayor Wick
Mayor Wick said this committee opening was advertised in the past but we were unable to fill it; that he
found a great candidate among those who applied for the Planning Commission, who accepted the offer to
be a part of this committee. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to confirm the Mayoral
appointment of Tes Sturges to the Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners,.for a.five year^term
beginning upon appointment confirmation and expiring December 31, 2024. Mayor Wick invited public
comment. Ms. Barb Howard, Spokane Valley: said she met Ms. Sturges when she served on the Salary
Commission and has a lot of faith in her. There were no further public comments. Vote by acclamation: in
favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried.
Council Meeting Minutes:02-18-2020 Page 2 of 7
Approved by Council:03-10-2020
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Wick explained the process,and then invited public comments. Ms.Barb
Howard, Spokane Valley: asked about the cost of the roundabout at the school on Wellesley and Sullivan,
and asked if there is a possibility we could lose the grant money; mentioned the delay in the project if it is
changed; mentioned the safety issue of kids on skateboards and that kids don't use sidewalks; said she is
pretty sure the school is not in favor of the roundabout. On another topic, again mentioned a camper on
Bowdish, and of a car with expired tabs; said she can't get anyone to do anything about it. Mayor Wick
said someone will contact her about the nuisance.
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
8. City Hall Update—John Hohman
Deputy City Manager Hohman introduced Mr. Robb Dibble of Dibble Engineering of Seattle, who is the
lead structural engineer on the repair of the curved wall in the back of Council Chambers.After again giving
a brief background of the situation, Mr. Hohman said that Mr. Dibble has been inspecting the situation all
day today, but is not in a position to discuss his findings at this time as he needs to analyze what he has
learned.Mr.Hohman again stressed that we are obligated to adhere to the low bid process and that Meridian
Construction was the low bidder for the construction; and stressed again that financial responsibility for
this work lies solely with Meridian and its subcontractors, and that we intend to seek full reimbursement.
Mr. Dibble gave a brief background of his work and his company; and said he is a structural engineer, and
that he is putting together an investigation plan which is being implemented; that he will survey the data,
and will document elevation changes based on what we know has occurred,and that he will do an ultrasound
to make sure there is no long-term permanent damage; said his goal is to help get this building back to the
condition and confidence we should have so it will continue to perform as intended; he explained that they
had to get into the wall in order to identify and address the deficiencies;that other items have been raised
and that he will have a scope of repair and expects to have a completed document to publish in the coming
weeks so the scope can be priced and handed to Council to determine how to pursue the settlement; and
said he is here to help this building get back to the fit and finish it deserves. Councilmember Thompson
asked about having a mural or pictures on the temporary wall or if there is any plan to make it look more
aesthetically pleasing without a lot of expense. Mr. Hohman said they are pricing paint and can look to
other means to soften the impact to the back of the room.
9. Spokane Transit Authority Update—STA CEO Susan Meyer; and Karl Otterstrom, Planning Director
STA's CEO Ms. Meyer said that tonight they will give an update on the routes that serve the greater
Spokane Valley; and she expressed her appreciation of Councilmember Haley as the STA Board Chair, and
of new board member Councilmember Hattenburg; and she then introduced Mr. Karl Otterstrom, Director
of Planning and Development.Mr.Otterstrom talked about STA's Moving Forward campaign and revisions
as STA continues to seek ways to improve system performance and respond to community input; he went
over the planning process; 2021-2022 service revisions timeline and preliminary proposal focus areas,
which includes Spokane Valley; he also mentioned network adjustments to improve service effectiveness
to address significant requests for service; he showed a map of the preliminary concept and mentioned
several routes including the Mirabeau Point Express,Indiana/Mission,and the Community College, as well
as modified routes to serve the Spokane Valley Partners, Valley Hospital, Valley Mall, and the Mirabeau
Park and Ride. Mr. Otterstrom finished by noting the online survey, which he said is open until March 2;
he said a public hearing is set for July,and if approved,changes to routes in Spokane Valley would become
effective May 2022. Council thanked Ms. Meyer and Mr. Otterstrom for their presentation.
10. Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection Improvement Project—Bill Helbig, Gloria Mantz
Mr. Helbig said tonight's presentation is an update on this project including the existing conditions, the
future of Spokane County's Bigelow Gulch project and how it connects to this project; where we are in the
project's budget; and that staff will step back about 19 months to when the intersection's options were
Council Meeting Minutes:02-18-2020 Page 3 of 7
Approved by Council:03-10-2020
presented to Council, the options' criteria, which option Council selected, and where we are today after
working on this project for about 19 months since Council made that selection.
