Loading...
2022, 03-01 study session MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Study Session Meeting Tuesday, March 1, 2022 Mayor Haley called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. The meeting was held in person in Council Chambers, and also remotely via Zoom meeting. Attendance; Councilmembers Staff Pam Haley,Mayor John Hallman, City Manager Rod Higgins, Deputy Mayor Erik Lamb,Deputy City Manager Tim Hattenburg, Councilmember Caiy Driskell, City Attorney Laura Padden, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Brandi Peetz, Councilmember John Bottelli,Parks, Rec&Facilities Dir. Ben Wick, Councilmember Dave Ellis,Police Chief Arne Woodard, Councilmember Bill Helbig, Community Public Works Dir. Adam Jackson, Planning/Grants Engineer Mike Basinger, Economic Development Dir. Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. PROCLAMATION: HUB's Two Millionth Person After Mayor Haley read the proclamation for the HUB's Two-Millionth Person, it was accepted with thanks from Mr. Phil Champlin, HUB Executive Director. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 22-003 Trespass Process—Erik Lamb After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 22-003 adopting procedures and criteria for trespass from public property. Deputy City Manager Lamb briefly explained the purpose of this ordinance. Mayor Haley invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 2. First Reading Ordinance 22-004 Amending SVMC 2.60 City Holidays—Caiy Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins and seconded to suspend the rules and adopt ordinance 22-004. City Attorney Driskell gave a brief overview explaining that the addition of this holiday was previously negotiated by Council and the City's collective bargaining union. Mayor Haley invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none.Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration:2022 Federal Legislative Agenda Approval Consideration—Erik Lamb It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins and seconded to approve the 2022 Federal legislative Agenda as presented. Deputy City Manager Lamb introduced Ms. Sherri Little from Cardinal Infrastructure,participating tonight via zoom,who he said will talk about the next steps to carry out the legislative agenda.Mr. Lamb noted that as a result of the February 1 Council meeting's discussion,the cover page of the legislative agenda has been updated to show the new project order and the updated projects costs. Ms. Little said that the idea is to map out what our strategy looks like for federal engagement in 2022, and once this legislative agenda is approved, she'll share it with Capital Hill delegation and members of the administration to make sure they know our goals in preparation for a D.C. visit with the delegation in order to advocate for those identified areas; she gave a brief Council Meeting Minutes,Study Session:03-01-2022 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council:03-22-2022 discussion about some of what has occurred in D.C.since the Council's February 1 meeting; said congress has not been able to pass an omnibus bill to incorporate all the sub-committee bills into one but did get one to extend the operations of the federal government until March 11;she mentioned the State of the Union address will likely have a large focus on the Ukraine/Russian development, as well as easing Covid restrictions, and of adding a new member to the Supreme Court. Councilmember Padden said that in light of last week's withdrawing of our grant request for the Expo Center, she suggested it might not be wise to keep that on our federal list, and said she would therefore like to move to remove it from our list. Concerning Councilmember Padden's motion, Mr. Hohman said that we withdrew that particular application but we would look for other opportunities to apply for an EDA grant and other grant opportunities;and said staff feels this is a vital project. Council discussion in favor of removing the Expo Center project included concern from Councilmember Padden about the lack of hoteliers backing the project, the increased cost, and the future of the stadium.Councilmember Woodard suggested leaving it off until the project is more certain,and mentioned the idea of getting additional revenue projections from the hoteliers on actual costs. Mr.Hohman replied that we know the cost but we continue discussions with the County and in about four or five months we should have a better feel on the standing of this project; but leaving this on the agenda or not is of course up to Council. Councilmember Hattenburg said he wouldn't want to put us in jeopardy with receiving support from the hoteliers. Mayor Haley invited public comment on the amended motion.No comments were offered. It was also confirmed with Councilmember Padden that the motion is just to remove the project and not the associated policy. Vote by acclamation to amend the legislative agenda: in favor: Mayor Haley, Deputy Mayor Higgins, and Councihnembers Padden, and Woodard. Motion carried to amend the motion. Vote by acclamation on the final amended motion to approve the 2022 Federal Legislative Agenda as presented, minus the Expo Centre Project: in Favor:Mayor Haley,Deputy Mayor Higgins, and Councilmember Woodard, Wick,Padden, and Hattenbang. Opposed: Councilmember Peetz. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Huckleberry Daze Sculpture Placement—John Bottelli It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins and seconded to instruct staff to pursue installation of Huckleberty Daze at Greenacres Park. Director Bottelli gave a brief background on the sculptures and their placement, and said that tonight is just a motion regarding the placement of the Huckleberry Daze sculpture. Mayor Haley invited public comment. Mr.Rob Rowe, Spokane Valley: said he teaches at Central Valley High School and he spoke about several citizen projects some students were working on;said that several of his students decided to attend a council meeting and after that meeting, a few of the Councilmembers approached them and inquired what brought them to the meeting; they mentioned the project and the discussion came up that they could further get involved with the placing of the Huckleberry Daze sculpture; said they were excited to get involved and were excited when it was decided to place the sculpture at or near Central Valley;said it saddened him that the decision might now be changed but realized this was an excellent learning opportunity for the students by getting involved; said if appropriate,he would like an explanation to be provided to the students on why the decision is being changed. Mr. Sarthak Shrestha, Spokane Valley: said he is the ASB Vice President at Central Valley High School; said he feels the sculpture belongs at Central Valley High School because he asked some of his student friends about where to place a bear sculpture and the answer was to place it at Central Valley High School and of those he asked, no one had another suggested place; said the school has huge foot traffic which means the bear would be respected and seen in its proper light; said not placing the bear at Central Valley High School is a heart-breaker for many students and doesn't seem right; and asked why the change of heart. Council Meeting Minutes,Study Session:03-01-2022 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council:03-22-2022 Councilmember Woodard said he always wanted it to go to Greenacres Park or another park so he hasn't really changed his mind; said the artist told him he wanted it in a place where kids could climb on it; said he understands why Central Valley wants it, but we don't have a plan for the other high schools or a piece to give them; said he is not disrespecting the students' wishes and appreciates them coming tonight, but Council has to make a decision for the entire community, and Central Valley isn't the only important part Councilmember Wick said he too hasn't changed his mind and thinks it should go to Central Valley as the Greenacres Park has more of a barnyard theme and the bear doesn't fit the theme. Councilmember Hattenburg said he originally wanted to place the bear at Ponderosa Park, but since that isn't developed,it would mean putting the sculpture into storage for years; and that while Greenacres Park is a beautiful park, he would like to see it at Central Valley. Councilmember Peetz agreed with putting it at Central Valley; said the City spent over $2 million at Greenacres Park and it is finished, and she would like to spread the wealth all over the city; said the school already has statutes of bears but they are copies and this is the original, which she said is why the students are so excited about the project; said the sculpture would be secure as they take care of their grounds; she gave kudos to the students for coming tonight, and said she wants the bear at or near Central Valley. Mayor Haley said this is a$127,000 bear that the artist asked us to put in a park where kids could play on it; said it was donated to us; she apologized that the students were invited to ask to have the bear at Central Valley, but it should have been explained that the artist's vision is at a park; said it is a pretty expensive sculpture to give to a school; and said she appreciates the students coming and hope they stay involved. In response to a question about the artist's desire of placement,Mayor Haley said she had a meeting with the artist and was told he wanted it to be in a park, and that was before it was donated. Vote by acclamation: in Favor:Mayor Haley, Deputy Mayor Higgins, and Councilmembers Padden and Woodard Opposed: Councilmembers Wick, Hattenburg, and Peetz. Motion carried. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 5. STA (Spokane Transit Authority) High Performance Transit Update—John Hohman Mr. Hohman introduced Mr. Karl Otterstrom with the STA, as well as Ms. Susan Meyer,attending tonight via zoom. STA Chief Executive Officer Ms. Susan Meyer thanked Council for allowing STA to come talk tonight; said this is one of the projects in their ten-yar plan funded with a ballot measure; said afterwards, if Council wants more information she would be happy to schedule another visit. Director of Planning and Development Mr. Karl Otterstrom went through his PowerPoint presentation discussing the 1-90 Valley High Performance Transit (HPT) Project, Corridor Development Plan update. As background he mentioned the STA Moving Forward Ten Year Plan commitments include capital and operating projects to be launched in 2025, including a new transit center, direct,non-stop peak hour service between Liberty Lake and Spokane, and night and weekend service, as well as extended service to Post Falls and Coeur d'Alene on a two-year pilot basis through a cross-state partnership;mentioned funding for the corridor infrastructure includes state and federal grants; went over their corridor development plan objectives, and explained the purpose of the project, that among other things we are experiencing rapid growth throughout the corridor and the peak traffic shows it; he then went over the plan process, timeline and engagement,scenarios for the HPT architecture,and ended by inviting all to a virtual open house March 2 at 5 p.m. After discussion about possible new routes toward for example,the new Amazon building, use of ARPA funds, and ridership, Council thanked Mr. Otterstrom and Ms. Meyer for their presentation. 6. Spokane Valley's 20th Anniversary—Mike Basinger, LesIi Brassfield, Jeff KIeingartner Mr. Basinger stated that the City's 20th anniversary is coming up fast and he and members of his Economic Development Team have already started work on this celebration; he briefly went over some of the accomplishments done since incorporation; and mentioned that there is a lot to celebrate and to help, staff will solicit a consultant to recommend and implement strategies. Council Meeting Minutes,Study Session:03-01-2022 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council:03-22-2022 7. Solid Waste Management Update—Hemy Allen,Erik Lamb Deputy City Manager Lamb said that Senior Engineer Mr. Henry Allen is responsible for managing the City's solid waste program; said he wanted to give a re-introduction of this topic and then look forward to what this and next year will hold for our City, after which he went over some of the history of solid waste as noted in his Request for Council Action. Mr.Allen explained about our two plans;one is the Solid Waste Management Plan to provide guidance for the entire system;he said it addresses everything you would put at the curb including waste reduction;that we also have a Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan adopted in 2014 which is more focused and has a lot more to do with what might be in your garage or under your kitchen sink,or household hazardous waste; said both plans need to be periodically revised and updated; said the documents are viewed as living documents and include long range planning for twenty years; said legislation changes and one such change recently adopted by the State, is a used food plan which has a goal to reduce by 50% the amount of food waste; and that although not required, said the state would like us to adopt that into our next adoption. Mr. Allen also mentioned HB 1799 concerning organic materials management aimed at the reduction of organic materials that go to the landfill and of diverting that into compost or other uses. There was also talk about recycling and of the difficulty in recycling glass in a manner so as not to contaminate anything else. Mr. Henry said in the months ahead, he would encourage everyone to think about solid waste and brainstorm ideas of what needs to be or should be part of our plans. 8.Advance Agenda—Mayor Haley There were no suggested changes to the advance agenda. 9. Council Comments—Mayor Haley There were no additional Council comments. 10. City Manager Comments - John Hohman City Manager Hohman thanked Representative MeMorris-Rodgers for meeting with us and for engaging in very informative conversations and discussions with Council last week; said he and Deputy City Manager Lamb also attended her Town Hall at CenterPlace. Mr. Hohman mentioned two handouts he placed at the Council dais tonight; one is a letter he received this past Thursday from Partners for an ARPA proposal, which was discussed at today's ARPA committee meeting; he noted that Deputy City Manager Lamb will be putting together an update to all Councilmembers in a few weeks. Mr.Hohman said the second handout is a draft letter he received from Lobbyist Briahna Murray, with assistance of Ms.Mantz and Mr. Jackson, to the House and Senate Transportation Committee leaders urging them to support Senator Padden's request for an additional$5 million for the new Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board Rail Grade Separation Grant Program in the final 2022 supplemental transportation budget; said this funding would allow Washington state to leverage additional funding by providing state matching funds, and would potentially allow our important Pines Road Grade Separation Project to receive state funding, which to-date we have not received. Mr. Hohman apologized for the short notice, and said he would like to send this letter tomorrow. There were no objections from Council. Mr. Hohman said he will finalize the letter for Mayor Haley's signature and then send it to Ms. Murray. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Higgins, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:48 p.m. IC:? (\c— b' ATTES • Pam Haley,Mayor Kristine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Meeting Minutes,Study Session:03-01-2022 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council:03-22-2022 @SpokaneTransit 1-90 /Valley HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSIT (HPT) PROJECT Corridor Development Plan Update City of Spokane Valley Council Meeting March 1, 2022 How a great city moves'" 1 _ _ Background .Sptlhanelfansit I-90/Spoune Valley Itigb Performance Transit 2/15/2022 2 2 1 Background • 1-90 is one of six High Performance STA Moving Forward 10-Year Plan Transit (HPT) corridors slated for - ( / improvements in STA Moving Forward (STAMF) Division Corridor I Liberty Lake • STAMF commitments include capital Commuter Express and operating projects to be launched Corridor 1-90/Valley ManroefHegal 'SCC Mirabeau I in 2025: Linei ten TnstCter Transit Center • A new transit center r A • ^- •ii • Expanded commuter parking east of p + s— i j lNew Park&Ride Sullivan Road i1i, Central City Line Legend — Wer$aWidsy Night Servke • Direct,not-stop peak hour service Cheney Line ii Sprague Line IMI Future HPT network between Liberty Lake and Spokane New Service i�w • Moran Station Park&Ride Mureeaen • Night and weekend service '• West Plains South Commuter e.Commuter rape.."Service If TransrtCenter Express Public Transportation Benet'Nen • Extend service to Post Falls and Coeur - drAlene on a two-year pilot basis CiiSpoRanoTtamil f through a cross-state partnership IDSpallaneTiansit 1-90/5pnkane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15)2022 3 3 Background • Other 1-90/Valley Corridor elements: • HPT stations/enhanced stops at other locations in the corridor • I-90/Valley service architecture • Argonne Road flyer station and park and ride • Future facilities in Kootenai County • Network redesign informed by new facilities • Funding for corridor infrastructure includes state and federal grants • $14.45M Total Programmed: $7.5M State, $1.84M Federal, $5.11M Local • Improvements will include design, engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of transit facilities and infrastructure •l1Spokanarrats1I 1-90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 4 4 2 Corridor Development Plan Objectives 1) Support economic vitality and growth by improving mobility and reliability on the busiest urban corridor in the Spokane/Coeur d'Alene Region 2) Advance transportation equity by improving access to jobs, education, health care, recreation, healthy food,childcare and other facilities 3) Promote integrated solutions that support safe and healthy transportation options for all ages and abilities 4) Engage our community agencies, businesses, and diverse community members to envision, enhance, craft,validate, and support service and facility improvements 5) Serve as a model for the community benefits of regional and interstate cooperation. 6) Advance service and supporting infrastructure improvements that are safe, cost-conscious, high-performing, resilient, and reflect and enhance community identity and environment I � I$1 Spo4dnelydn;il I-96/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 5 5 r. 2115/21:122 6 4i 3 We're Growing... • We are experiencing rapid growth throughout the corridor • East Spokane Valley area and Liberty Lake area experiencing fastest percentage, both jobs and housing • Household and Job growth hotspots: • Sprague Avenue (Spokane and Spokane Valley) • Argonne Road (Spokane Valley and Millwood) • Spokane Business & Industrial Park(Spokane Valley) • Meadowood Technology Campus (Liberty Lake) • Harvard Road and Country Vista (Liberty Lake) • Kootenai County is growing at an even rate, one of the fast metropolitan areas in the United States YSpokar raosit i.90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 7 7 ...and Feeling it • Daily and Peak Traffic on 1-90 • 1-90 Hot Spots: • Hamilton St to Thor/Freya Interchange • `S" Curves near Sprague Interchange • Sullivan Road Interchange to Harvard Interchange • Ramp Terminals in Downtown Spokane, Pines (SR 27), Liberty Lake • Interstate (Washington/Idaho) Commutes • Fastest rate of growth is people commuting from Spokane County to Kootenai County •Sy SpokaooTraasit I.90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/18/2022 8 8 4 Corridor Development Plan eSpOdeTianslt 1-90/Spokane Valley Hfgh Performance Transit 2/15/2022 7 9 Corridor Development S rlca mech .y n0 tansa Isar olaerad lIn e tyroScqe� . y TsRho 6 1 TNa fi Plan Process aeal Psriirw ily 4 4 .