Ms. Mantz explained that this intersection is currently a four-way stop controlled intersection with about
13,000 vehicles per day and that the intersection is currently at a failing level of service and has been so
since at least 2014; she noted that there have been 17 accidents in the last eight years.Ms. Mantz explained
that the intersection is adjoining the East Valley Middle School and the East Valley High School. She stated
that phase six of the Bigelow Gulch Project will be re-aligning Bigelow and that currently it intersects
Forker and Progress, and with the phase six, Progress will be deadened and the traffic will be shifted into
the intersection of Sullivan and Wellesley. Ms. Mantz noted that with the completion of the County's
project, the intersection will experience about 23,000 vehicles a day by 2040. Ms. Mantz also went over
the project's background and budget, including grant awards, Spokane County's financial contribution,and
project coordination between us and Spokane County,which has been ongoing for about the last two years,
which discussions included the benefits of having both projects constructed simultaneously,which will help
minimize the impacts to the public; she mentioned that the County also amended their NEPA (National
Environmental Protection Act) documents to include our project, which saved us having to file NEPA
documents; she noted that the County is in the process of acquiring right-of-way from the school needed
for our projects as well as theirs, which saves our City a tremendous amount of time and work.
Mr. Helbig continued with slide 6 of the PowerPoint, noting that these next few slides were actually shown
to Council during the presentation of summer of 2018, where Council was presented the options for the
intersection, and decided upon the signalized intersection option; and he noted some of the more important
criteria included on slide 6 include vehicle safety, pedestrian safety, and project costs. Via two new slides,
Mr. Helbig explained the vehicle safety and pedestrian safety at roundabouts versus signalized
intersections; and of the different types of conflict points for signals and roundabouts; he added that speeds
in roundabouts are generally 20 or 25 mph, and that roundabouts are generally safer for pedestrians. Mr.
Helbig further explained that for this intersection, if a roundabout were added, it would be between two
schools;and he said that students are a group of pedestrians who tend not to use crosswalks,so a roundabout
in this location would be a matter of educating the pedestrians. Looking at new slide 8, Ms. Mantz added
that in this intersection for the concept roundabout shown, and the designated crosswalks, pedestrians
wouldn't be using those designated crosswalks,but would be jaywalking; and that the distance between the
two crosswalks would be approximately 180 feet. Mr. Helbig further explained that if someone were using
the one crosswalk,they would then have to travel 180 feet to the next crossing. Another criteria examined
back in 2018, Mr. Helbig said, was right-of-way needs; for the roundabout, we would need eight times
more right-of-way than what would be needed for signalization. Mr. Helbig said the public was given the
information about roundabouts and how they would operate at schools;he said there is not another situation
in our state with one roundabout between a middle and a high school; and he said the public voiced their
concern about students navigating between the schools,and not using the cross-walks,and of inexperienced
drivers using the roundabout. Councilmember Haley mentioned that a safety feature of roundabouts is the
slower speed; and that school zones are also a slower speed. Mr. Helbig agreed that one will still have to
take into account the pedestrians using the facilities and using them as they were designed. Mayor Wick
mentioned he had heard about a tunnel for pedestrians to cross. Mr. Helbig noted that the tunnel would not
be for normal pedestrian activity, but for sports activities and to allow the students and coaches to get their
equipment safety across the street; in addition,Mr.Helbig said it is his understanding that the tunnel is only
open when they need to get their sports equipment moved.
Ms. Mantz said that during the July 3, 2018 Council meeting, there was a motion consideration for which
option and Council chose the signalized intersection in a vote of six to one; she said staff has been working
since that July meeting and we are now at 90% design complete,with right-of-way acquisition in progress;
that construction is planned for 2021; that so far we spent $50,000 for intersection analysis, $150,000 for
signal design, and $45,000 for right-of-way consultant, and that these figures do not include the County's
Council Meeting Minutes:02-18-2020 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council:03-10-2020
efforts. She mentioned the March 14, 2018 public meeting which she said was very well attended; she
mentioned that staff also met and coordinated this project with East Valley District Superintendent Kelly
Shea several times, most recently last week; she said he is supportive of roundabouts, but feels that is not
the right solution for this intersection due to the issue of pedestrian safety, inexperienced drivers, and the
two schools; and said if Council wants to change the option, he highly recommends more public outreach.
Ms. Mantz noted we would have to amend the NEPA, which would take three to six months as we would
probably have to do our own if the projects limits change; said we would set the clock back and re-design
the projects and start with square one, and the County would have to wait on negotiations from us; she said
the County indicted they would like construction in 2021 and don't want to delay their project; but if we
change to a roundabout, it would delay the project until 2022, and we would have to do more public
outreach; and we would have to explain to SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) why the
delay. In response to a question about repaying funds,Ms. Mantz said she has asked but has not received a
definitive answer. Mr. Helbig said it is up to Council on how to move forward, and staff is looking for
direction; and Ms. Mantz added that staff still recommends a signal for this intersection. Deputy Mayor
Peetz asked about maintenance cost for signalization,and Ms.Mantz replied the cost is about$2,000 a year.
Councilmember Hattenburg said as a former teacher, he knows it is difficult to educate students to use the
crossing;that he never thought about putting in a roundabout. Councilmember Haley said this had come up
before when she was on an education committee with Mr. Shea and there were a lot of safety concerns with
a roundabout, and he would lose a lot of his playing field; concerning the tunnel, she said that cannot be
used for back and forth traffic or kept open as there would be people hiding in the tunnel, but it can only be
used for moving equipment.
Deputy Mayor Peetz said originally the thought was a roundabout would be better; but with recent
comments maybe some attitudes changed; said she understands school speed zones; said there has been
mixed feedback and she mentioned there are no issues with the roundabout in Liberty Lake. She also noted
she doesn't want to do a signal and in 15-20 years come back and do a roundabout later; and suggested a
region-wide meeting with members of DOT (Department of Transportation) to see if attitudes changed.
Mayor Wick said according to a study on public opinion and roundabouts, that people are resistant before
construction, but once construction occurs,more people favor the roundabout; he said he feels people need
to be educated on roundabouts; said he has a handout from the federal highways that discusses reduction in
collisions; said he thinks the community will come around as we have more; said he knows it would be
more money and said people are afraid of the unknown; again said he realizes it will cost us time, but he
would rather do it now than later, and thinks there are still other grant opportunities we could go for; and
he mentioned that back in 2018, he was the lone vote to support the roundabout instead of a signal. Ms.
Mantz said she has nothing against roundabouts,just not for this particular location.
Councilmember Haley said she has a problem with the idea of inexperienced drivers including new drivers;
said she also has experience with kids of school age and there would be no way she would let her own kid
walk between those schools. Councilmember Higgins said if someone tries walking in a roundabout,there
are points you can't see a car or the car can't see the pedestrians; said we have already made significant
capital expenditures toward the signalized intersection and feels we should not just let that go and start back
up again from scratch; said there would be a delay of one to two years, and time is money; said this decision
was not made lightly when it was first made, and he doesn't see any reason to change. Councilmember
Woodard said that not every intersection is good for a roundabout as we are not going to get rid of every
signal in our city; he mentioned trucks and cars in a roundabout in an intersection between two schools
means a lot of traffic; said he was at the East Valley School District meeting and there was a lot of hostility
about kids trying to walk around a roundabout; said he doesn't think it will work well and we need to move
ahead as time is money and this is a place that needs to be fixed,and the sooner the better. Councilmember
Thompson said because public safety is very important and based on Mr. Shea's comments as well as
Council Meeting Minutes:02-18-2020 Page 5 of 7
Approved by Council:03-10-2020
others, that this isn't the right place for a roundabout; and said she supports the signal and what we have
already done.
11. South Barker Corridor Study—Erik Lamb, Adam Jackson, Bill Helbig
Deputy City Manager Hohman said that tonight staff is bringing this subject forward for discussion and to
introduce the subject and see if Council would like staff to look into other items and do more research; said
we are not in a position to implement anything, as tonight is purely for discussion; said any impact fees in
the future would be a calculated percentage based on number of trips; also mentioned we would not look
to development to pay for all, but this is an area of discussion as we struggle to find resources for those
infrastructure improvement projects.