(l\ BMPs.BUIldine HlocuB+ainstormed f� to Adores Needs Pi elimieary Tmn sit Service&Facllilfca Scenarios UK Pi el o,I.a,y Rcfn+ed Ser.is. S ijcililies Scrn oio Piolanod Servlee& Fadlllin Stemma 4,) UrettCarWor Oareiopnsent plan 1t).StahehaWer input JAC-'.l ©PvtakOpemHime Final Corridor Development Plan eSpAlldlteTlditSit t-90/5pokane Valley High Performance Transit ?/lii/2022 10 10 5 I Timeline and Engagement AzimmzEszawzmxim. OCT nOV DEC zmziwzmzzoommzEm' Public Open House Comment period open Assemble Stakeholders Building Blocks& Public Open House Corridor Brainstorming lodiabons and initial objectives Comment period open opportunities exploration Evaluation ' Criteria Service frequency , Mif 1 :a TACg3 service expansion, xa..R' new routes, TAC#] Concept TAC 02 (1`1. Ilansd nub Plan Baseline : ;Development Tasks Conditions (4 &Analysis - rll Development Plan Implementation am I ff kL:4F p AL,.s s,r da do lot ul ®Pudle Input GISpIlhalleTWISit -90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 11 11 Scenario Development Process Building blocks, Developed several objectives and Preliminary scoring evaluation scenarios Shortlisted scenarios One (1) scenario selected as unifying architecture with three (3) alternatives based on potential facility site locations Land analysis i 40401 n11 I-90/Spokane Valley:High Performance Transit 2/1_5/2022. 3.2 12 6 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture • Effective transit routes: = Provide connectivity from population centers to key employment and activity centers • Balance access (stop frequency) with speed • Provide reasonable reliability • 1-90 Corridor: • No one route is able to provide the access and speed that will encourage ridership • Preferred solution offers three primary routes Spckanstansit I-90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 13 13 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture Spokane Post Falls 4yy. Millwood : u:lene Aiena llorth University 11/414e314l /jO� Lihortylake ar,l +f Rink su z • 11)11]at ._7- — — Va11ey7C Liberty Lake Spokane Valley ri on, LEGEND. l Existing Transit Items leeat§ans Seeraiia Hoyle 7 Sterraria Route 77 PatenlialTransllCaulerlPalkand Ride raciliVelotetlons er Upgrades g a —Scenario Route99 iii4SpSAannTianslt i-e0/5pokane Valley HIgh Performance Transit 14 7 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture Post Falls Spukaite Miliwond "'" Coeur d'Alene Arena/ University I Mirabeau 1 Liberty North Flank M rkt . Y Lake SR2 Plaza 41 I_.�.� wy Airpoa I Valley TC liberty Lake Spokane Valley i West Plains Y- I LEGEND: P rl Existing Trantll Access Locations -Scenario Routs Scenario Route 7T h Potential Transit CenterIPark and Rids Facility Locations ar Upgrade; ScenarisRoule99 GOSeolianetansd i-90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 15 15 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture 6 Post Falls Millwood " Coeur d'Atenn Arena! FAIrahcau lb tiank LiLri ty Litho Plaza I Vollei TC Liberty Lake Spokane Valley Gist lain` LEGEND tLJ ® Existing Transit Access Locations Scenario Route 7 -Scenario Route 77 , Potential TransiL Colo/Par*and Rids Facility Locations or Upgrades G�� —Scenario Route 99 119 SpakannTrarsit 1-90/Spokane Volley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 16 16 8 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture , „,..= ,,,,, • , - i I IfL 1' 1 I Post Falls I Spokane Millwood 1 lS tt) Coeur d'Alene Unfversliy I I Mirabean District ,....".....Irr_1177----.." • Liberty tzke i -...- —.Z------ Liberty Lake I --A Plains V,111 IC Spokane'Valley I LEGEND; I ri Existing Emma Access Locations = -.kende Route 7 a v i el- —Setrurlo Houten ii Potential fiansit Centel/Park dilai Rile Pact%Locations or Upgrades 'ff — SC01131i0 Rule 99 Es SpokaneTransii 1-90(spolnane Valley High Performance Transit 17 17 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture — . ;•:. . ..--_-7 1 , Poll Falls Spokno Millwood ' : Coeur d'Alene A h n„i 11 linkreisity i mir,iht,i? i die ly Uke Ni p:.t t ',.:,11.1 i C .., , , . Liberty Lake Spokane Valley • We i l'Idins LEGEND: tfli i9 ,-i Existing Emit Access Locations Scenario Route 7 — 5- —Scenario Route 77 ii Polvitlatiransit Center!Pmkand Mk FastityLocalinns or Upgrades cv -Scenatio Route 99 Spoliacelransil 1-90/Spokarle Valley Hipll Perl,r/Iza,,Ir..,' 1:- 18 9 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture I Post Falk Spokane qg Millwood zT Coeur d'Alene Arena i North Bank , Dlsirei ir.t Un! ict I Marty Lake Plan I ! s . �a!I_ IIILiberty Lake Spokane Valley .i ,,:at Plains LEGEND: (V 1 brisling Traesil Access Locations Scenario Rote - —Scrnarin Rude 77 ki, PolenlialTransil Cone,IPerknod Ride Facilitytocallaes or Upgrades - S:,n3r!o Rollie 99 `w SpoklnaTrame I-90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit ._ 19 Preferred Scenario for HPT Architecture go ,. Post Falls tip.. r •rnr, ' Coeur d'Alene II_ Lake V Valle/Ti Liberty Lake Spokane Valley a at Plains la I LEGEND: G l J Existing Transit Access Locations -Scenario Rule s - -Scenario Route 77 ilb Pnlen1Wl Transit Center/Park and Ride Facility Locations or Upgrades N' — Scrnario Route 99 0SpokanaSraosi! i 