In going through the PowerPoint, Mr. Jackson explained that the purpose of the South Barker Corridor
Study is that is an area in the eastern part of our City which is experiencing significant development; that
the Barker Corridor level of service is degrading, and we want to evaluate the Barker Road corridor from
Mission to the south city limits to document existing conditions, identify future conditions, develop
mitigation recommendations, and identify fair share costs. Mr. Jackson noted the 10 study intersections as
shown on the slide and went over each intersection's existing conditions and expected conditions in the
year 2040; he also noted the several recommended intersection and road improvements. Mr. Helbig then
explained the information on the next few slides concerning the fair share cost analysis.
Deputy City Attorney Lamb then talked about the current mechanisms to collect traffic mitigation; he
explained traffic concurrency is one tool to have development pay for its fair share; and impact fees are
another potential option; said any mitigation is really an impact fee separate from traffic concurrency fees
and SEPA fees, both of which we use. Mr. Lamb explained the current process limitations, and discussed
impact fees; he said we are only talking about traffic improvements for the needed improvements in the
Barker Corridor; and he further explained the legalities of impact fees. A question arose about collecting
impact fees outside our City limits, and Mr. Lamb explained that we are not allowed to impose fees outside
our jurisdiction; but with SEPA and concurrency, we can notify jurisdictions of where they need to send
pending applications so we can provide comments for what we believe are their project's impacts to our
City, but we cannot require them to impose fees.
There was some discussion on previous developments and what they might have paid including a voluntary
$160,000 contribution from Morningside;that there are not many traffic engineers in the region which lends
to having more traffic studies; fees in lieu of studies; previous agreements with the County; and voluntary
fees or trip generation letters. Mr. Hohman noted that a previous fee of$3.00 per trip was based on a very
old study, which has not been adjusted for inflation or material increases over the last several years. Mr.
Helbig mentioned other jurisdiction traffic fees as shown in the PowerPoint; said there is a wide range of
fees but tonight's objective is to start dialogue. Mr. Hohman noted if Council is interested,there is a lot of
work to do including community involvement for example,with the Chamber of Commerce Transportation
Committee, and the Home Builder's Association, or to look at the conversion from trips to units; adding
that we did not want to embark on all that if Council is not interested. After further brief discussion on the
topic, there was complete Council consensus to continue to study the subject.
12. Advance Agenda—Mayor Wick
There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda.
13. Council Check-in—Mayor Wick
The heater fan noise as well as a change in acoustics were mentioned and Mr. Calhoun said he will check
into the situation. There was also mention again that some Councilmembers are hearing that our City is not
contributing to the homelessness issue and there was a suggestion of a media campaign. Councilmember
Wick mentioned the letter in front of Councilmembers, which is addressed to Congresswoman Cathy
Council Meeting Minutes:02-18-2020 Page 6 of 7
Approved by Council:03-10-2020
McMorris Rodgers concerning USDOT Granting Program Requirements; and Councilmembers did not
object to having the Mayor sign and send the letter. Mayor Wick mentioned TPA (Tourism Promotion
Area)bill which would allow an increase in room fees from$2.00 to$5.00 a night;mentioned our interlocal
agreement with the TPA; and asked Councilmembers about supporting the bill. After brief discussion
Councilmembers agreed to ask our Lobbyist Briahna Murray to sign in, in favor of the bill. Mr. Calhoun
said he will contact Ms. Murray.
14. City Manager Comments—Mark Calhoun
Mr. Calhoun said that he just learned today of another BUILD grant opportunity and said perhaps the Pines
Grade Separation Project would be a possible project; and said we will have more discussion on that as the
deadline isn't until May 18.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz„veconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session
for approximately eight minutes to discuss potential litigation, and that no action will be taken upon return
to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 8:52 p.m. At 8:58 p.m., Mayor Wick declared
Council out of executive session at which time it was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz, seconded and
unanimously agreed to adjourn.
Ben ick, Mayor
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Meeting Minutes:02-18-2020 Page 7 of 7
Approved by Council:03-10-2020
ti
i, su�llivan & Wellesley
Pt �
: • -� - 1 ntersection, Project
.ter r
.ate.. i _. r ->1 i"':
....,..!---;,(.....,.10.,;_-
,' •-i h ,yr 'f -i ,_y y tr iu...i r 4` :Fa.P
.
a
a , Project Update
r1'.
'S++ir
v Atli
r February 18, 2020
y P
i i , } r ...1.2,-
.. w .f �w meg
r) 1f ! ,..,. �� ,I f• h. d �177r^',. lh Y Ai' �,_ Gi'
. ''.S'-_;'fir w _/ '� '.P$'°+ �t
•
- ,� ' ' T - `=l 1,111 Hei rg, City Engineer
P r 1 �. Gloria- ant ., Engineering 'I Manager
Presentation Outline
• Existing Conditions
• Spokane County Future Project
® Project Background & Budget
o Intersection Options
s Selection Criteria
• Recommendation / Council Selection
• Work To Date
• Questions / Moving Forward
Spokane
2 .Malley.
1
Existing Conditions
• 4 Way Stop Controlled
• Existing Level of Service (LOS) F East Valley East Valley
Based on Sullivan Rd Corridor Study Middle School High School
• 17 Accidents in 8 years
---_ _ __ _. MINIIII Iev
El
r
[
- L _._ !N ,.I11
3
Spokane County Bigelow Project (Phase 6)
w Majority of Traffic Using Progress K ` _. ' � ` 7 4.0`, }44
Shifts to Sullivan I EE t 'r1• "•, ,,'„i"..-''' -�
■ 4I� i
.4 sf • *Of #yt
• Changes Vehicle Traffic Patterns ,I 1 ' } _ !.
(Local and Regional) i y,- ,-, , I• r,
i.,- ',"..6,. _ f ry
• Traffic at Sullivan/Wellesley Grows `, . 3 , ;ii ��1` a
4441
Significantly �' , f . `1 Ii:ry. {i �.��
:. a. 11
11 OU47 ", ' 1
P' ..i, r n� . In, 1, - rt.L` .. 1;,..XN .)',
e rs y, y 99J .•t,.
4
2
Project Background & Budget
■ Grant award to Improve the Intersection
City Fund 303 $ 184,950
Spokane County $ 99,625 * I'
Federal CMAQ Grant $1,085,425 EW"5`tiYAVE fes°
Total Estimated Budget $1,370,000 -- i la.
* Spokane County contributed $99,625 to ROW for full buildout solution � = ! I
• Spokane County Bigelow Gulch Corridor Project
- Phase 6 Connects Bigelow Gulch to the Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection
• City and County coordination
• Bigelow Phase 6 NEPA Covers City Project
• County negotiating the ROW for the City project with East Valley School
District on behalf of the City
• Project schedules to minimize the impact to the traveling public Siokane
�Ualley
Intersection Options
Selection Criteria
A Vehicle Safety
Signal Pedestrian Function and Safety
I11 Bicycle Function and Safety
Ease of Obtaining ROW
or IA Dependability
IA Familiarity and Public Acceptance
• [/1 Future Transportation Needs
Roundabout Iy1 Performance
MT Traffic Control During Construction
[T Project Cost
Wricane
6 .,..$ 11ey.
3
Design Option A: Traffic Signal
nn
I
1 I ,ju mMRau nnarl 111'
1� nnawr.nivn rnsnn
II I
W
Alli
=__- ==--= =-----= 4 ------------- --------- -- ------.
Sr1 W I
J II a F_ - I I�
95 1*. :,
�1 I - wp s �1Q1{�iie
7
.000 Valley.
Design Option B: 2-Lane Roundabout
\ , ,, 1
I ,, :1\ \\.. , 1
7�
I V 1' ) 1 Y l
0.(11 !
is } II Valley.
4
Criteria — Vehicle Safety
Traffic Signal —32 Conflict Points 2-Lane Roundabout— 14 Conflict Points
CJ tlnuurg4g spoil.,
j 1 ®merging epols Reduction in collisions
coming spots
` Q waavtg spars
: ,ry r8M
411431.• • eef
•
r • Diverging r
1 4 Merging I
I
0 Crossing
Ii
9 Valley.
Criteria — Pedestrian Safety
Roundabout — 20 e
Hit by a vehicle traveling at
12 Conflict Points MPH
9 out of 10 pedestrians survive.
Hit by a vehicle traveling at piTraf is Signal
S out of 10 pedestrians survive.
16 Conflict Points
Hit by a vehicle traveling at 40
MPH
oesnossim*
' only 1 out of 10 pedestrians survives.
kank�ems'
SpO
10 1a11ey.
5
Criteria: Ease of Obtaining Right of Way
--- i�r 5 r. n
. 1 X41 �^
"w are.5.esnv -�wVAKAi-II., I I -- 5
6
— it
=r -----'-- for na Al {'I h ',� t
1 ai., 111 64466
it.....•
aunt
/ r
—
\IIrI
-- J Ll Total Area= " 't -t- ii
M 73,500 S .
ft.