90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 20 10 Next Steps • Evaluate Alternatives • Refine Preferred Scenario • Routes and timing of implementation • New facilities • Improvements to existing facilities • Transit priority measures • Develop Initial Corridor Development Plan • Coordinate Initial Results with TAC and Public in Spring 2022 040.0laa0 I-SO/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/1S/2022` -21 21 Engagement and Next Steps Time Task/Event Feb 14—Mar 2 Feb 15 Open House Promotion TAC Meeting 2 Feb 15—Mar 17 Partner Agency Presentations Mar 2 Open House rMar 2—Mar 17 Online Survey March/April Partner Agency Meetings May TAC Meeting 3 June Open House {S,SpDNdA®T2M1SIY I-90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022;: 2x. 22 11 I-90/Valley HPT Corridor Timeline Corridor Planning Analyze and evaluate operations Robust public and Prepare Corridor Update scope and budget and Infrastructure solutions stakeholder input Development Plan for project elements Compete Undertake full design&engineering Acquire necessary Refine scope and budget Execute necessary environmental of planned improvements property and right of way review for project elements agreements Construction & Implementation 2O23 2O25 Conduct all procurement Construction management Install passenger and HPT Schedule and deploy new activities for construction and administration amenities bus service iyS5ANdneTransil I-90/Spokane Valley Hsgh Performance Transit 2(15/2022 23 23 How to Get Involved • Attend the Virtual Open House (March 2, 5:30 pm) • Respond to the Project Survey (March 2-17) • Access links will be advertised and posted to the project website (below) • STA is available for individual follow-up briefings upon request I-90/Valley Corridor HPT Project Website www.spokanetransit.com/i90 `iSpskassTrarsil I.90/Spokane Valley High Performance Transit 2/15/2022 24 24 1 Z March 1, 2020 Sen. Marko Liias, Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee Sen. Curtis King, Ranking Member of the Senate Transportation Committee Rep. Jake Fey, Chair of the House Transportation Committee Rep. Andrew Barkis, Ranking Member of the House Transportation Committee Dear House and Senate Transportation Committee Leaders, The City of Spokane Valley strongly urges you to include $5 million for the new Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) Rail Grade Separation Grant Program in the final 2022 Supplemental Transportation Budget. This funding will allow Washington State to leverage additional federal funding by providing state matching funds and will potentially allow an important project to our region to advance forward. The recently adopted federal infrastructure package established the Railroad Crossing Elimination Program to eliminate hazards at railway-highway crossings. The City of Spokane Valley intends to apply to these grant programs to secure funding for the Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. The City has been advised that its chances of successfully securing federal funding through these programs will increase considerably if the project has been allocated state funding. The Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board ranked the Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation project as its top unfunded Tier 1 rail crossing in the state out of 4,171 total crossings based on freight mobility and safety. Given that ranking, we are hopeful that if state funding is provided to the FMSIB Rail Grade Separation grant program that the City would be successful in securing state funds for the project. Several of you met with the City of Spokane Valley within the last year and learned about the Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation project in great detail. You'll recall that the project will construct an overpass over BNSF railway and replaces the signalized intersection of SR 27 (Pines Rd.) and SR 290 (Trent Ave.) with a multi-lane roundabout. This project addresses safety, congestion, freight mobility, and economic development. • Safety: During the five-year period from 2017 to 2021, there were 49 total collisions within the project limits, including seven crashes related to the at-grade rail crossing. Proposed improvements will remove the at-grade highway-railway conflict and drastically reduce left-turn and through traffic collision points that lead to the City's most prominent fatal and serious injury crashes. . • Congestion/Freight Mobility: The current at-grade rail crossing experiences an average of 62 trains per day (3.5 minutes per train) and results in 28,000 hours of vehicle delays each year. Freight/trucks experience 93 hours of delay every day. Vehicle delays from rail crossings are expected to increase upon completion of BNSF Railway's pending double track project, which will double the rail capacity through Spokane Valley. The project improves interstate reliability and redundancy by removing four hours of daily "gates-down" time each day on SR 27, reliably connecting SR 290 to 1-90, Spokane Valley Hospital and the Sprague Ave. commercial