11
Criteria: Public Acceptance of Roundabouts Near Schools
MJII
1
n*
..) .
_ I i if=1 — '
i 6 1 I
—
•-,..4.._ [QC—I1, 1 — w, -�� -Eigi1I alt°
f1 AY6�:t t ` --
Y
111C'44 lIUlf!! c rf
For 2-lane roundabouts near schools:"...consideration should be given to providing a pedestrian crossing island
and/or an actuated rapid flashing beacon or pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB)at each crossing."
Source:Safe Routes To School Program(SR2S)
SSokan� ".
12 .0...Va11ey.
6
Recommendation / Council Selection
• Traffic Signal
,„ " 11.09Mg..10,...•
• Lower Right-of-Way Impacts
• Lower Project Cost in
• Higher Public Acceptance Near Schools _. 1 _ _ __z p ,,r...- _
1 I
at this Location .,-- ..' fiI
i Similar Level of Service as Roundabout
u
( .
--:.s: tspliiii. _
1
• Less Impacts During Construction ' ---- I,
• July 3, 2018 — Motion Consideration . ,,..
, ,
-
., S.
.
• Signalized Intersection Selected
• Council voted 6 to 1 for signalized
intersection ,, .."...,.
*Wane
13 ....0Valley
Work to Date
III !i
• Design — 90% Complete
• ROW Acquisition — In Process
[RI
• Construction — Planned 2021
_
• Project Expenditures (Approx.) i. f
• Spokane Valley:
• Intersection Analysis $ 50,000
_
• Signal Design $ 150,000
1 ' .
, -
• ROW Consultant $ 45,000
apoivane -
14 _. Malley
7
Public Outreach
■ Public Meeting March 14, 2018 ;.
• Mixed Opinions ki.,■ Concerns About Pedestrian Safety and
Young Drivers 4
• Intersection Between Middle School and - ''''.7-±1--ii 0 "--
High School
• Concerns About Pedestrians Not Using V1 ,. ii
Crosswalks in a Roundabout ; . f l s
,1
• East Valley School District — February 11, 2020
• Some impact to future parking lot and existing gravel parking areas
• Roundabout Concept is Not Right for this Location Spo�lcan �
15 • Recommends Additional Public Outreach if Considering a Roundabout Valley
Selection Change Impacts
■ NEPA (3 to 6 months) i`_�. _.,•
• New Project Limits
• Impacts to Public Facility (School) i,.
• Design Phase / A'ii_, k
• Currently 90% Complete 0 [----t--7 #
• Re-Start Design Phase , = ti4 --
1
.___e—
■ ROW Phase ., ' , , 11
,
• Currently Negotiating �y i,i ,\
• Re-Start ROW Phase, On Hold Until: h - r.
-
• Advance to 60010 Design Before Begin
• Develop New ROW Plans and New Project Funding Estimate
• Obtain NEPA Approval Spoikan `
16 • Appraise ESVS Property---2 to 3 Month Walley i
I
8
Selection Change Impacts
,,.
■ Intersection Construction
• Currently Planned 2021
[111 \\,
• Delay Intersection Project Until 2022
• SRTC Board approval for 2022 CN ' if I
• Construction Phasing — Must (�1
Accommodate Bigelow Gulch TrafficLI
• Higher Traffic Control Costs
■ Bigelow Gulch - County Project I — f 6
• Still Construct in 2021
• More Impacts to Traveling Public
• Bigelow Traffic Impact Spokane
17 • 4-way Stop Intersection for 1 Year �jUal><ey
Estimated Project Total Cost
Project Element Signalized Roundabout
Intersection Analysis $50,000 $ 50,000
Engineering $175,000 $ 375,000
Right-of-Way $135,150 $ 368,000
Construction $1,462,323 $ 2,288,000
Inflation (2022 Construction) $ 69,000
Total Project Cost $1,772,473 $3,150,000
Federal Grant $1,085,425 $1,085,425
Estimated Local Cost(CO41111111111M NM=
Spokan '
18 .00.0Ualley.
9
Questions / Moving Forward
wry= le.yea,
II' 1nearwxn + -'� 5.
sr
II I \:',1e-,
\\.
ni [
r
- ': lag„_t_ ._ 1 Y I • 1,(� � .
ll I, • I
4.
10.'N.1.11..:1"
Sg ikan�ems"
19 4000 Valley
19
10