corridor south of 1-90. • Quality of Life: The project promotes the expansion of transit services through north Spokane Valley by removing the at-grade rail crossing. The project further promotes a safe non-motorized crossing of the rail tracks in an area of the City with multiple underserved and disadvantaged communities, including low- income, minority, youth, disability, and non-English speaking populations. The project also provides a new trailhead connecting adjacent communities to the Centennial Trail, a regional trail spanning from Spokane, WA to Coeur d'Alene, ID. • Economic Development: The project will generate $101.9 million in state general fund revenues. The existing intersection and BNSF crossing limits development of 170 acres of mixed-use or commercially-zoned property, and 56 acres of prime industrial-zoned property. The project will increase access to this property and generate additional economic development. This project will be shovel ready in 2023, The unfunded need of the project was recently re-evaluated to reflect current market prices and has increased from a total funding need of$19.3 million to $24.3 million. The City has secured the following funding: City Funding $4,700,000 (Local Funding) Surface Transportation (STBG) Grant $3,800,000 (Federal Funding) Consolidated Rail (CRIS1) Grant $1,250,000 (Federal Funding) Total Secured Funds $ 9,750,000 While the city and the federal government have invested funding into this project, the state has not. It is critically important that the 2022 Supplemental Transportation allocate $5 million to the new FMSIB Rail Grade Separation grant program to allow for that funding to potentially be awarded to the Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. If funding the grant program is not feasible, we ask that you make a direct allocation to the Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation project at any funding amount. Doing so will demonstrate state support for the project and significantly increase the ability of the City to secure federal funds. Thank you for considering this request. If you have any questions about this request, please contact the city's contract lobbyist, Briahna Murray, at (253) 310-5477. Sincerely, Pam Haley Mayor, City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley FOOD BANK PO BOX N11360 SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99214 Partners & FAMILY SERVICES (509) 927.1153 WWW.SVPART.ORG Capital Project Proposal: ARPA Funds Executive Summary February 24, 2022 To: City of Spokane Valley, City Manager/City Council Members/ARPA Committee From: SVP CEO/Board of Directors Overview: A normal drive through the Spokane Valley quickly brings recognition of an increased presence of homeless and destitute individuals and families. Those are only the visible signs of a growing poverty problem. Hidden are the children and their caregivers who suffer in silence. Suitable affordable housing is at a crisis point, households are doubled up, and new residents continue to move into the Valley exacerbating the issue. Spokane Valley Partners has soldiered on for decades as one of the main mitigating forces pushing back against the desperation of poverty. Though the numbers of those in need grow each year, SVP continues to serve from the same renovated church. Over the next decade,estimating a 20% increase in overall need for social services is a conservative projection.The Partners building has reached maximum capacity and will be unable to meet future demands unless the community invests in an appropriate facility capable of increasing services to meet the swell in need over the next few decades. The Need: The Spokane Valley is experiencing an increased need for social services, especially basic need resources such as food, diapers, clothing, emergency assistance, housing, and transportation. Some of the reasons include: • The population growth trajectory: it averaged 1.724% annual growth past 5 years • An aging population that correlates with the baby boomer retirement wave • A low-income affordable housing crisis: < 1%vacancy, 14% price increase past year; there is currently a 3-year waiting list to receive subsidized low-income housing • Long-lasting economic effects of the pandemic and inflation in cost of basic goods Table 1 COSV Population,Poverty&Seniors Causal Factors 2010 2021 2031 2021-2031 Comments Total population COSV1 89,755 102,976 121,8842 18.4%growth SV has room to grow #residents<185%ofthe 30,516 35,012 41,440 18.4%growth 185%is SVP's normal service poverty rate for income threshold' #residents<ALICE rate 31,414 36,042 42,660 18.4%growth ALICE: Asset Limited Income for household income Constrained Employed (United Way) #residents>60 years 18,619 23,677 30,309 28%growth Fixed income US Census data was used for measured and projected populations 'Projection based upon current population trend of 1.7%annual growth(average growth for past 5 years is 1.724%). 'During COVID the federal threshold for service was raised to 400%and it still continues at that rate SVP's Current Facility and Capacity: Our current building is a 2-story converted church with partial basement. The most recent addition (13 years ago) is the food bank warehouse. It allows limited leased space for partners and has become less than adequate for the overall mission. Some of the limitations include: • 33,000 total square feet, but much of it is less than optimal for the current use • 4,200sq'food bank warehouse is excellent but unable to handle increase; during COVlD's peak output, we rented two additional warehouses to meet storage needs • 530sq' walk in cooler/freezer, plus 4 external commercial units are at capacity; future projection from 2nd Harvest is to expect more perishable donations and less canned • Food bank has an overhead garage door but NO loading dock to receive daily shipments • 2nd Harvest/NW Harvest/SVP desire to evolve SVP into a redistribution center; it would localize the prioritization of food flow into the Valley; this requires a larger warehouse • 3,200sq' converted auditorium being used for diaper bank/clothing bank is too small and is over wood floor joists so we're unable to use a forklift, cannot palletize inventory • Must store some clothing/diapers in basement, only access is elevator or external ramp • New Diaper bank contracts will result in a 300% increase in 2022 (400,000 diapers) • Heating and cooling systems are patched together and most of it needs to be replaced • Parking is not adequate for staff, interagency partners, and customers at current output Proposal: We propose COSV use half of the$16M of its allocated ARPA funds to help build/purchase a new space to accommodate the social services needs of the next decade. The new site will house Spokane Valley Partners and provide an appropriate facility for the food bank mission to meet future demands along with all of our other wrap around services. It will also host multiple other agencies as a robust consolidated resource center. We would work to build a coalition that provides a variety of elevating services including life skills education and mental health professionals. A more robust consolidation of our Valley resources is one leg of the model being developed to address homelessness and extreme poverty related issues. To meet future needs we propose the following: • 3.5-5.0 acres of land • 50,000 square foot facility, including 25,000 square foot warehouse • 2 bay loading dock; triple our current freezer/cooler capacities • Pre-engineered plan &space for future facility expansions • 150 parking spaces and ample room for tractor trailer/truck flow • Access to bus lines with easy access from the Sprague corridor or major arterials • Sufficient office space to accommodate robust co--located interagency partnerships • Commercial teaching kitchen and multi-purpose smart classroom • City staff and city council advocate for this project with other potential funders ARPA funds requested: $8,000,000 Total Project Cost Estimate: $12,500,000 Cost Breakdown: We estimate that our project will cost about$12.5 million, which includes land purchase, construction, and professional services, Cost may increase over time as the result of inflation and square footages may need to be modified during the design phase to meet budget. 1. Land: 3.5—5..0 acres that meets our location requirements $ 2,000,000 2. Warehouse: 25,000 sqf at$150/sqf $ 3,750,000 3. Basement: mechanical and multi-purpose spaces: 8,000 sqf at $150/sqf $ 1,200,000 4.Two story office/services space: 16,000 sqf(8K each floor) at$300/sqf $ 4,800,000 5. Walk in cooler/freezer, teaching kitchen, smart classrm, furnishings, etc. $ 750,000 TOTAL COST $12,500,000 We request the following from the city council: 1. Allocate $8 million of City's ARPA funding toward the project 2. Release the first$2 million up front to enable land purchase negotiations 3, Broker agreement with Spokane County to allocate an additional $4+ million 4. Assist SVP in gathering additional funding sources if needed 5. SVP is owner of the property with zero mortgage and may create lease partnerships within the building with other agencies; SVP is responsible for future maintenance of the property, with an expectation of continued support from COSV for annual general operating expenses. SVP's current facility: 1. To be sold after moving into new facility 2. Funding from sale to be retained by SVP for equipment/vehicle upgrades and facility maintenance reserves or other unforeseen needs. Benefit to the Community: • Using federal funds now prepares the community for long-term success and prevents the burden of meeting future facility requirements from falling on the local economy • A zero-mortgage status for your primary low-income service provider means all local dollars for decades to come will go toward services and not to bank payments • Spokane Valley will show leadership within the county by taking a proactive response to poverty projections, building a safer and healthier community for Valley residents Thank you for taking this proposal into thoughtful consideration. Kind regards, Cal Coblentz, CEO